staffordshire bull terrier, why?

Castiel · 5 Jun 2012 at 16:18

shadesofgrey said:
Every dog is an individual dog, regardless of breed.

You seem to be missing the point. You said...

I know what I said...and it is true. Nothing you have said changes that. It would be foolish to consider every dog equally as they are not all equal.

shadesofgrey said:
There is no considering to be done when it comes to breeds as pets and esp around children because no dog is to be trusted. Every single dog is a risk, regardless of breed. Take the saffy as an example, well known nanny dogs, great with children as a breed, far more so than a poodle even (poodles are viscious blighters) but it's still a dog and not to be trusted.

Except that is not actually the case is it.....if a Papillion bites you it will be significantly less severe than if a bull terrier bites you.....

No one said that individual dogs are to be trusted....please actually read the entire thread before making a fool of yourself.

Castiel said:
You also have to consider what the breed was actually bred for as well....it isn't as simple as blaming the owners or attributing training to a dog......some breeds are bred for specific traits and therefore those innate traits need to be considered....a fighting breed will be innately more risk than a bloodhound breed for example.

A breed bred for its guard-dog traits may well be a loyal and innately protective and safe breed for its owner and family, but may pose a risk to an outsider...for example the dog thinks that it's owners (child) is being attacked by the owners friend (child) when in fact they are merely playing.....the risk is apparent.

This is not to say that individual dogs will always be this way, or that individual dogs from different breeds will not, but it does mean that the breed of the dog should always be considered in regard to the likelihood of inconsistency of expected and/or acceptable behaviour.

Castiel · 5 Jun 2012 at 16:23

shadesofgrey said:
No it has not. Where are you getting that from?
Direct quote from the kennel club breed advice

Yes it has....the specific advice regarding the only two breeds recommend with children or in family environments has been amended...as it was representativeness of other breeds.....for example Labrador's.

I did not say that the advice for SBT dogs had changed, only that the advice regarding suitable dogs for children had.....specifically this advice:

The_One said:
Staffies are one of only TWO breeds recommended to be good with children

FACT

You are a little bit sensitive.....

Threepwood · 5 Jun 2012 at 16:25

Back with the insults I see... Grow up old chap.

They are all equal when it comes to trusting a dog. Because you simply don't. Regardless of how big or small or how much damage they can do. Any dog can kill a child. Period.

Provide me with a link, because them saying 'well known lovers of children' says to me that they advise them for being around children?

The_One · 5 Jun 2012 at 16:30

http://www.battersea.org.uk/dogs/staffies.html

Kennel Club approved.

"Extremely reliable, highly intelligent and affectionate,
especially with children."

Battersea dogs home uploading videos of staffies and children. The horror!!

Castiel · 5 Jun 2012 at 16:33

shadesofgrey said:
Back with the insults I see... Grow up old chap.

Insults?????

shadesofgrey said:
They are all equal when it comes to trusting a dog. Because you simply don't. Regardless of how big or small or how much damage they can do. Any dog can kill a child. Period.

Yet I did not imply anything to the contrary....at no point did I say that you can fully trust a dog......however it is sensible to consider which dog including which breed it is, any traits it may have, needs it may have and even things like size and function when choosing a dog......this has nothing to do with trusting any individual dog over another.

shadesofgrey said:
Provide me with a link, because them saying 'well known lovers of children' says to me that they advise them for being around children?

A link to what?

Who said that they were not "well known lovers of children"...I stated that the advice that they were only one of two breeds recommended as safe with children was false and the KC removed that advice for the reason I gave.

Castiel · 5 Jun 2012 at 16:35

The_One said:
http://www.battersea.org.uk/dogs/staffies.html

Not the same as this though is it?

The_One said:
Staffies are one of only TWO breeds recommended to be good with children
FACT

The KC amended that because it gave the wrong impression and that is a FACT.

Threepwood · 5 Jun 2012 at 16:39

Insults?????

before making a fool of yourself.

Yet I did not imply anything to the contrary....at no point did I say that you can fully trust a dog......however it is sensible to consider which dog including which breed it is, any traits it may have, needs it may have and even things like size and function when choosing a dog......this has nothing to do with trusting any individual dog over another.

I'm mainly talking about dogs and kids man. You can pick the very best breed to be around your children, wind up 'trusting' them because you did. Which is a mistake because as I'm saying (that's right, I'm saying that, not you, I'm not suggesting you said that, at all...) is no dog is to be trusted around children.

A link to what?

A link to the ammened advice where the kennel club no longer suggest that saffies are to be reccomened around children. All I can see is there advice saying that they are good with kids.

The KC amended that because it gave the wrong impression and that is a FACT.

How is 'affectionate, especially with children' any different to 'well known lovers of children'????

The KC amended that because it gave the wrong impression and that is a FACT.

Proove that statement? As what they are saying atm is exactly the same, just different words... If what you say is true (as in, ammened to stop giving the wrong impression) why are they saying the same thing? You're making it up as you go along!

Find me another example on the kennel club breed advice of any other dog being loving/affectionate with children, other than the retriever.

Castiel · 5 Jun 2012 at 16:45

shadesofgrey said:
I'm mainly talking about dogs and kids man. You can pick the very best breed to be around your children, wind up 'trusting' them because you did. Which is a mistake because as I'm saying (that's right, I'm saying that, not you, I'm not suggesting you said that, at all...) is no dog is to be trusted around children.

Castiel said:
You also have to consider what the breed was actually bred for as well....it isn't as simple as blaming the owners or attributing training to a dog......some breeds are bred for specific traits and therefore those innate traits need to be considered....a fighting breed will be innately more risk than a bloodhound breed for example.

A breed bred for its guard-dog traits may well be a loyal and innately protective and safe breed for its owner and family, but may pose a risk to an outsider...for example the dog thinks that it's owners (child) is being attacked by the owners friend (child) when in fact they are merely playing.....the risk is apparent.

This is not to say that individual dogs will always be this way, or that individual dogs from different breeds will not, but it does mean that the breed of the dog should always be considered in regard to the likelihood of inconsistency of expected and/or acceptable behaviour.

Like I said, read the whole thread before making a fool of yourself...that is not an insult, it is an observation, one with an increasing amount of evidence to support it.

shadesofgrey said:
A link to the ammened advice where the kennel club no longer suggest that saffies are to be reccomened around children. All I can see is there advice saying that they are good with kids.

The advice was removed and the breed descriptions amended to be more representative.....for the last time I DID NOT SAY THAT THE KENNEL CLUB NO LONGER RECOMMEND STAFFIES AROUND CHILDREN....I SAID THAT THE FACT THE ONE STATED ABOUT THEM BEING ONE OF ONLY TWO BREEDS RECOMMENDED FOR CHILDREN WAS WRONG.

shadesofgrey said:
Proove that statement? As what they are saying atm is exactly the same, just different words... If what you say is true (as in, ammened to stop giving the wrong impression) why are they saying the same thing? You're making it up as you go along!

No it simply means that you cannot read. See above.......

Kenai · 5 Jun 2012 at 16:46

This thread is becoming increasingly painful to read.

Morba · 5 Jun 2012 at 16:50

So placid and friendly, yet so excitable and fun.
Loved our staffy

Threepwood · 5 Jun 2012 at 16:55

Like I said, read the whole thread before making a fool of yourself...that is not an insult, it is an observation.

/Yawn.

I DID NOT SAY THAT THE KENNEL CLUB NO LONGER RECOMMEND STAFFIES AROUND CHILDREN....I SAID THAT THE FACT THE ONE STATED ABOUT THEM BEING ONE OF ONLY TWO BREEDS RECOMMENDED FOR CHILDREN WAS WRONG.

Read that again and you might see a double negative. What are you saying exactly? And how is TheOne wrong? The kennel club used to say 'affectionate, especially with children' they now say 'well known lovers of children'.

Please show me another example of a breed that TKC says is good with kids, apart from the cheap bay retriever ofc.

gigeorge · 5 Jun 2012 at 16:59

Phate said:
A friend of mine has one.

It is the most dopey, docile, chilled out, friendliest dog I have ever met in my life, fact.

As with all dogs...its 90% down to the way the owner is. They have the stereotype of being savage as the typical knuckle dragging monkeys that get them are usually complete douchebags and train the dogs as such.

This.

EdGey · 5 Jun 2012 at 16:59

Can't understand why anyone would have one even if they were renowned for being friendly.

The_One · 5 Jun 2012 at 17:01

EdGey said:
Can't understand why anyone would have one even if they were renowned for being friendly.

on the flip side why not have one

~Divine~Wind~ · 5 Jun 2012 at 17:01

Any animal can turn out nasty/dangerous depends if its brought up as a little ****

My uncle had one from a puppy, was the softest piece of **** you'd ever meet lol
It was scared of little terriers n stuff

Threepwood · 5 Jun 2012 at 17:02

The_One said:
on the flip side why not have one

Can't understand why anyone would have one even if they were renowned for being friendly.

It's simple really.

There is no accounting for taste.

Castiel · 5 Jun 2012 at 17:14

shadesofgrey said:
Read that again and you might see a double negative.

Go on then, illustrate that?

shadesofgrey said:
What are you saying exactly? And how is TheOne wrong? The kennel club used to say 'affectionate, especially with children' they now say 'well known lovers of children'.

I think that is patently obvious....

The One stated that the KC only recommend two breeds of dog for children.....FACT. when in actual fact they do not recommend only two breeds as suitable for children.

Are you saying that there are only two dogs that the KC recommend with children?

shadesofgrey said:
Please show me another example of a breed that TKC says is good with kids, apart from the cheap bay retriever ofc.

I'll offer more than one.....

A real gentleman, he adores children and has a kind and loving nature and a confident air.

http://www.the-kennel-club.org.uk/services/public/breed/display.aspx?id=2048

He is an excellent family dog, particularly good with children and always ready to join in their games.

http://www.the-kennel-club.org.uk/services/public/breed/display.aspx?id=3059

Gentle, and good with children

http://www.the-kennel-club.org.uk/services/public/breed/display.aspx?id=5109

Good with children, he is a devoted companion, absolutely non-aggressive and easy to care for

http://www.the-kennel-club.org.uk/services/public/breed/display.aspx?id=6149

Here is the Chesapeake Bay Retreiver with no mention of children:

http://www.the-kennel-club.org.uk/services/public/breed/display.aspx?id=2044

Happy?

Kenai · 5 Jun 2012 at 17:14

shadesofgrey said:
And how is TheOne wrong?

He said the Kennel Club reccomend them as ONE OF ONLY TWO dogs to have with children.

Castiel is saying the KC have withdrawn the advice about it being ONE OF ONLY TWO BREEDS and given I can't find anything on the KC website about this ONE OF ONLY TWO BREEDS business, i'm inclined to agree.

NOTE: This does not mean they no longer suggest they are suitable for kids, merely that they are not ONE OF ONLY TWO.

You'll notice i've massively overemphasised a particular part of that post as you seemed to be having difficulty with it when Castiel tried explaining it.

raf · 5 Jun 2012 at 17:14

I think they get a very unfair rep regarding their disposition to people, from my experience with them they've always been very gentle towards humans.

With newly met dogs of the same sex they can be horrendous though and there's no denying that. I know that any breed has the potential to go for other canines but ANY terrier whether it be a Staff/Jack Russell/Yorkie is generally more dog aggressive than other breeds. The problem with bull terriers is that they have the means to do a lot of damage in a short amount of time wheras granny's Yorkie isn't going to do much other than look a wally.

Not meaning to slate the breed in all this, they can make lovely pets and we've had one in our family who was fantastic with my nephew. As long as people are responsible with them there's no problem, it's a shame so many get a dog without doing any research into their origins or temperament.

Hatter The Mad · 5 Jun 2012 at 17:15

Wy are Staffys so popular amongst poor people? It's pretty much the only breed you see going in and out of the PDSA.

Funnily enough, said people sell Staffy puppies on the doorstep of the RSPCA hospitals in London - ironic as they will mot likely be sold to others who will be back at the charity hospital because they can't actually afford to keep a dog.

staffordshire bull terrier, why?

Can't type for toffee