pineninja said:

https://dogbitelaw.com/images/pdf/Dog_Attacks_1982-2006_Clifton.pdf

Too long to quote....probably the most in depth and seemingly unbiased statistical analysis ive found.

---

psi said:

vandago said:

It has nothing to do with the breed.  The misconception that any one breed is prone to be more vicious than the next, is in fact sad.

---

Do you believe that breed has no relationship to behavior at all, or is viciousness a special case for some reason? Is it also a misconception that one dog breed can be genetically predisposed to be better than another at, say, herding sheep?

---

in my experience, an untrained border collie
will assume traditional herding maneuvers



but they will fail to wait for appropriate moments,
or their owner's signal
and rush the herd
because they view it as a wild chase
and need to be trained to understand their position is to help maneuver sheep
rather than hunt sheep

Have never seen a trained Australian Cattle Dog work
but they few untrained ones farmers had in my area growing up
were nippy -- they would playfully bite at people while wagging their tails to say hello

Labradors are typically strong swimmers
and even as puppies, they do not seem to have as significant fears of water
but people are also pretty likely to take their labs swimming
as they want them to be quick and efficient in bringing a freshly shot duck out of water if necessary

only ever knew of one Collie growing up

but he never let anyone know that a kid fell down a well

Love_spirit said:

I totally disagree that it's just the owners that cause the massively disproportionate bite number. 
Pitbulls have an abnormal locking jaw. They also have the chance of mauling even in the care of kind owners. And yes they are generally sweet dogs but it doesn't change this fact. There are many dog breeds where that isn't ever going to happen.
It's like with cats, you can own a perfectly nice cat why the fuck does anyone need an Ocelot? Well the answer is you don't.
However I just said a bunch of shit when I totally agree with you. They shouldn't be banned.

---

psi said:

What are your views on wolves as pets? If someone raises a wolf from a puppy, trains it as one would a dog, and does everything right in training it, do you end up with an animal that's as safe to be around as any dog? Is the "one day it just snapped for no apparent reason" scenario something to be concerned about with a wolf raised in this way, or just an old wives tale kind of thing?

---

My view on wolves as pets,
full bred wolves,
is that they are like raising giant foxes,
foxes can be kept as pets
but if a wolf decides to turn on its owner
it's going to be far more news-worthy than a Fennec Fox doing so



Don't keep a pet fox around chickens, rodents, or rabbits
Don't keep a pet wolf around small children, small mammals, or loud/aggressive friends

Keep a pet raccoon wherever,
they are stinky but adorable

raised from young they can make pretty docile pets fully grown
but do not go getting too close to a fully grown wild one
they can be scrappy, and have a surprising center of weight to throw around

but personally always wanted a pet Skunk

that's basically just a stripey dog with stubby legs, right?

vandago said:

1234go said:

Shut up, morrow.

---

You better watch it.  Morrow can flip a 100 lb weimaranar over in the middle of an attack, and he lifts it by it's legs

---

CookieCrumbs said:

Crystal G said:

I thought that was a retarded comparison too.

But actually, fishermen have been catching some baby Great Whites along the coast of California, like Huntington Pier, where surfers and swimmers go.

I think because of overfishing and pollution, sharks are starting to come in closer and closer to the coast in search of food.

---

I believe they are too but baby sharks do not indicate they are hanging out there. Most shark species (most fish for that matter) have their young in shallower water because it is safer from large predators like other sharks.

Alligators or bears would have been a better comparison but... still not exactly fair.

---

vandago said:

Working in a shelter of course you are going to get bitter, aggressive pits, and they are stronger than some breeds, so if they were trained by a dipshit they wont understand what they are doing is wrong, like any breed.  They aren't born that way though.

---

CookieCrumbs said:

Man the position of EVERYONES FUCKING WRONG DAMNIT is generally the best one to have in all debates.

also

Quote:

Maybe more striking is the fact that you are FAR more likely to die from eating a hot dog (choking from inhalation of food) than from being attacked by an actual dog.

Death by a real dog- 1 in 116,448.

Death by a hot dog- 1 in 3,375.

---

lawl

---

Crystal G said:

vandago said:

Working in a shelter of course you are going to get bitter, aggressive pits, and they are stronger than some breeds, so if they were trained by a dipshit they wont understand what they are doing is wrong, like any breed.  They aren't born that way though.

---

Yes they can be. Dogs are like people, they have their own individual personalities. Some are mellow and relaxed, some are high-strung and have lots of energy, and some are aggressive.

That's why veterinarians will often recommend to neuter a male dog if it's aggressive, because sometimes the reason for their aggression is biological and from too much testosterone.

---

Yeah the only dogs I've met that were straight up crazy were not neutered and were inbred or something. One was cross eyed. Another just... I dunno he was more like a robot of pure instinct rather than an animal. That one I know was inbred as I knew the lineage. Raised by country folk that don't think and don't care for that sort of thing. Wouldn't listen to commands half of the time. Tried to eat my cat right out of my arms. Did eat all the country folk's chickens. They let him run around and he formed a pack with other local dogs so they kept him tied up after that, cuz they're wise enough to know that's bad, but he snapped his chain and ran away.


So that's irresponsible breeding as well as ownership.
The goofy cross eyed mofo was not generally aggressive, didn't hurt anything afaik, but he'd challenge anything. Dog or person. Anyone but his owner. Was more dumb than anything.

Oh wait he did bite someone. Owner's roommate thought it was funny to hit the dog. And keep hitting it after he started growling. He got his hand tore up. Told the owner he needed to put the dog down



That's the thing about statistics... There's no way to tell if the person provoked the animal. I mean without video and reliable witnesses. Much less the condition or stability of the animal. In pineninja's list a man died from a Shepard but wasn't even bit. The dog just knocked him down. Which again is an irresponsible owner. Should train your dog not to jump or at least have him on a short leash if you know he jumps when your elderly grandpa comes to visit.


People are dumb.

Crystal G said:

CookieCrumbs said:

Man the position of EVERYONES FUCKING WRONG DAMNIT is generally the best one to have in all debates.

also

Quote:

Maybe more striking is the fact that you are FAR more likely to die from eating a hot dog (choking from inhalation of food) than from being attacked by an actual dog.

Death by a real dog- 1 in 116,448.

Death by a hot dog- 1 in 3,375.

---

lawl

---

I bet a lot of those choking statistics are mainly due to infant or toddler choking. Putting random things in their mouths and choking from that.

In any case how is that choking statistic accurate, every year only like 5,000 people in the USA die from that. That's less than 1 in 3,375.

Not only that, but death by dog is simply one type of statistic. There are records of people who have gotten bitten by dogs, but never died, or of people who have been hospitalized from dog bites but never died, etc.

I don't think the death by bee comparison is fair either, because only people who are allergic to bee stings die from them. Not many people are allergic to bee stings.

---

CookieCrumbs said:

True though people have become "friends" with wild wolves by playing by the pack rules. I remember watching a documentary a while back about a dude that understood their behavior well enough they came to accept him as the alpha. He would get on his knees and eat raw meat with them.

Alot of people have behavioral problems with dogs because they don't assert dominance and establish themselves as the alpha. With both dogs and wolves the pack will follow the lead of the alpha and never snap at him.

pineninja said:

https://dogbitelaw.com/images/pdf/Dog_Attacks_1982-2006_Clifton.pdf

Too long to quote....probably the most in depth and seemingly unbiased statistical analysis ive found.

---

That is an interesting document and I commend it for appearing to be unbiased. Still a problem though about where the reports are coming from. It says who compiled it but not how the reports were made and whether they were confirmed by "an expert" (animal control or whatever). The totals are pretty low though considering it was compiled over 20+ years.

And sadly based on the footnotes I imagine many were children or elderly. Which honestly shouldn't be left alone with large dogs anyway. Being said I also imagine a good % was from escaped or stray dogs.

---