why own a dangerous breed?

EGAR · 06-06-2011 12:14pm

The title of this thread is *why own a dangerous breed?*

This in itself is a oxymoron since none of us do as there is no such thing as a dangerous breed, there is, however, such a thing as a dangerous owner and the legislation must be pointed at these NOT the dogs.

getz · 06-06-2011 12:32pm

ISDW wrote: »

It would be very useful if you could post here what it is, could be helpful to people.

when owning a dog [like a staffie ]it should have a thick collar.not a harness or chain,if the dog grabs hold of another dog ,and will not let go,you should put you hand under the back of his collar and twist at the same time out the palm of your other hand over its nostrils,this will stop the dog getting any air to its lungs.it will have to let go.if the dog has not got on a collar use your belt for the same affect, ;the staffie owners bible;

getz · 06-06-2011 12:38pm

Discodog wrote: »

My reply was in response to the following:

That's not the same as savaging your kids.

If you kill the dog you never get to find out why it bit so you learn nothing. It's too easy to assume that it was "bad" dog & then go out & get another one without discovering what the owner did to make it bite.

I agree but you know the problem where ignorant people take one look & assume the worst.

how can you expect the avarage man in the street to get it right ,when even goverment experts got it wrong ? ireland once put the bullie on their restricted list,to wear a muzzle,

The Sweeper · 06-06-2011 12:40pm

getz - if you're using a strangle hold on a dog to break its hold on something, you're preventing air from getting through its windpipe whether it's breathing through its mouth or its nose. Covering its nostrils with your hand is unnecessary (and just puts your hand in the immediate line of fire).

(Even saying that, trying to get a hold of a collar in the middle of the snapping, whirling, roaring melee that's a proper dogfight isn't something I'd do without backup.)

toadfly · 06-06-2011 12:40pm

Getz why are you using Staffs as an example of a dangerous breed? You've done that in a few posts now.

getz · 06-06-2011 12:50pm

TillyGirl wrote: »

Getz why are you using Staffs as an example of a dangerous breed? You've done that in a few posts now.

tillygirl,in my eyes staffies are the most loving pet anyone can have,when i have been asked which dog should we get with children,i will always tell them the staffie,its a nannydog it can take all the rough and tumble that young children do to a puppy, the only reason i mention the staffie as a restricted breed ,because in ireland it is[wrongly i believe] it not on the restricted list in the Uk.

Bullseye1 · 06-06-2011 12:50pm

If your an owner of a Ristricted Breed you have a greater responsibility by virtue of the law in place to protect the public. I know that if my Ridgeback went on the rampage that she would do alot more physical damage than an yellow lab. Do I agree with the breed being restricted? No. But i do know I'm not helping my case by being irresponsible in public places.

Owners of certain breeds need to take ownership back from he irresponsible owners. Allowing any Tom dick and Harry to own your chosen breed will only harm the breed going forward.

Alot of restricted breed owners simply overlook the pandemic of young adolescent men who keep bull breeds to intimidate 3rd parties. I have yet to see a proper and full discussion on this element of society who keep dogs as weapons.

EGAR · 06-06-2011 12:50pm

getz wrote: »

when owning a dog [like a staffie ]it should have a thick collar.not a harness or chain,if the dog grabs hold of another dog ,and will not let go,you should put you hand under the back of his collar and twist at the same time out the palm of your other hand over its nostrils,this will stop the dog getting any air to its lungs.it will have to let go.if the dog has not got on a collar use your belt for the same affect, ;the staffie owners bible;

What utter boll***.

EGAR · 06-06-2011 12:54pm

getz wrote: »

it not on the restricted list in the Uk.

That's because the UK DOES NOT HAVE a restricted breeds list

. They have the DDA (Dangerous Dogs Act) which bans four breeds from being owned:

the Pit Bull Terrier
the Japanese Tosa
the Dogo Argentino
the Fila Braziliero

caseyann · 06-06-2011 12:57pm

EGAR wrote: »

I think a lot of ignorance is still rampant when it comes to dogs and animals in general. Anthropomorphism is often at the root of it all. How often have I heard comments like *He should have known better*, *He should be grateful that I took him in*, *He nearly talks to you* etc?

Regardless of how WE feel and think, we CANNOT apply the same to dogs.

Dogs are subject to different influences than we are inasmuch as they are opportunistic scavengers by nature. They are not little furry humans on four legs. They are animals and as such do not know right from wrong as we perceive it.

The times I have been bitten (apart from the full on attack by the Yellow Lab I had taken in as a *stray*) were done by dogs in extreme distress, ie RTA's, breaking up a dogfight, pain/fear induced "aggression" at the vets.

It seems that common sense is not that common anymore if it ever was.

A dog is a dog is a dog, it is not a child substitute, it is not a weapon and above all it is NOT human.

That is one of the biggest problems humans treating dogs like they are human.
They underestimate their pets because they have forgotten they are not human.
The time our dog went into a frenzy,it was terrifying but luckily i had control and used a barrier for him not to actually draw blood.He repeatedly in squealing pain attacked the barrier i put in front of me.And that was from a mere touch of where the pain was poor thing

There was no indication no limping no nothing and had been on a walk with me not five mins before.

When people say their dog would never bite someone that is when i say they are mistaken.He may not intend on biting someone but it can happen and thats why as the pet owner it is up to them to always treat the dog with care and respect their strength.

I hate the dangerous dogs act thing.I think should be powerful breed act.

getz · 06-06-2011 1:03pm

The Sweeper wrote: »

getz - if you're using a strangle hold on a dog to break its hold on something, you're preventing air from getting through its windpipe whether it's breathing through its mouth or its nose. Covering its nostrils with your hand is unnecessary (and just puts your hand in the immediate line of fire).

(Even saying that, trying to get a hold of a collar in the middle of the snapping, whirling, roaring melee that's a proper dogfight isn't something I'd do without backup.)

you may be get bitten but it will not be by the dog that has hold of the other dog , you will find the bullbreeds are not the snapping breeds they are a crushing type of dog,when they get a grip they stay in one place,anyway its better than pulling the dog off ending up with a shocking injury to the other dog,and its a tried and tested humane method,among the breeders,

caseyann · 06-06-2011 1:04pm

EGAR wrote: »

What utter boll***.

I have luckily had only minor scrapes my whole life with dogs fighting.
What would you do in situation of two dogs under full attack? In case i ever run into situation like that(which i hope i never have to)

ISDW · 06-06-2011 1:06pm

caseyann wrote: »

That is one of the biggest problems humans treating dogs like they are human.
They underestimate their pets because they have forgotten they are not human.
The time our dog went into a frenzy,it was terrifying but luckily i had control and used a barrier for him not to actually draw blood.He repeatedly in squealing pain attacked the barrier i put in front of me.And that was from a mere touch of where the pain was poor thing There was no indication no limping no nothing and had been on a walk with me not five mins before.

When people say their dog would never bite someone that is when i say they are mistaken.He may not intend on biting someone but it can happen and thats why as the pet owner it is up to them to always treat the dog with care and respect their strength.

I hate the dangerous dogs act thing.I think should be powerful breed act.

For goodness sake, there is no dangerous dog act in Ireland.

Why on earth would you want to bring in another flawed piece of legislation? A powerful breed act? And what dogs would you have on that?

Getz, when you said you knew how to stop dogs fighting, I thought you actually knew something. Anybody that puts their hands anywhere near two dogs fighting is an idiot and deserves to get bitten. If you have a dog with a collar on, get a pole, brush handle etc and get that under the collar at the back and twist it, but no way should you get your hands anywhere near the dogs.

caseyann · 06-06-2011 1:13pm

ISDW wrote: »

For goodness sake, there is no dangerous dog act in Ireland.

Why on earth would you want to bring in another flawed piece of legislation? A powerful breed act? And what dogs would you have on that?

Getz, when you said you knew how to stop dogs fighting, I thought you actually knew something. Anybody that puts their hands anywhere near two dogs fighting is an idiot and deserves to get bitten. If you have a dog with a collar on, get a pole, brush handle etc and get that under the collar at the back and twist it, but no way should you get your hands anywhere near the dogs.

Same **** different wording .

Discodog · 06-06-2011 1:15pm

getz wrote: »

how can you expect the avarage man in the street to get it right ,when even goverment experts got it wrong ? ireland once put the bullie on their restricted list,to wear a muzzle,

We expect "the man in the street" to learn quite complex procedures like driving a car, paying taxes etc. We don't allow someone to drive until they prove that they are qualified. The Government don't consult experts. Most of the expert opinion submitted regarding the DBEB was ignored.

ISDW · 06-06-2011 1:19pm

caseyann wrote: »

Same **** different wording .

What? I don't understand your post.

EGAR · 06-06-2011 1:20pm

caseyann wrote: »

Same **** different wording .

No, it isn't. Both legislations are worlds apart.

The DDA in the UK bans certain breeds and their TYPES which causes dogs to be seized and destroyed, incarcerated for years on end whilst their owners fight to get them freed.

I am working with DDA victims in NI and believe me, they would rather have a restricted breeds list and their beloved pets back.

caseyann · 06-06-2011 1:21pm

ISDW wrote: »

What? I don't understand your post.

Dangerous dogs act,restricted breeds act.All the same just worded different.All create stigma to the dogs of them breeds.
Sue me for writing dangerous dogs act.

getz · 06-06-2011 1:22pm

EGAR wrote: »

That's because the UK DOES NOT HAVE a restricted breeds list . They have the DDA (Dangerous Dogs Act) which bans four breeds from being owned:

the Pit Bull Terrier
the Japanese Tosa
the Dogo Argentino
the Fila Braziliero

no it does not,quote,in the UK it is illegal to breed from/sell,abandon or give away a banned/restricted dog,but you can own one

EGAR · 06-06-2011 1:25pm

getz wrote: »

no it does not,quote,in the UK it is illegal to breed from/sell,abandon or give away a banned/restricted dog,but you can own one

You have to go to court, get your animal assessed whilst incarcerated, MC'd, tattooed and insured for astronomical premiums and when you die, your dog dies with you. And that only applies if the court has a good day.

The Amendment pertaining to this is only valid in the UK NOT in NI, they have never accepted the amendment.

Really, you need to do your homework first before you give advice.

barone · 06-06-2011 1:31pm

and your postman has to deliver to all of the houses housing all of theese dogs

ive reared dogs,bred dogs for a lot of my life,and ive owned some right terrors of dogs,mainly jrt's. and i can say with some experience that sometimes all the training in the world will not stop one dog from attacking another,or even a person,every dog has its own personality,and as with us is affected by its life experiences,but also like any group of people from the same loving familly,one just has a different attitude to life and will use aggression because he/she likes it. the odd thing i find is people cant seem to fathom this.. there are no safe breeds,and no dangerous ones... all breeds have their bad examples,and nothing will ever stop that,

yes dogs can be trained to be bad and aggressive,not the dogs fault
yes dogs who are trained to be good and obedient can attack other dogs/humans .. not the owners fault

some are just flawed. much like ourselves

ISDW · 06-06-2011 1:33pm

caseyann wrote: »

Dangerous dogs act,restricted breeds act.All the same just worded different.All create stigma to the dogs of them breeds.
Sue me for writing dangerous dogs act.

So then why do you want to bring in a powerful breeds act?

There is a big difference, because the general public hear the words 'dangerous dogs' and they react to them. Legally it is also very different as in Irish law there is actually such a thing as a dangerous dog, which is different to a restricted breed.

EGAR · 06-06-2011 1:35pm

My postie loves coming here, he particularly likes Bruce, a dog seized under the DDA in NI and incarcerated for 2 years and 10 months in solitary confinement.

EGAR fought long and hard to get him out and he arrived here nearly a year ago after we won on appeal to have him released across the border into our care.

EGAR · 06-06-2011 1:41pm

The only dog currently in my care who has issues and cannot be rehomed as she has severe food aggression with humans (not dogs, go figure) and is a stubborn old cow in many other ways isn't a restricted breed.

She came from another rescue who gave up on her due to her *little ways*.

And here she is, the B*stardhound

169031_185553408135462_100000424117521_595451_3723466_n.jpg

getz · 06-06-2011 1:48pm

EGAR wrote: »

You have to go to court, get your animal assessed whilst incarcerated, MC'd, tattooed and insured for astronomical premiums and when you die, your dog dies with you. And that only applies if the court has a good day.

The Amendment pertaining to this is only valid in the UK NOT in NI, they have never accepted the amendment.

Really, you need to do your homework first before you give advice.

you must read posts all i said was that you can own a banned /restricted dog in the UK [i did not mention NI] it may cost you a lot of money,but a lot of our dogs cost money,[my bully cost £2,000.] but you can own one,i live in england. and i have seen japanese tosa walking in blackpool.

**Vai** · 06-06-2011 1:54pm

Everything I would have said has been said in the previous pages but I just wanted to add my personal experience.

Ive been bitten once, by my gran's old JRT, I now own a JRT/schnauzer mix. I once pulled a GSD off my little sister, I now own a GSD. Next door to me is a rottweiller who I know for a fact has never been walked or socialised, he constantly tries to break into my yard to get at my dogs which means I now have to keep a close eye on them anytime they are outside. One of my mates has a well trained, socialised and exercised rottie who I would trust totally.

Point being, its not the dog, its not the breed, its the training, socialisation, exercise and general time and effort that the owners put in.

Discodog · 06-06-2011 2:00pm

Strange isn't it how a St Bernard is perceived as a big cuddly dog with a brandy flask around it's neck & a Rottie is perceived as dangerous.

EGAR · 06-06-2011 2:00pm

getz wrote: »

you must read posts all i said was that you can own a banned /restricted dog in the UK [i did not mention NI] it may cost you a lot of money,but a lot of our dogs cost money,[my bully cost £2,000.] but you can own one,i live in england. and i have seen japanese tosa walking in blackpool.

Geography lesson: NI is part of the UK.

EGAR · 06-06-2011 2:02pm

Discodog wrote: »

Strange isn't it how a St Bernard is perceived as a big cuddly dog with a brandy flask around it's neck & a Rottie is perceived as dangerous.

Historically wrong since the real St. Bernards used to rescue peeps never had a flask around its neck

.

Shave a St. Bernard, dock its tail and crop it's ears and you get a totally different image.

Rottweilers were bred to drive cattle once upon a time...

getz · 06-06-2011 2:37pm

EGAR wrote: »

Geography lesson: NI is part of the UK.

so instead of saying the UK,i will say the united kingdom of great britain,of which nothern ireland is not part,

ISDW · 06-06-2011 3:24pm

getz wrote: »

so instead of saying the UK,i will say the united kingdom of great britain,of which nothern ireland is not part,

There is no such thing, it is either Great Britain, or the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

getz · 06-06-2011 3:41pm

ISDW wrote: »

There is no such thing, it is either Great Britain, or the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

ok this is getting stupid,i should say great britain ,that does not include northern ireland,isle of man,guernsey and jersey, now can we get back to the thread

are you serious · 06-06-2011 3:59pm

jesus lads it all got a bit tetchy there for a bit :rolleyes:

Look at the end of the day there are RB owners out there that could name many dogs that should possibly be on the RB list just for size alone and some that could be on it for how snappy they are.

And of course all of our well trained/socialised friendly individual dogs should be given a reprieve from the list imo

Anyway... I really think its time I brought my dog for a walk

eilo1 · 06-06-2011 4:42pm

I think it would be great if they had a much broader RB list than included all large dogs and the little nippy ones. But that as part of applying for a dog licence you could take some sort of exam to prove your dog is well socialised and trained. If they passed they wouldnt have to be restricted ie muzzled in public etc.
Idelistic I know but the whole RB this is just so outdated and ineffective I would love to see the government come out and do something proactive with regards to animal issues.
(sorry about the spelling no checker today!)

06-06-2011 6:02pm

getz wrote: »

ok this is getting stupid,i should say great britain ,that does not include northern ireland,isle of man,guernsey and jersey, now can we get back to the thread

The Dangerous Island list !

CL32 · 06-06-2011 6:07pm

eilo1 wrote: »

I think it would be great if they had a much broader RB list than included all large dogs and the little nippy ones. But that as part of applying for a dog licence you could take some sort of exam to prove your dog is well socialised and trained. If they passed they wouldnt have to be restricted ie muzzled in public etc.
Idelistic I know but the whole RB this is just so outdated and ineffective I would love to see the government come out and do something proactive with regards to animal issues.
(sorry about the spelling no checker today!)

Yep, I'd love to complete some form of 'canine good citizen award' and earn my way off RB list.

There are no resources for something like that though. Enforcement is so hit and miss as it is that any scheme like that would just be ignored by those who would replace any seized dog the very next day.

ppink · 06-06-2011 6:13pm

eilo1 wrote: »

I think it would be great if they had a much broader RB list than included all large dogs and the little nippy ones. But that as part of applying for a dog licence you could take some sort of exam to prove your dog is well socialised and trained. If they passed they wouldnt have to be restricted ie muzzled in public etc.
Idelistic I know but the whole RB this is just so outdated and ineffective I would love to see the government come out and do something proactive with regards to animal issues.
(sorry about the spelling no checker today!)

That would be an interesting piece of legislation.....all large and small nippy ones to be passed by exam:p

pokertalk · 06-06-2011 6:33pm

ppink wrote: »

That would be an interesting piece of legislation.....all large and small nippy ones to be passed by exam:p

and the middle ones are dont need to do the exam:D

The Sweeper · 06-06-2011 7:32pm

I think a canine good citizen cert is a nice idea, but an exam is a terrible idea. What happens if, due to a new environment, distractions and feeling your apprehension entering the exam, your dog has a bad day?

I know some people who compete in agility and they laughed at my apprehension over it, saying everyone has days where the course starts, and their well trained dog runs the opposite way, pees on every obstacle and stares at them as if it's never heard 'sit' in it's life...

Zapperzy · 06-06-2011 7:57pm

eilo1 wrote: »

I think it would be great if they had a much broader RB list than included all large dogs and the little nippy ones. But that as part of applying for a dog licence you could take some sort of exam to prove your dog is well socialised and trained. If they passed they wouldnt have to be restricted ie muzzled in public etc.
Idelistic I know but the whole RB this is just so outdated and ineffective I would love to see the government come out and do something proactive with regards to animal issues.
(sorry about the spelling no checker today!)

I get where your coming from but don't you see that all that is doing is adding more breeds to the list so it is still a restricted breeds list regardless of what breeds are on it (so still breed specific legislation which has been proven not to work).

Also the small dogs are nippy arguement is exactly the same as the all bull breeds/rottweilers/dobermans/gsd's are aggressive arguement, it's all down to the owner at the end of the leash (or sometimes lack of :rolleyes:), some owners treat their small dogs like babies, pick them up and carry them around, don't train them and use the excuse 'they are small and won't hurt anyone', or believe that small dogs like jack russells don't need walking, all of this results in a small nippy dog with napoleon complex due to the way that there owner has treated them.

As for adding all large dogs and small nippy ones, what about the medium sized labradors and collies? Are all medium sized breeds exempt and therefore incapable of biting someone?

I agree with the bit about when buying a licence you should have to take an exam to prove you are capable of owning, training and socializing a dog, but as the current licensing system stands this idea is only idealistic and will never have 100% coverage because most people don't even buy a basic €12.70 dog licence that involves them walking into a post office stating the breed of their dog and handing over €12.70.

AgileMyth · 06-06-2011 8:08pm

I have a German Shepherd and a Boerboel. Both would be considered 'dangerous' by some. Both are lovely, well mannered dogs because they were brought up right. The boerboel in particular is an imposing looking dog, but everyone thats met her knows how soft she is really.
The little terrier thing next door is a different story, vicious little thing.

So, how do you define dangerous breed?

Sigma Force · 06-06-2011 8:24pm

The incident the OP described is awful, and clearly the owner of the dog that attacked is at fault.
Any breed can be vicious, know of chihauaus (can never spell it), Jrts, collies and mix breeds that have been pretty narky and have attacked people none of which are on the RB list.

It's dangerous owners not dangerous breeds, met a lovely rottie yesterday much better behaved than my lot who are not on the RB list. You could tell the owner knew their dog and cared for her well she was surrounded by dozens of other dogs all day with no probs.

Tigger · 06-06-2011 8:33pm

Not unusual but recent

So my rottie lab cross is 11 years old he has had his spleen out because of cancer and he's always been a dote

Last Sunday I had him
In a public park ( on a harness and lead with muzzle )
And this max little terrier runs up. The little dog starts being aggressive , my fella ignores him and the owner start laughing. Then the little dog bites my fella runs under him and starts biting at his stomach etc. I pull my dog back and put my leg between them and at tie point my missus picks up the little dog and hands it to the owners .

So how is my dog dangerous and theirs not?

EGAR · 06-06-2011 8:38pm

My own APBT got attacked in the forest park in Portumna when he was 10 months old. He was muzzled as per law, the two dogs who attacked him were neither muzzled nor leashed. I had to physically prevent my dog from being ripped apart and got bitten in the process by one of the mutts.

No owner in sight.

Shanao · 06-06-2011 8:57pm

Decided to go have a look on stats for strongest bite when it came to dogs after so many people saying the pits will always do the most damage, and here's the results. Funny how the Dogue De Bordeaux isn't an RB despite having a jaw strength more than twice that of the Pit.

Pitbull pressure bite was 235 lbs
German Shepherd bite was 238 lbs
Bulldog bite was 305 lbs
Wild Dogs bite force was 317 lbs
Rottweiler bite force was 328 lbs
Wolf bite force was 406
Dogue de Bordeaux was 556 lbs
Turkish Kangal was 714 lbs

ppink · 06-06-2011 9:48pm

Tigger wrote: »

Not unusual but recent

So my rottie lab cross is 11 years old he has had his spleen out because of cancer and he's always been a dote

Last Sunday I had him
In a public park ( on a harness and lead with muzzle )
And this max little terrier runs up. The little dog starts being aggressive , my fella ignores him and the owner start laughing. Then the little dog bites my fella runs under him and starts biting at his stomach etc. I pull my dog back and put my leg between them and at tie point my missus picks up the little dog and hands it to the owners .

So how is my dog dangerous and theirs not?

Because you were able to deal with the attack? your "missus" was able to pick him up and hand him back.

eilo1 · 06-06-2011 10:37pm

The Sweeper wrote: »

I think a canine good citizen cert is a nice idea, but an exam is a terrible idea. What happens if, due to a new environment, distractions and feeling your apprehension entering the exam, your dog has a bad day?

I know some people who compete in agility and they laughed at my apprehension over it, saying everyone has days where the course starts, and their well trained dog runs the opposite way, pees on every obstacle and stares at them as if it's never heard 'sit' in it's life...

well exam might be the wrong term. I guess what I mean is that it should be easy enough to watch a dog interact with another random (well adjusted obviously) dog and person or two and be able to say that the animal in question is safe to the public in general.
Obviously there will always be exception;such as when a dog is panicked through pain or fear. But it would be a good guide to the dogs behaviour and hopefully minimise violent incidents.
(sorry for the spelling again this isnt my normal laptop, dam dyslexia!)

eilo1 · 06-06-2011 10:46pm

Zapperzy wrote: »

I get where your coming from but don't you see that all that is doing is adding more breeds to the list so it is still a restricted breeds list regardless of what breeds are on it (so still breed specific legislation which has been proven not to work).

Also the small dogs are nippy arguement is exactly the same as the all bull breeds/rottweilers/dobermans/gsd's are aggressive arguement, it's all down to the owner at the end of the leash (or sometimes lack of :rolleyes:), some owners treat their small dogs like babies, pick them up and carry them around, don't train them and use the excuse 'they are small and won't hurt anyone', or believe that small dogs like jack russells don't need walking, all of this results in a small nippy dog with napoleon complex due to the way that there owner has treated them.

As for adding all large dogs and small nippy ones, what about the medium sized labradors and collies? Are all medium sized breeds exempt and therefore incapable of biting someone?

I agree with the bit about when buying a licence you should have to take an exam to prove you are capable of owning, training and socializing a dog, but as the current licensing system stands this idea is only idealistic and will never have 100% coverage because most people don't even buy a basic €12.70 dog licence that involves them walking into a post office stating the breed of their dog and handing over €12.70.

I dont disregard the nature argument. I personally believe personality is based on both nature and nuture and this belief comes from working in the equine industry and health sciences. I do think nurture is a big influecen but do not belive it is everything.

Anyways that aside the medium sized dogs (this is to say 10-30kg seem to have the best public profile. As any scheme is totaly dependant on funding, not testing the least likely offenders is a cost saving measure.

I personally would be happy to pay more for a dog license if it meant a better and more fair life for dogs.

And on a final point if you did have an exam/assessment for dogs you would probably highlight owners that where less able to handle their dogs.

ISDW · 07-06-2011 9:36am

My brother lived in Germany for a while and they had a rottie. There was an incident in Germany involving a drug dealer and his staffie, so they went a bit hysterical and brought in laws about certain breeds, including rotties. They have to be muzzled, on leads etc. However, if your dog passes a temperament test, then they can be walked without a muzzle. Max the rottie passed his with flying colours, so could be walked like every other dog. They still got shouted at though by passers by, ironic, German breed in Germany:rolleyes:. But, it can be done, testing to show responsible ownership. I can't see it ever being done here unfortunately.

Tigger · 07-06-2011 1:31pm

ppink wrote: »

Because you were able to deal with the attack? your "missus" was able to pick him up and hand him back.

why did you put "missus" in quotes?

she knows how to handle dogs not everyone can handle a snarling terrier thats attacking their dog so efficiently.

why own a dangerous breed?

Comments