• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

most dangerous dog breeds, least dangerous dog breeds, and why

Out of ignorance, many dogs owners raise dangerous dogs despite the best intentions to treat their dogs well.

And dogs don't just bite their owners; they also fuck with people who have absolutely nothing to do with the condition of the dog.

So obviously there's a lot more to it than you think.

And you approve of this? This little story rather reinforces my beliefs about dog owners. A man, who had every right to be on the property, underwent a frightening ordeal because the owner failed in his duty of care.

Oy vey.

Metaphor,
I am hoping that you will glean from these posts that not all dogs are as you think they are. Note the bolded bit. She did her job - GENTLY! That is a well trained dog.

Gaynor.
The fucked up part about is not that the dog made a bad choice--the dog is not a moral agent--but that that it's owner has trained it to fetch humans with its teeth.

In my personal experience, many dog owners have a very bizarre idea of what behaviours are acceptable--or even desirable--in their pets.
In all likelihood, the owner did not train the dog to fetch humans. The dog was likely to have been trained to guard property and not to hurt humans, both jobs carefully and expertly carried out. The human was at fault for not acknowledging the dog properly. Of course the dog and owner get the blame for the employee's lack of manners and good sense. But the employee was at fault. The dog had no way to discern whether the employee was there to work or to rob. The dog did not react with violence but to restrain the errant human and to seek the authority and judgement of the proper authority: the owner. Note the employee was not injured, unless you are counting pride.

It is absolutely wrong to expect dogs to exercise knowledge and training they do not possess or to punish them for human failures yet we do just that all the time.

Only an idiot would swat at a dog, especially a large guard dog.

So, it isn't victim blaming if the victim is an idiot?

What victim? The employee was not injured. Probably scared but that's not being injured.

Suppose instead of a dog, the owner had a mechanical alarm and the employee didn't know the code. A silent alarm was triggered; police or private cops were dispatched and came upon the employee who is startled at seeing himself surrounded by officers with guns drawn. Suppose they are just private cops, no uniforms that this scared idiot recognizes. He's placed in cuffs, taken to the owner who says: that's my employee, he's ok.

Would you be crying foul then? Of course not. Essentially, this is exactly what happened, only instead of armed humans, there was a dog who responded perfectly to its training, apprehended a suspect without causing any injury and brought him to the owner who could determine whether the suspect was a danger or simply daft.

I would feel quite differently if the dog had mauled the employee. Then, it would be a case of probable improper training of both dog and employee. And the boss as well. Seriously: who has dogs guarding the place and then doesn't let the employees know that it's being guarded and how to properly interact with the dogs?

But in this case, the employee was uninjured, except perhaps his dignity but really: the man needed a bit of education there. The dog is completely blameless and showed a great deal of restraint as well as excellent training.
 
No one was hurt or likely to be hurt, so I think describing this as an unsafe working condition or an attack is a a bit of stretch.
With certain dogs yes, but some other dogs, you could just be a couple facial ticks away from setting them off.

Of course some dogs are unstable. This is clearly not the case as related to us.

Plenty of humans are pretty unstable as well. They do a great deal more harm, often on a massive scale.

This was an employee who went into work, apparently without authorization. Some would call that breaking and entering = crime.
 
I had run-ins with dobermans that owners at a couple of houses thought they should just run loose. Not attacked there, but how do you fucking properly approach an angrily barking doberman as a young teen after being attacked by a pair of german shepards when you were a younger kid?

Don't try and tell the caninephiles that dogs and their owners could ever do anything wrong. Only a child full of hate would be startled by a German Shepherd lunging at the fence every time the child has the cajones to walk home from school. "The dog's more afraid than you are", of course. "He's sweet, he just doesn't know you", which puts me in mind of having a deformed redneck cousin who you keep in the house who doesn't attack his family members but strangers are fair game.

Yes, there are badly trained dogs and there are also some unstable, unreliable and dangerous dogs as well just as there are unstable, unreliable and dangerous human beings. I have moved house because of a dangerous dog, as a matter of fact. I wasn't safe, my husband wasn't safe, more importantly, our kids were not safe, nor was the mailman, the old lady walking past, the police officer who was too scared shitless to take any action to protect any of us and insist the dog be better confined instead of being left where he could break out of doors and go after people or jump fence and go after people. I felt a little bit for the dog who was clearly unhappy and clearly wasn't getting the attention he needed but the dog was in serious need of a lot of serious training and possibly being put down if the training didn't work. The owner was a POS who had no idea what he was doing and was unwilling to recognize that he had a seriously dangerous dog in a neighborhood full of kids and people simply walking home from the post office or corner store. Frankly, if the neighborhood had been full of murderers, it still was unsafe and unreliable and should not have been kept.

There's a big difference between badly trained dogs which are plentiful and unstable, unreliable dangerous dogs, which are relatively few. My former neighbor's dog was both badly trained/untrained and also unstable, unreliable and very dangerous.

It's too bad that you had bad experiences with some dogs when you were a kid and worse that no one helped you out. Clearly, that is not what happened in the case of the dog who was guarding his master's property which was entered by a thoughtless, stupid employee. In that case, the dog behaved far more rationally than the employee did. No one was hurt, although the employee did provoke the dog.

The fact that some people are frightened of dogs is not the same thing as dogs who frighten people who are easily frightened by dogs are dangerous. The fact that some people are bad dog owners is not the same thing as their dogs deserve to be put down! although that happens far too frequently.

I have large herding type dogs who are not at all aggressive. Most people who see them just want to pet them and to get to know them, but some people are clearly frightened of dogs. When I see someone who clearly is frightened or even a little unhappy that my dogs are out, I have the dogs walk very close to me, and if possible, change course to avoid the person who is disturbed by their presence. I realize some people have only had bad experiences with dogs and may not be in the mood to learn that my dogs are sweet. I don't have a right to expect that of anybody. I do have the responsibility to make sure that my dogs are well behaved and are within my control at all times. That requires effort and attention to surroundings (attractive nuisances abound, especially in the spring!) and to my dogs and other people, especially if they also have dogs, children, or seem in any way to be unsteady on their feet or frightened or disturbed by my dogs. The last thing I want is for anybody to be frightened or hurt, which in theory could happen if one of my large dogs bumped against someone who was unsteady on their feet. But that is fairly unlikely, actually. My dogs were quite good with my disabled mother, who was more than a little unsteady on her feet. Still, it is my responsibility to make sure everybody is safe and FEELS safe.


I like (most) dogs but not all dogs. I've known some who were poorly behaved and poorly trained but not dangerous, even if the dog was a large one. Those dogs (and owners) needed training.

I've known a couple of fairly nasty tiny dogs that if larger, would never have been tolerated by even the owners but would have been put down. I've known a few dogs who were 'crazy'--unstable, aggressive, prone to attack--and by attack, I mean attempting to bite, successfully biting (serious bites, not nips!) and to harm. Those dogs needed to be put down.

Most dogs I've known have been good dogs, even the imperfectly trained ones.
 
What victim? The employee was not injured. Probably scared but that's not being injured.

Imagine for a moment there are people in the world who don't respond to guard dogs with unalloyed joy. Imagine for a moment being someone who would prefer to hear Chanticleer to the cacophony of dogs barking. You may think having a dog clamp down on your person and drag you to god knows where isn't an experience worth fretting over, but others might.

Suppose instead of a dog, the owner had a mechanical alarm and the employee didn't know the code. A silent alarm was triggered; police or private cops were dispatched and came upon the employee who is startled at seeing himself surrounded by officers with guns drawn. Suppose they are just private cops, no uniforms that this scared idiot recognizes. He's placed in cuffs, taken to the owner who says: that's my employee, he's ok.

Would you be crying foul then?

I'd be crying foul that the idiot owner hired employees without telling his security detail about them, yes.

Of course not. Essentially, this is exactly what happened, only instead of armed humans, there was a dog who responded perfectly to its training, apprehended a suspect without causing any injury and brought him to the owner who could determine whether the suspect was a danger or simply daft.

It's the dog owner who was daft. Or is it that dog owners never do anything wrong ever?
I would feel quite differently if the dog had mauled the employee. Then, it would be a case of probable improper training of both dog and employee. And the boss as well. Seriously: who has dogs guarding the place and then doesn't let the employees know that it's being guarded and how to properly interact with the dogs?

The idiot dog owner in this example.

But in this case, the employee was uninjured, except perhaps his dignity but really: the man needed a bit of education there. The dog is completely blameless and showed a great deal of restraint as well as excellent training.

I didn't blame the dog. I don't like dogs but I didn't blame it. You'll notice I indeed blamed the owner in what I wrote. That doesn't mean that having a dog latch on to your person isn't a frightening experience.

Would you want your mother to go through it?
 
If it's your dog. The problem comes when others encounter the dog--how I treat animals has nothing to do with how a dog I encounter has been treated.

Every dog bite I've gotten (nothing serious) has been due to my not accepting the dog doing something to me that I didn't want the dog to do. I did not treat the dogs badly, I simply stopped the improper behavior.

How many dog bites have you gotten?

I have been around dogs all my life, both familiar and unfamiliar and have bitten just once.

Then again, I like dogs.
In general, I love animals. Dogs too. Been bit by two when a kid, what the fuck is your point? That I went to ring the door bell of a house and the owners had their angry dog outside running loose? Give me a fucking break!
 
Imagine for a moment...


Stop right there.


It is you who are doing the imagining. Just about everything you have imagined that happened in this scenario is just that...your imagination at work. You've created this imaginary situation where a hapless guy who'd wandered into an area guarded by vicious, untrained attack dogs was savagely brutalized by these bloodthirsty monsters and left gasping for the last of his life as the dogs' owner twisted his Snidely Whiplash mustache and patted the evil German Shepherd responsible for all the bloodshed on the back.


This is absurd. The owner of the dogs lived in my house for the better part of 10 years. We had the dogs themselves in our house for awhile, and they were exceptionally well behaved around kids, cats, other dogs, and humans of all stripes. When I went to the shop (and I did this many times) the dogs were a welcome sight.
 
Imagine for a moment...


Stop right there.


It is you who are doing the imagining. Just about everything you have imagined that happened in this scenario is just that...your imagination at work. You've created this imaginary situation where a hapless guy who'd wandered into an area guarded by vicious, untrained attack dogs was savagely brutalized by these bloodthirsty monsters and left gasping for the last of his life as the dogs' owner twisted his Snidely Whiplash mustache and patted the evil German Shepherd responsible for all the bloodshed on the back.


This is absurd. The owner of the dogs lived in my house for the better part of 10 years. We had the dogs themselves in our house for awhile, and they were exceptionally well behaved around kids, cats, other dogs, and humans of all stripes. When I went to the shop (and I did this many times) the dogs were a welcome sight.

I've imagined nothing. I've talked about facts. Do not put words into my mouth.

There are bad dogs, and there are bad dog owners.

And -- horror of horrors -- some people just don't care for dogs, don't own them, don't abuse them, and wouldn't otherwise give a shit if dog owners didn't try to defend the indefensible, or imagine there is something psychologically wrong with the people who don't share their mania for canines.
 
I've imagined nothing. I've talked about facts. Do not put words into my mouth.


Well let's quote you then, so there can be no doubt.


You think a dog CLAMPED ON YOUR LEG WITH ITS TEETH isn't an attack?

vicious dogs

rampant evil


You've portrayed the story I told as an instance of an untrained dog viciously attacking an unsuspecting victim. This is clearly not the case.
 
Stop right there.


It is you who are doing the imagining. Just about everything you have imagined that happened in this scenario is just that...your imagination at work. You've created this imaginary situation where a hapless guy who'd wandered into an area guarded by vicious, untrained attack dogs was savagely brutalized by these bloodthirsty monsters and left gasping for the last of his life as the dogs' owner twisted his Snidely Whiplash mustache and patted the evil German Shepherd responsible for all the bloodshed on the back.


This is absurd. The owner of the dogs lived in my house for the better part of 10 years. We had the dogs themselves in our house for awhile, and they were exceptionally well behaved around kids, cats, other dogs, and humans of all stripes. When I went to the shop (and I did this many times) the dogs were a welcome sight.

I've imagined nothing. I've talked about facts. Do not put words into my mouth.

There are bad dogs, and there are bad dog owners.

And -- horror of horrors -- some people just don't care for dogs, don't own them, don't abuse them, and wouldn't otherwise give a shit if dog owners didn't try to defend the indefensible, or imagine there is something psychologically wrong with the people who don't share their mania for canines.

There are bad dogs. There are bad dog owners and frankly more bad owners than bad dogs.

In the case I was talking about, the one described in this thread, the dog was not bad and I don't think the owner was a bad owner, either. Perhaps a poor judge of employees but a responsible dog owner and someone who took the time and effort to train his dog properly: the employee was not harmed.

The employee was daft, behaved dangerously around a dog who was clearly on duty guarding.

The dog executed his duties splendidly, with NO HARM coming to anyone.

I would never try to convince anyone who disliked or was afraid of dogs to like my dogs, however harmless and sweet and un-aggressive I know them to be. I avoid people who are either afraid of or who dislike dogs when I am out with my dogs.

But: just because someone is afraid of dogs or dislikes dogs and the dogs exist! does not mean that the dogs are behaving badly or were poorly trained.

My mother was afraid of dogs. She was afraid of many things--she was simply that kind of person. However, she did well with my dogs and my dogs did well with her and in fact, she even had a (small, and imo, not particularly nice) dog of her own. Fear or dislike of animals is not a fixed quality but is mutable with patience and intelligence. It was not my doing that changed my mother but her own desire to change and to learn to enjoy dogs. For the record, her own dog came before I had my dogs so her dog influenced her to tolerate and then to truly like my dogs, rather than my dogs influencing her.

Liking and even loving dogs is not 'mania.' It is foolish to fail to recognize that not everyone likes dogs or likes your particular dog. Just as it is foolish to believe that all dogs are bad, all dog owners are maniacs and that if someone is afraid of a dog, it is the dog's fault. It may be because the person has an irrational fear of dogs. Or even a very rational fear of dogs. But unless that particular dog has behaved badly in that person's experience, it isn't the dog's fault.
 
Well let's quote you then, so there can be no doubt.


You think a dog CLAMPED ON YOUR LEG WITH ITS TEETH isn't an attack?

vicious dogs

rampant evil


You've portrayed the story I told as an instance of an untrained dog viciously attacking an unsuspecting victim. This is clearly not the case.

The story about the dog and the employee is about a dog that clamped its jaw on an employee and dragged it away. I did not misrepresent the story (neither did I tell it -- it's not my story, after all).

As for my other posts, I am (quite obviously, I thought) using heightened language and hyperbole for rhetorical effect. However, I have not made anything up.
 
I would never try to convince anyone who disliked or was afraid of dogs to like my dogs, however harmless and sweet and un-aggressive I know them to be.

But you know that's exactly what people who own dogs who end up mauling children say, right?

Liking and even loving dogs is not 'mania.' It is foolish to fail to recognize that not everyone likes dogs or likes your particular dog. Just as it is foolish to believe that all dogs are bad, all dog owners are maniacs and that if someone is afraid of a dog, it is the dog's fault. It may be because the person has an irrational fear of dogs. Or even a very rational fear of dogs. But unless that particular dog has behaved badly in that person's experience, it isn't the dog's fault.

I don't think dogs are moral agents, so the question of 'blaming' a dog is meaningless. If anyone is to blame, it is owners. I believe some breeds are naturally more dangerous than others, and that some owners are naturally worse than others, and there is probably an interaction effect of bad owners desiring more dangerous breeds.

However, there really are people who have a mania for dogs; I've met them, I've worked with them, I'm even friends with them. But the things they do -- anthropomorphisation of their animals, the vast sums of money spend on them etc -- do not seem entirely rational to me.

I'll never own a dog as a pet (even if I loved dogs, I don't want to pick up their shit, walk them in winter, or constantly vacuum their hair), I'm glad guide dogs exist and in fact I've never heard of any guide dog 'turning' on its owner or anyone else.
 
Imagine for a moment there are people in the world who don't respond to guard dogs with unalloyed joy. Imagine for a moment being someone who would prefer to hear Chanticleer to the cacophony of dogs barking. You may think having a dog clamp down on your person and drag you to god knows where isn't an experience worth fretting over, but others might.

Only a fool would not think it a serious matter to be taken by a dog to its owner. Perhaps the same kind of fool who goes into a place guarded by dogs and instead of acknowledging the dog and offering a hand to assure the dog it meant no harm, swatted at the dog. Who knows if this person was authorized to be there? Not the dog. And neither you nor I know that.

The dog was doing his job. The employee should have been doing a better job. It's too bad if he was frightened but maybe he was not harmed.

Suppose instead of a dog, the owner had a mechanical alarm and the employee didn't know the code. A silent alarm was triggered; police or private cops were dispatched and came upon the employee who is startled at seeing himself surrounded by officers with guns drawn. Suppose they are just private cops, no uniforms that this scared idiot recognizes. He's placed in cuffs, taken to the owner who says: that's my employee, he's ok.

Would you be crying foul then?

I'd be crying foul that the idiot owner hired employees without telling his security detail about them, yes.

Which we don't know happened. We know an employee went into his workplace during off hours and didn't behave properly around a dog who was guarding the place. That is foolish. Extremely.

Of course not. Essentially, this is exactly what happened, only instead of armed humans, there was a dog who responded perfectly to its training, apprehended a suspect without causing any injury and brought him to the owner who could determine whether the suspect was a danger or simply daft.

It's the dog owner who was daft. Or is it that dog owners never do anything wrong ever?

I've already said that there are plenty of bad dog owners and plenty more who are foolish. I think this dog owner wasn't a very good judge of employees. Who knows whether the employee had been told about guard dogs or not? Or whether they were up to no good or not?

One of my dogs broke up a wrestling match between my son and one of his friends by grabbing the friend by the ass cheek until the friend loosened his grip and got off my son. My dog loved the friend before and after this incident. The friend loved the dog before and after this incident. My son and his friend learned not to engage in wrestling matches around the dog. No one was hurt. No one held any grudges or bad feelings. Dog was as thrilled to see the kid the next time he came over and every time after that. And was thrilled to hang out with him immediately after releasing his grip on his ass. The kid was equally thrilled with the dog and in fact, cried as hard as anyone in the family when the dog died some 7 or 8 years later. Still gets teary eyed when we talk about him. Not from fear but out of love and memories of all the fun they had together.

I did make a point of reminding the kids that the dog disapproved of wrestling and wasn't always able to tell that they were just having fun. We all learned something.


The idiot dog owner in this example.

In this particular example, I don't think it was the dog owner who was an idiot. The employee certainly was an idiot.


I didn't blame the dog. I don't like dogs but I didn't blame it. You'll notice I indeed blamed the owner in what I wrote. That doesn't mean that having a dog latch on to your person isn't a frightening experience.

Would you want your mother to go through it?

Of course it was a frightening experience. Fear can be a very valuable experience. The employee learned not to go into work unannounced and hopefully learned how to behave around dogs. Just because someone was frightened does not mean they were harmed.

Even if you dislike dogs or are frightened of them and even if you prefer to avoid them, it is wise to learn how to behave around them for your own safety. Likewise, it is wise to learn how to be safe around water, cars, traffic in general, crowds of people and a host of other creatures and situations.
 
But you know that's exactly what people who own dogs who end up mauling children say, right?

No. People with dogs who end up mauling children are often people who insist that their dogs are harmless and insist that the child get over their fear by being around a dog that is obviously unstable and unsafe.



I don't think dogs are moral agents, so the question of 'blaming' a dog is meaningless. If anyone is to blame, it is owners. I believe some breeds are naturally more dangerous than others, and that some owners are naturally worse than others, and there is probably an interaction effect of bad owners desiring more dangerous breeds.

However, there really are people who have a mania for dogs; I've met them, I've worked with them, I'm even friends with them. But the things they do -- anthropomorphisation of their animals, the vast sums of money spend on them etc -- do not seem entirely rational to me.

I'll never own a dog as a pet (even if I loved dogs, I don't want to pick up their shit, walk them in winter, or constantly vacuum their hair), I'm glad guide dogs exist and in fact I've never heard of any guide dog 'turning' on its owner or anyone else.

You may be surprised but I don't care for the anthropomorphism of dogs or other animals, either. Dogs are dogs and should be treated as dogs, respected as dogs and not regarded as child substitutes, miniature humans, etc. It isn't good at all for the dog, imo.

I do think that dogs have moral selves, albeit not on the same level as that of most humans. My own dogs clearly have a sense of fairness and fair play and clearly make judgments about people and situations. My first dog (of my own, as an adult) only showed dislike of two people: one a person I disliked and thought was not a good person to have around and the other a serviceman who came to look at my furnace. The dog liked everybody else, including every other service person who ever entered my house, even if I didn't much like them. I figured if he didn't trust the guy, there was a reason and I respected that. I kept a firm hand on my dog and we left the man to his work and escorted him out as soon as he was done. No growling, no snapping, no bad behavior on my dog's part. He just firmly stayed between me and the guy the entire time he was in the basement. I believed the dog.

Dogs are a lot of work and are not for everybody, even all dog lovers. But a well behaved dog can be a source of unconditional love. They don't care if you are beautiful or smart or popular or well dressed or rich. They care if you are happy and try to make you happy. They sympathize when you are sad and accept your bad moods without holding grudges. They forgive immediately and are always willing to take the blame. Sure, they hog the bed and want all the treats but nobody's perfect.
 
Imagine for a moment being someone who would prefer to hear Chanticleer to the cacophony of dogs barking.
I wouldn't want to pick up their shit or vacuum their fur, either.

It's not my favorite thing to do, either, but it's (one of the) price(s) of dog ownership.

Note: I also was not thrilled to change my kids' dirty diapers, get up at freaking 6 a.m. or for that matter, go bar hopping with my husband's high school friends. There are things we do for love and out of responsibility.

I found all of those things to be a fair trade off or at least an acceptable one. Dog ownership is not for everyone. Neither is parenthood, motorcycles, art, science, dancing, or singing. I stay away from some of those things out of inclination and some of them out of respect for others. If you heard me sing, you'd agree with me.
 
I wouldn't want to pick up their shit or vacuum their fur, either.

It's not my favorite thing to do, either, but it's (one of the) price(s) of dog ownership.

Note: I also was not thrilled to change my kids' dirty diapers, get up at freaking 6 a.m. or for that matter, go bar hopping with my husband's high school friends. There are things we do for love and out of responsibility.

I found all of those things to be a fair trade off or at least an acceptable one. Dog ownership is not for everyone. Neither is parenthood, motorcycles, art, science, dancing, or singing. I stay away from some of those things out of inclination and some of them out of respect for others. If you heard me sing, you'd agree with me.
I was referring to Chanticleer.
 
The story about the dog and the employee is about a dog that clamped its jaw on an employee and dragged it away. I did not misrepresent the story (neither did I tell it -- it's not my story, after all).
You continue to misrepresent the story with the substitution of "dragged" for the original "escorted".
As for my other posts, I am (quite obviously, I thought) using heightened language and hyperbole for rhetorical effect. However, I have not made anything up.
Um, the use of hyperbole is making things up.
 
You continue to misrepresent the story with the substitution of "dragged" for the original "escorted".

Well may you put 'escort' in inverted commas:

es·cort (ĕs′kôrt′)
n.
1.
a. One or more persons accompanying another to guide, protect, or show honor.


Um, the use of hyperbole is making things up.

It's no more making things up than any figurative speech that is not literally true. If someone told you it was raining cats and dogs you wouldn't accuse them of making things up.
 
Back
Top Bottom