To think ALL aggressive dogs should be PTS

[JaffaMyCake]

This isn't a thread about a thread.

AIBU to think that dogs that repeatedly display signs of aggression towards humans and/or other dogs should be PTS?

I'm not talking about the odd growl here or there, but I mean dogs where the owners know that the dog can be aggressive.

As someone who has previously been bitten by a dog who the owners knew to be aggressive, but assured me was under control, I don't give two shiny shots whether you think you can control your dog, if it repeatedly behaves aggressively then it should be PTS, regardless of the circumstances in which the aggression occurs. (Obviously discounting being deliberately tormented or scared).

And before I get flamed, I love dogs and have one myself, but I know that if my dog was aggressive I wouldn't hesitate in having him PTS.

I know dogs are often "part of the family", but really, it would be far more sensible if people were stringent about this and no doubt it would prevent a lot of accidents/deaths!

dons flameproof suit

[LesserSpottedNeckSnake]

Young children should never be left with dogs for all the reasons stated, but I leave my DC and my dogs together all the time. They play in the garden together, loll on the sofa together, watch tv together, bounce on the trampoline together (Seriously, it's a sight to behold ) The DC are 12 and 10, know well how to approach and play with the dogs, and also what not to do. When the dogs roll around playing together, they know to stay out of their way. They can both walk the pup, and do, and both are involved in feeding, training and taking care of the dogs' needs. The DC adore the dogs, regularly tell me that their dogs are their best friends, and have learned a huge amount about responsibility and meeting another animals needs. So I just wanted to point out that keeping dogs and children separate at all times is something that they grow up and out of (Obviously this depends on the dog's temperament and the DC's development).

[amatuermummy]

There is always a reason why a dog bites anyone or any other dog. You can not decide that all dogs that have shown any aggression should be put to sleep. I have worked training dogs for 20 years and there is a massive scale of aggression and how to treat it. You can call a dog giving a warning growl to a human aggressive or you can call a dog lunging at another dog aggressive. You can not treat every dog or situation the same. It is very ignorant to suggest that all dogs who have shown any aggression to humans or dogs should be PTS.

My mother in law's dog has snapped at a child once - the child jumped from the sofa on top of the sleeping dog and then proceeded to lay on him and pull his ears. The dog growled and the parents of the child laughed and told the child to be careful. The dog then snapped towards the child (happened to be his face as he was laying with his face on top of the dog's head). The child has a small red mark on his face and was distraught about being 'bitten'. Should that dog now be put to sleep?

[Chattymummyhere]

You don't leave children alone with dogs because you can never be sure, most dog won't attack randomly but a toddler even with the best training on how to behave with the dog could do something to hurt the dog.

I would never leave my children and my dogs alone together... My children could get hurt very badly just by being in the way of my dogs playing, without the dog even realising a child is there but then I have big dogs and I would not get in the middle of a fight between them I would use something but never my body, I've seen their teeth and I don't want to be on the wrong end of them, however my dogs are well adjusted and will even allow my children to pick up her pups at less that 24hours old without so much as even a look to check, because they have been raised around children and the children around the dogs...

To add I would never let my children pick up pups if I had any warning or signs that the bitch would be unhappy with it we always take the bitch lead as to what is acceptable with her pups, down to her even helping access which pup to which home which has worked very well, we have even turned people away who our bitch did not like in the sence she would not stop guarding to let them even see the pups. She is a good judge of people!

[tabulahrasa]

"The reason is because the child is far more likely to provoke the dog."

For me it was never even about provocation, the dogs I had when the DC were young were lovely tolerant child friendly dogs, but children do stupid things if you're not paying attention and I wasn't willing to leave the dogs to the mercy of small children.

I wasn't preventing damage to the children as I didn't think that was a likely consequence to anything they might do, I was just making sure the dogs weren't hassled.

[ExitPursuedByABear]

I have posted many times about my dog on dog aggressive spaniel. He is all bark and no bite but can be quite intimidating to other dogs.

I do everything in my power to prevent him meeting other dogs, but if anyone suggested that he should be pts becausen of this behaviour then they would have me to reckon with.

[SelectAUserName]

The vast, vast majority of instances where a child is injured in its own home by the family dog are precisely because the child has teased, goaded or hurt the dog and it has reacted to the provocation. So if the child has been taught from an early age to respect the dog, and the dog has similarly been raised to be well-adjusted, well-trained and confident, there is no reason whatsoever for the child not to "feel safe in their own home".

The reason most sensible dog-owning parents don't leave dog and child together unsupervised isn't because there is a high probability that the dog will launch an unprovoked attack on the child, because there simply isn't. Obviously it can never be 100% ruled out because illness, unexpected outside stimulus etc can occur, but it is extremely, vanishingly rare in a dog with no issues. The reason is because the child is far more likely to provoke the dog.

[AmberLeaf]

There is no part of "just being a child" that should incorporate being allowed to tease, goad or hurt a living animal If you're not prepared to follow some common sense rules about children-animal interaction, or to teach your child appropriate behaviour around an animal from an early age, that's fine - don't have a dog. No one is forcing you to do so

I didn't say that or anything like that.

Im talking about being free to feel safe in their own home.

[TerraNotSoFirma]

YABU.
My dog is very aggressive with other dogs due to her being attacked last year.
She is kept on a lead and has a yellow ribbon attached to her lead to hopefully alert other dog walkers to keep their off-lead dogs away from mine. (This rarely happens though)
There is no way I'd have have my dog PTS because of this, she hasn't done anything wrong.
My dogs and DC are never left together unsupervised, I would do this with any dog, be it a westie or a GSD regardless of wether they've previously shown aggression or not.

[Pawprint]

I am a dog walker and dog owner and have a healthy respect for the damage/injury a dog can do.

What I would say is that the dog we call 'aggressive' is just being a dog - growling etc are normal ways for a dog to communicate. The problem is always with the owner, unless the dog has a neurological condition that causes it's 'aggressive' behaviour.

I do think more dogs should be muzzled. I also think that, in an ideal world, every new dog owner would have to attend a dog behavioural course. It is a disgrace that so many dogs end up in rescue centres or are euthanised through no fault of their own.

There is a dog in my town that is a large breed and very prone to growling at humans. If that dog decided to attack, there would be little the person at the other end of the lead could do. Some years back, I was attacked, whilst walking my dogs, by two dogs who had escaped from their garden. I was livid and gave the owner, who wandered out after about ten minutes a piece of my mind. The owner then started shouting abuse at me to the point where I called the police on my mobile.

To this day, this man walks his dogs off lead and without muzzles, directly going against what the police have (on several occasions, it wasn't only me who complained) ordered him to do.

I wish more owners would de-sex their dogs. I wish more owners would keep control. Sadly, there are always going to be owners who are not responsible and that is where the problem lies.

[primroseyellow]

YANBU

[LtEveDallas]

There are too many variables to make such a blanket statement OP. An aggressive dog is not always dangerous. There is a HUGE difference between dog aggressive and human aggressive and it is up to decent owners to manage the risk appropriately.

Plus people on the outside easily confuse or diagnose aggression when it is nothing of the sort. I know a Rottie that growls and snarls almost constantly - but he's talking and purring, showing affection not aggression, but someone that doesn't know him could easily say he is aggressive. MuttDog barks whenever she sees someone, if she knows them or not. All she is doing is telling people that she is there - but I've been told she is dangerous and should be muzzled. Not a chance.

[midori1999]

Amberleaf, even if I didn't own dogs, there would be places in my house that would be out on bounds without my supervision because of the risk of injury. Our dogs stay in the (large!) utility room or garden during the day, but the DC wouldn't be able to go in there without me anyway as they'd need to go through the kitchen, where they aren't allowed without supervision.

[SelectAUserName]

There is no part of "just being a child" that should incorporate being allowed to tease, goad or hurt a living animal. If you're not prepared to follow some common sense rules about children-animal interaction, or to teach your child appropriate behaviour around an animal from an early age, that's fine - don't have a dog. No one is forcing you to do so.

Dog owners are a funny bunch,though, and constantly equate dogs with people - see plinkyplonks post upthread.

They just don't get it.

No. Some owners are a funny bunch and don't get it . Not all. There are things that some dog owners do that make me cringe, and I've had dogs all my life.

I don't have dogs to be furry human/children substitutes, I have them because I like dogs. They don't sleep on my bed, lick my face, eat off my plates or any of the other things that make me shudder. They also don't, as explained above, run around out-of-control or are allowed to be nuisances to other people or dogs.

Trust me; irresponsible, thoughtless careless, lazy or downright weird dog owners annoy me, as a dog-owner, even more than they annoy non-dog-lovers, because they are the ones who get the responsible owners like me, and some of the other people on this thread, tarred with the same brush. Exactly as some of you have done despite evidence to the contrary.

[tabulahrasa]

"But then there are places in the house that are out of bounds to the child in case it gets /attacked/injured?"

No..I haven't had an aggressive dog living with my DC, but, when they were younger (they're teenagers now) I didn't ever let them be alone with the dog...the dog stayed with me if I was in a different room.

[Bowlersarm]

YABU to want a blanket ruling.

Each case should be taken on it's own merit.

[AmberLeaf]

But then there are places in the house that are out of bounds to the child in case it gets /attacked/injured?

Not how I would want my children to live at all.

[tabulahrasa]

"I have heard/read dog owners say that they wouldn't leave their child alone with their dog, this is of course sensible, but again the idea that my children couldn't be in a room in our house without me there is mindboggling."

Not the child - the dog, you let the child do what children do and prevent the dog from moving freely round the house.

[AmberLeaf]

The idea of a child not being able to be a child in its own home because of an animal taking priority is to me mindboggling.

I have heard/read dog owners say that they wouldn't leave their child alone with their dog, this is of course sensible, but again the idea that my children couldn't be in a room in our house without me there is mindboggling.

My home is a safe place for my children, I couldn't have anyone or anything in my life that would jeapordise that safety.

[kali110]

Lacking agree with you there to, forgot that point. When i was younger ( def not proud and am still ashamed)i pushed the family dog off bed. He was hurt and bit me. Def my fault. I deserved it. ( dog was fine after few days of tlc, mainly by me).

[kali110]

Yabu. Its not as simple as that.There are many reasons a dog can show aggression, illness abuse etc. a dog that has been horribly abused should be pts? Dogs can be retrained. Not the dogs fault. We dont give up on abused and violent kids/adults why cant we show the same sympathy towards animals?
If a dog was aggressive towards people and couldnt be contolled/retrained,not sick then i would think pts, but not simply, that dog seems aggressive, kill it.

[LackingEnergy]

AmberLeaf - I don't understand dog owners that keep a dog that has bitten their or someone elses child, they must be a sandwich short.

Surely it would depend on what the child did or didn't do to the dog prior to the bite.

If the child goaded, hit, or did something they'd been told not to do to that specific dog (take food from a food aggressive dog for example - which I did as a child) etc then I wouldn't bother euthanizing.

If the dog bite with absolutely no provocation, something that very rarely happens (you just won't have read the signs), then I would consider pts as an option if I couldn't minimise any further risks to child and dog.

With rescue dogs some aren't to be rehomed with children, other dogs, cats etc should those less than 'perfect' dogs be pts just because they may or may not have issues surrounding them? I see little point in destroying a dog just because some worthless 'human' has fucked it up. If the dog can be trained and trust regained then that dog deserves a chance

[AmberLeaf]

YANBU

If a dog attacks a human in the circs you describe [not when being attacked by a human etc] then yes, it should be PTS.

I don't understand dog owners that keep a dog that has bitten their or someone elses child, they must be a sandwich short.

[acer12]

It DOES depend on the dog. My 81 year old nanna has a very strong and often depicted as aggressive dog in the media. She has had her for years. Lovely lovely temperament. Didn't even curl a lip when a random jack Russell came pegging it in the kitchen, gobbled her food down and legged it back out! Just stood the gob smacked watching it escape through the bushes!

Yet there is a dog near my work and if I forget some times and walk near its side of the fence, it attacks it with such ferocity I offen wonder what it woul do it it got out. It's a large dog you can tell it is. It makes me feel sad that this fog has been allowed to get in this state of aggression.
Bloody arse hole owners