So people are only scared about being attacked by dogs, most people that are out walking get attacked by another person not a dog.
I never said that people were only concerned with dogs and not humans.. All I have done throughout this thread is defend why muzzles should be used in order to make dogs safer around humans, which is what this thread is about, not about what humans do to one another.
Ok then, can I ask why you're so against the use of muzzles or do you just not find them necessary? Because I remember reading a post of yours saying that you agree that all dogs should be kept on leads in public, but why not muzzles when all it would be is just added protection in case the lead becomes useless? It's not like it's hurting the dog or preventing it from going about it's natural business like it would on a lead and added bonus: less chance of it being able to bite you if something bad happened with the situation.
I don't believe that dogs need to be muzzled when out to protect the public, same as I don't believe all people need to be handcuffed when out to protect the public.
I never said that people were only concerned with dogs and not humans.. All I have done throughout this thread is defend why muzzles should be used in order to make dogs safer around humans, which is what this thread is about, not about what humans do to one another.
But people are at more risk from other people than dogs.
I think pedigree breed clubs and rescue kennels do play an important role in making sure that dogs only go to suitable homes. My Mum has had Italian Greyhounds for over a decade and had to go through a thorough vetting process to prove that she had a suitable home and lifestyle before being allowed to buy an IG. I know people who adopt pets have also criticized the over-zealous checks done before they are allowed to adopt, but I see this as a good thing as it weeds out potential 'problem' owners who can't / won't give an animal the care it needs.
What is sad is that there are always unscrupulous and greedy people who will sell to anyone no matter how unsuited to pet ownership they may be.
Yes, and compulsory licensing for breeders, with a code of conduct, would help to weed out the puppy farmers and backyard breeders.
I didn't know the IG people took that approach. The flat-coated retriever society are similar, and often home check prospective owners. I'm sure that's one reason why you rarely find a flat-coat in rescue.
Italian greyhounds are lovely dogs, we often used to meet a really sweet one, but the owner moved away. It was great to see him running with my boisterous lakelands.
I don't believe that dogs need to be muzzled when out to protect the public, same as I don't believe all people need to be handcuffed when out to protect the public.
Well if it stops them from being able to bite people when the urge strikes then where's the harm in that? It's not hurting the dog and it also means that they don't have to be put down if they did end up attacking someone and a parent wouldn't have to worry about a dog suddenly overpowering it's owner and attacking their child. Another poster previously on here has said that they're anxious around dogs because of times where they've witnessed dogs being aggressive around them with their baby and being scared that it'll turn on them next. Would it be reasonable to tell them that they shouldn't be worried about the dog and instead worry about the people around them?
There were many times when we had our golden retriever that I wished children weren't allowed out without their hands tethered behind their backs. However cuddly he looked, he was NOT a teddy bear and didn't want small fingers prodded in his face. Poor lad was terrified of children, and when anyone with a young child visited our house he would run upstairs and curl up in the far corner of the spare bedroom trembling.
A lot of the problems are caused by adults getting pets that they don't really understand how to handle properly. You see it too commonly with a lot of pets but obviously dogs have a greater ability to cause damage when things go wrong.
Totally agree. Although I was brought up around dogs at both sets of grandparents', I would never have a dog with small children around because it doesn't matter how well you "know" your animal or how well it's trained, it has the potential to cause serious damage without much warning.
Well if it stops them from being able to bite people when the urge strikes then where's the harm in that? It's not hurting the dog and it also means that they don't have to be put down if they did end up attacking someone and a parent wouldn't have to worry about a dog suddenly overpowering it's owner and attacking their child. Another poster previously on here has said that they're anxious around dogs because of times where they've witnessed dogs being aggressive around them with their baby and being scared that it'll turn on them next. Would it be reasonable to tell them that they shouldn't be worried about the dog and instead worry about the people around them?
Well the chances of being attacked by a human are a lot higher,
Well the chances of being attacked by a human are a lot higher,
So does that mean that we should just take risks with the dogs and not worry since risk of other threats are higher? The only way for the statistics for dog attacks to go down is for people to do something about it.
In your opinion there is no need for all dogs to be muzzled. If you asked other people with experiences with being attacked by aggressive dogs or having their child attacked then they'd say it would definitely be necessary to stop other people from being bitten.
I recall reading that you've got more chance of being struck by lightning that you have of being attacked by a dog
I never said that people were only concerned with dogs and not humans.. All I have done throughout this thread is defend why muzzles should be used in order to make dogs safer around humans, which is what this thread is about, not about what humans do to one another.
A muzzle wont make my dogs safer around humans. It would make them sad though.
So does that mean that we should just take risks with the dogs and not worry since risk of other threats are higher? The only way for the statistics for dog attacks to go down is for people to do something about it.
Except the chances of some random person being bitten by some random dog are practically none existent.
Well if it stops them from being able to bite people when the urge strikes then where's the harm in that? It's not hurting the dog and it also means that they don't have to be put down if they did end up attacking someone and a parent wouldn't have to worry about a dog suddenly overpowering it's owner and attacking their child.
We're talking a tiny, tiny fraction of dogs that may behave in the way you state in bold. So as ever, we have to cater for the lowest common denominator and muzzle ALL dogs even though very few are aggressive, just because it *might* protect one person.
Applying that logic, we'd ban anything that had the potential to cause harm, just to potentially save a few people.
So ban all cars from driving above 20mph.
Ban all sharp implements.
Ban all alcohol.
Ban all sports.
Etc etc.
Obviously this is exaggerating hugely to make the point, but the same principle applies. Ultimately, if you place a baby with an unpredictable pack animal, unless you enforce control and boundaries rather than introducing the baby into the home without correct preparation, you're in danger of creating a potentially volatile situation. Muzzling the dog will of course stop it biting anyone, but training it correctly and supervising both it and any children/babies will remove the need to even consider a muzzle.
This one really is tragic. The owners were obviously concentrating on the new born so much they forgot to properly introduce it to the dog. We made sure when we first got our dog that he properly met children when they came round so that he got used to them being welcome in the home. Twelve years later he's never so much as raised his lip at one, even though those children are getting to the point of being young adults now.
It's all about the first few weeks. Let the dog see that the child is part of the "pack" so that he or she thinks to protect it rather than as a nuisance or an intruder. The sad thing here is that another month or so and the animal and child would have bonded and most likely have been the best of friends for years to come. So sad.
None of those are random people being bitten by random dogs. They're postal workers coming into contact with animals while delivering the mail usually on entering the dog's "territory".
However, if you can find me any statistics on people walking down the street or in the park being attacked by a passing dog without warning then I'll happily stand corrected.
I would have no objection tbh, if it meant my dog was kept safe.
Dogs can easily be trained to accept, even like, a muzzle.
However, it doesn't tackle the underlying issue that too many dogs a badly bred, sold to idiots, kept by idiots etc.
And like it or not, to some people kids are NOT any more important than dogs. It's the attitude that kids can do whatever they want to dogs and the dog just has to lump is that causes bites!
I'd be mortified if my dog went for a kid, but that would be because I'd failed as a dog owner and would have to face having my dog killed.
We're talking a tiny, tiny fraction of dogs that may behave in the way you state in bold. So as ever, we have to cater for the lowest common denominator and muzzle ALL dogs even though very few are aggressive, just because it *might* protect one person.
Applying that logic, we'd ban anything that had the potential to cause harm, just to potentially save a few people.
So ban all cars from driving above 20mph.
Ban all sharp implements.
Ban all alcohol.
Ban all sports.
Etc etc.
Obviously this is exaggerating hugely to make the point, but the same principle applies. Ultimately, if you place a baby with an unpredictable pack animal, unless you enforce control and boundaries rather than introducing the baby into the home without correct preparation, you're in danger of creating a potentially volatile situation. Muzzling the dog will of course stop it biting anyone, but training it correctly and supervising both it and any children/babies will remove the need to even consider a muzzle.
The chances of a plane crashing is also low but preparations are still made in the event of one happening so why shouldn't we prepare in the event of a dog turning aggressive?
I agree people should train their dogs properly, but many don't, which makes them more likely to be a threat. There are many irresponsible dog owners out there who don't care if their dog is vicious or not (some even like them to be vicious) and even though it's not the dog's fault, they're the ones who will be blamed and put down if incidents happen. But if it was the law for dogs to wear muzzles in public then if they don't comply with the rule then they can be reported, be fined or have the dog taken off them in order to stop them being irresponsible.
But if it was the law for dogs to wear muzzles in public then if they don't comply with the rule then they can be reported, be fined or have the dog taken off them in order to stop them being irresponsible.
The law already exists for dogs to be controlled in public. But as progressive governments did away with the dog license and dog wardens, no-one's out there policing it.
Muzzling dogs wouldn't make any difference because the same irresponsible dog owners who end up in the cases that hit the news are the ones who won't bother muzzling their dogs.
My parents got a Springer Spaniel puppy just under a year before they had me. The two of us grew up together - I'm an only child and so Hollie was my sibling in my eyes when I was a kid. My parents made sure that we spent time together so that Hollie understood I wasn't a threat to her but I was never ever left alone close to her until I was mentally competant enough to understood how to behave around her - I got a strict education about what not to do to the dog - pull her hair, pull her tail, hit her, tease her constantly etc etc. Naturally, I ignored quite a bit of this over the years and yes it would have served me right if Hollie had bitten me, but she never did (other than a little 'get on with it' nip at my trousers or shoes when it was walkies time and I wasn't getting to the front door quick enough).
People just aren't responsible enough with their dogs or children anymore. They train their dogs to be attack dogs or status dogs or whatever but not to do the basic commands. They teach their dogs to be angry and aggressive due to the way that they treat them. They also don't exercise them enough and play fetch etc.
People also simply just don't understand dogs and their instincts and they don't teach their children to respect the dog.
None of those are random people being bitten by random dogs. They're postal workers coming into contact with animals while delivering the mail usually on entering the dog's "territory".
However, if you can find me any statistics on people walking down the street or in the park being attacked by a passing dog without warning then I'll happily stand corrected.
The law already exists for dogs to be controlled in public. But as progressive governments did away with the dog license and dog wardens, no-one's out there policing it.
A park attendant called for police “back-up” after threatening a woman for arrest over an elusive dog foul.
Amber Langtry, 35, was walking her dog with a friend on New Year's Day when a lone Tower Hamlets Enforcement Officer accused her of not clearing up after her pet.
When she explained to the officer that he'd made a mistake and asked to see the offending evidence, he refused to show her, then pointed to a spot in the opposite direction to where Miss Langtry's dog had been. He then proceeded to issue her with a ticket and called the police.
Comments
I never said that people were only concerned with dogs and not humans.. All I have done throughout this thread is defend why muzzles should be used in order to make dogs safer around humans, which is what this thread is about, not about what humans do to one another.
The way I like to see dogs is running free, like on a beach.
They can't even do that at certain times of the year anymore.
I don't believe that dogs need to be muzzled when out to protect the public, same as I don't believe all people need to be handcuffed when out to protect the public.
But people are at more risk from other people than dogs.
Yes, and compulsory licensing for breeders, with a code of conduct, would help to weed out the puppy farmers and backyard breeders.
I didn't know the IG people took that approach. The flat-coated retriever society are similar, and often home check prospective owners. I'm sure that's one reason why you rarely find a flat-coat in rescue.
Italian greyhounds are lovely dogs, we often used to meet a really sweet one, but the owner moved away. It was great to see him running with my boisterous lakelands.
Well if it stops them from being able to bite people when the urge strikes then where's the harm in that? It's not hurting the dog and it also means that they don't have to be put down if they did end up attacking someone and a parent wouldn't have to worry about a dog suddenly overpowering it's owner and attacking their child. Another poster previously on here has said that they're anxious around dogs because of times where they've witnessed dogs being aggressive around them with their baby and being scared that it'll turn on them next. Would it be reasonable to tell them that they shouldn't be worried about the dog and instead worry about the people around them?
Totally agree. Although I was brought up around dogs at both sets of grandparents', I would never have a dog with small children around because it doesn't matter how well you "know" your animal or how well it's trained, it has the potential to cause serious damage without much warning.
Well the chances of being attacked by a human are a lot higher,
So does that mean that we should just take risks with the dogs and not worry since risk of other threats are higher? The only way for the statistics for dog attacks to go down is for people to do something about it.
I recall reading that you've got more chance of being struck by lightning that you have of being attacked by a dog
A muzzle wont make my dogs safer around humans. It would make them sad though.
Except the chances of some random person being bitten by some random dog are practically none existent.
Applying that logic, we'd ban anything that had the potential to cause harm, just to potentially save a few people.
So ban all cars from driving above 20mph.
Ban all sharp implements.
Ban all alcohol.
Ban all sports.
Etc etc.
Obviously this is exaggerating hugely to make the point, but the same principle applies. Ultimately, if you place a baby with an unpredictable pack animal, unless you enforce control and boundaries rather than introducing the baby into the home without correct preparation, you're in danger of creating a potentially volatile situation. Muzzling the dog will of course stop it biting anyone, but training it correctly and supervising both it and any children/babies will remove the need to even consider a muzzle.
It's all about the first few weeks. Let the dog see that the child is part of the "pack" so that he or she thinks to protect it rather than as a nuisance or an intruder. The sad thing here is that another month or so and the animal and child would have bonded and most likely have been the best of friends for years to come. So sad.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2115256/Postmen-bite-dog-attacks-Royal-Mail-launch-probe-staff-mauled-4-000-times-year.html Might want to tell these people then if that's the case.
I'll see your random dog attacks and raise you random stranger attacks: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1224565/Random-attack-thugs-30-seconds-stranger-assaults-soar-binge-Britain.html
Muzzle humans I say, or at least make them wear mittens so their punches hurt less.
None of those are random people being bitten by random dogs. They're postal workers coming into contact with animals while delivering the mail usually on entering the dog's "territory".
However, if you can find me any statistics on people walking down the street or in the park being attacked by a passing dog without warning then I'll happily stand corrected.
Dogs can easily be trained to accept, even like, a muzzle.
However, it doesn't tackle the underlying issue that too many dogs a badly bred, sold to idiots, kept by idiots etc.
And like it or not, to some people kids are NOT any more important than dogs. It's the attitude that kids can do whatever they want to dogs and the dog just has to lump is that causes bites!
I'd be mortified if my dog went for a kid, but that would be because I'd failed as a dog owner and would have to face having my dog killed.
Common sense people!
The chances of a plane crashing is also low but preparations are still made in the event of one happening so why shouldn't we prepare in the event of a dog turning aggressive?
I agree people should train their dogs properly, but many don't, which makes them more likely to be a threat. There are many irresponsible dog owners out there who don't care if their dog is vicious or not (some even like them to be vicious) and even though it's not the dog's fault, they're the ones who will be blamed and put down if incidents happen. But if it was the law for dogs to wear muzzles in public then if they don't comply with the rule then they can be reported, be fined or have the dog taken off them in order to stop them being irresponsible.
And most of these will have been were the dogs live, so would not have a muzzle on any way
The law already exists for dogs to be controlled in public. But as progressive governments did away with the dog license and dog wardens, no-one's out there policing it.
My parents got a Springer Spaniel puppy just under a year before they had me. The two of us grew up together - I'm an only child and so Hollie was my sibling in my eyes when I was a kid. My parents made sure that we spent time together so that Hollie understood I wasn't a threat to her but I was never ever left alone close to her until I was mentally competant enough to understood how to behave around her - I got a strict education about what not to do to the dog - pull her hair, pull her tail, hit her, tease her constantly etc etc. Naturally, I ignored quite a bit of this over the years and yes it would have served me right if Hollie had bitten me, but she never did (other than a little 'get on with it' nip at my trousers or shoes when it was walkies time and I wasn't getting to the front door quick enough).
People just aren't responsible enough with their dogs or children anymore. They train their dogs to be attack dogs or status dogs or whatever but not to do the basic commands. They teach their dogs to be angry and aggressive due to the way that they treat them. They also don't exercise them enough and play fetch etc.
People also simply just don't understand dogs and their instincts and they don't teach their children to respect the dog.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34TBMkRJZKk There you go.
And unfortunately when someone does try and police dogs, they end up on a massive power-trip like this guy: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/show-me-the-poo-tower-hamlets-park-official-calls-for-police-backup-over-noncompliance-of--female-over-mystery-dog-foul-9092395.html