Rotweillors

[reptile]

What I can't understand (re the recent case in Dundee of a small girl being mauled by 3 rotweillors) is why we can't have a law limiting the number of these dogs people are allowed to own. I'm a dog owner, but why does anyone need/want 3 dogs, let alone rotweillors.
It would be so easy to police, rather than going on a case-by-case basis, if you had to have a license for your dog, and, in the case of dangerous breeds, had to prove your case for owning more than one (or even just one IMO).

Sounds perfect Molly :o

I like being a country bumpkin

Oh, forgot to say, we've designed our utility room to accomodate a bed for the dog we don't have yet...

molly that's great. EXp couldn't understand why i kept a space behind the sofa, why i was always pricing dog food and reading dog owner forums when we didn't have a dog. i told him, "dogs are in my blood. i am a dog owner with or without a dog." i knew it was only a matter of time before i filled that gap.

hormonesnomore, that's a very sad story, but it's not justification for trying to eradicate an entire breed or impose draconian restrictions on all owners and dogs. Not that I would expect a Daily Mail article to be very balanced on any subject. I can't blame the mother in the story for needing an outlet for her anger and grief, but that is not the answer.

The fact is that dog bites to humans are rare, compared to all the other ways people can get injured, and attacks resulting in serious injury or death, while obviously terrible and tragic, are extremely rare. And almost all could have been prevented by responsible dog ownership, and, I'm sorry to say, better parenting. It's common sense not to leave dogs and small children unattended together, not to let your dogs run free and unsupervised in the street, and with respect to this case, not to let a little 11 year old girl walk two big powerful dogs on her own!

rottweilers are known to just snap without warning. it is as if a wire just snaps. maybe other dogs as well but rotties are just so powerfull and hang on to what they bite which makes them so dangerous if they do bite.

Mousy can you show us the research on wire snapping theory?

Because the UK Kennel Club don't seem to support that theory. They would be interested to see new research

i was bitten by a rottie as a child. there was no provocation. i was standing with my dad and his friend walked towards us with the dog and teh dog went between me and her and just bit my hand. even then (probably because i had a good teacher-my dad) i knew it wasn't a rottie issue it was that particular dog and that particular owner. i am not afraid of dogs and continue to love rotties.

no, sorry I cant.
I know a security guard in germany who works with rotties and he replaces his dogs after 3 years on duty because the risk of them "snapping" is too high. (they are working dogs running free at night on an industrial estate and have extensive training to be nearly perfectly obedient)
this does mean they dont "work" anymore and are only let off the leash in a fenced off area. muzzled and on a lead in public.

So your basing your theory on the word of one man? Who sounds lovely btw. Replacing his dogs after 3 years

Rotties as trained guard dogs and rotties as family pets are entirely different btw. Both in the way they are raised and socialised and the way they are trained. Not that I believe what the man in Germany says.

i wonder if the fact that he trains them for 3 years to guard and protect has anything to do with them snapping mousy? train any animal to respond a certain way to perceived threat and eventually it will see fit to put it's training into practise.

Actually can anyone who has stated that Rotweilers are aggressive by nature find any research by a recognised authority to back up their theory? Because I'm trying really hard to find some and I can't

Wiki for example believes that aggression in Rotweilers is caused by irresponsible ownership and training and by their nature they are 'good-natured, placid in basic disposition, very devoted, obedient, biddable and eager to work'

The American KC say they are calm, courageous and intelligent. No mention of aggression.

My rottie boy is six years old and never 'snapped' yet, I really don't think they all turn evil after 3 years

If this is happening, I would have questions about how that man is training and caring for his dogs, rather than about the breed.

They're not aggressive by nature - it's true they can be quite assertive and dominant, especially the males, which is why you need to be firm and sensible with training and obedience, and not let them push boundaries.

But they're not fighting dogs, as many people seem to think, or anything to do with hunting or killing - they were bred for livestock herding, and used as draught dogs as they're big and strong.

Look they only kill and maim a few children. Compare that to the amount of pleasure the likes of Valhalla and DrNortherner get from them and there's no contest.

The fuss made over a few kids who wouldn't have been hurt if they'd been kept in the house! Anyone would think this was a parenting site or something.

the point is that controlling what the likes of valhalla do does not prevent things like this, because the people who own the dogs involved in these incidents are not sensible or law-abiding.

No-one said it's okay onagar. But calling to ban a whole breed because of the actions of three individual dogs, all owned by the same idiot, is not the answer. The idiots will simply buy and mistreat another breed. That breed will then become the new Rotty despite, having previously been held in high regard, as is the case with the SBT after the Pitbull was banned. And banning Pitbulls hasn't stopped idiots breeding and selling them illegally. It's just that now they are all owned by idiots who think they are above the law. Which is much safer of course

Things do need to change. These people need to learn that you need to train and socialise dogs properly or your just asking for trouble. But there is no easy way to do that.

Consider the elephant. A noble creature (I think dogs are fine too in the right place - I like animals).

The elephant is not as far as I know aggressive by nature and they are certainly impressive creatures.

Suppose they became popular as pets?

Of course they would tend to step on small children by mistake. You could hardly blame them for that. You can imagine the owners can't you.

"Well they have to get out for exercise. It's not fair to keep them in"

"I did my best to train my elephant not to step on people, but there's only so much I can do"

And the owners would be right. There is no way to make an elephant 100% safe.

For that reason we would not allow people to have elephants for pets in the first place. We'd say 'sorry, but there is no way to have an elephant running the local park without there being a risk to others"

That is unfortunately the situation with dogs. Even if all owners were careful (and we've established that they are not going to be) there is no way to have a dog without risking the lives of the children (and sometimes adults) in your community. Every dog that attacked anyone had a 'first time' that they did it and it was always a surprise.

Every time this comes up we get some dog owners who will say they want a dog badly enough that this won't stop them. The law currently allows them to do this, but the rest of us are allowed to have an opinion on their moral position.

onagar the risk an elephant poses is far greater than the risk a dog does. the sheer size of an elephant makes them dangerous to keep as pets.

it is not a fair comparison. if elephants were kept as pets in the same quantities as dogs there would be a far greater risk of injury and death.

booyhoo, we could debate which was the greater risk, but it doesn't really matter as it was just an example. :)

It could have been kangaroos which I understand can kill a human (or a dog) with a kick.

The thing is that were we to keep elephants as pets it would be true to say that they were not intending to harm anyone and that most owners were doing what they could to minimise that harm - just like with dogs.

Unlike with dogs though people who tried to keep an elephant in a residential area would be told they were being dangerously irresponsible. The only reason keeping dogs seems different is that it's been going on for a long time.

Personally I think it's cruel to the dogs too. Breeding animals just for selfish entertainment. Keeping them in a house or flat and not letting them have true freedom. It's not exactly something to be proud of is it.

And that's just the caring dog owners. Remember that every dog mistreated by its owner suffered at the hands of a dog lover. Those who dislike dogs do not buy them in the first place.

'why can't schools teach life skills like dog owning?'

AAAARRRGGGHHH!!
I'm going to start counting you know. All the essential things that parents suggest ought to be taught by schools rather than see as their responsibility.
Although, congratulations. I think it's the first time this particular gem has been offered.

anyone hat would breed a dog for enterainment and keep it in a house or flat not letting it have true freedom wouldn't be a responsible owner.

dogs have been kept as pets throughout history for a very good reason. they make good pets. the reason keeping a dog as opposed o a kangaroo or elephant is accepted is because dogs can be trained to behave very well. those that don't train them are failing the animals and failing to protect the general public. keeping a dog in a residential area is not dangerously irresponsible. better that han letting dogs roam freely in packs, which they would do if people didn't own them. it is only dangerously irresponsible when owners to not care for the dogs properly and socialise them.

the bottom line is, people are always going to own dogs. there will never be a government legislation that says dog ownership is illegal. what could happen however is that more effort is put into restricting who can own a dog/dogs. better checks before rehoming. alot more restriction on breeding. tougher punishments for irresponsible owners etc.

'why can't schools teach life skills like dog owning?'

how is dog owning a life skill?

and lots of people who don't like dogs buy them. they buy them to hunt, to fight with, to look macho and tough. alot of it is money driven. it doesn't come from a love of dogs.

sorry, T button is playing up.

Domestic dogs are not wild animals like wolves, we invented them essentially, they've been bred over the centuries as companion and working animals to live and work alongside people. Keeping a dog as a family pet is not like caging a wild animal, and I don't think it's cruel at all (unless obviously the dog is mistreated).

Try telling my dog it's cruel for him to sleep in the house with us. It would be cruel to turn him away, 'true freedom' or not - he wants to be with us!

I don't breed dogs, for entertainment or otherwise, he came to us from a rescue centre, and I expect it will be the same for any dog we have in the future. That's my whole point about whether it's 'irresponsible' for me to have him or not - I didn't cause him to exist, he already did, and unless you really think he should have been killed for the way he looks, I can't see what would have been kinder or more responsible than giving him a happy loving home.