Does something need to be done about dogs?

Ragnahex said:
If a you were bathing your child and you left the room for a minute came back and the child had drowned. Would you blame the person who left or the bath? They are known to be dangerous
Click to expand...

People with limited intelligence would blame the bath. A sensible person would blame the person who was meant to be looking after the child.
 
sanaxe1 said:
If you got rid of the object there would have been no death. I thought the reason for this thread was to stop deaths. So with that in mind should we get rid of baths to stop deaths?
Click to expand...

You've missed the point then. And if you stopped the person being born thered be no death. Or you could apply a bit of sense and realise that a bath doesn't kill someone, an event in a bath such as a medical episode causes the person to die in the bath.
Dogs actively attack.
 
Screeeech said:
I imagine more details will come out, but the red flag yet again is that a two year old toddler was attacked; I'm wondering exactly how or why a two year old, ended up being in the vicinity of three dogs where an attack could take place?
Click to expand...

It's fairly standard though, the dogs go for smaller prey. If you look at the age distribution for attacks children are the most likely victims, children and the elderly the most likely fatalities.
It only takes a moment for a dog to bite and cause devastating injuries so they needn't be unsupervised.
 
Efour said:
Simple....
Kill all amstaffs, Pitbulls, any other dog that has been created to look like a slab of meat with teeth.
Then kill all the dumb owners that say "oh my Billy is as soft as butter, he wouldn't hurt a fly, it's bad owners that create bad dogs.."
Just stop having selectively bred killing machines as pets, stop being surprised when their natural instincts boil up and they shred your grandma or 8 month old kids.

Get over yourself and get labradors or poodles.
Click to expand...

Erm...our poodle is 40kg of muscle and teeth. I really wouldn't recommend him to anyone who isn't a fit healthy adult. He's very strong and very difficult to control. Albeit he's the biggest from his litter and about 10kg heavier than his great-uncle who we had before him and his grandad before that.
 
Graetzbridge said:
I disagree. The problem is always the owner. I showed the dog I had when I was about fourteen. He was handsome and had a beautiful temperament. I visited a neighbours' house who also had a dog. It was temperamental to say the least and the bloody thing bit me. These were quite different dogs but, believe or not, they actually from the same litter. What does that tell you about the different owners?
Click to expand...

What about people who have had multiple dogs and only one is problematic?
 
Foghorn Leghorn said:
No it isn't.

Dogs are generally thought to be descended from wolves so it was automatically assumed that they would be pack animals with little to no research.

Studies of large quantities of free ranging wild dogs in Romania, Africa, South America, India, Mexico and other countries have shown this to be false. Research showed dogs would occasionally stick together for a couple of days through a common goal ( food, scavenging not hunting, or females in heat generally) and then go their separate ways. None of the dog populations studied formed packs in the way wolves do and male dogs do not get involved with the rearing of their puppies, unlike wolves.
Click to expand...

Again, incorrect.

"Stray dogs are unowned animals that tend to show remarkable plasticity in pack behavior, leading to group stability.103 The density of stray dogs reflects this plasticity, varying from 127 dogs to 1304 dogs per square kilometer.103 Stray-dog packs tend to be a little smaller than feral packs and have two to three times as many males as females.79,103,125"

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/immunology-and-microbiology/feral-dog
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom