This one's a shocker!

**James Deuce** · 30th August 2007, 01:18

Ban Dogs. They serve no purpose if they aren't working dogs.

**skidMark** · 30th August 2007, 01:29

Originally Posted by Jim2

Ban Dogs. They serve no purpose if they aren't working dogs.

woah! thats taking it a bit far dude

you just want to remove all the species of dog

this is the thing one bad dog and every dog gets picked on

just because there are humans who are murderers we don't all get suspected of being murderers too

i believe it's all in how the dog is raised,

my friends labrador (female) was trained from memory as a dog to fetch ducks or rabbits, the most gentle dog you will ever see

a few years ago she was playing with a waterbomb in it's mouth and she was so gentle with it that she never popped it.

if they are trained right they are gentle yes some dogs maybe there something wrong with them i don't know i'm no dog expert, but dogs are great companion and to even suggest that jim2 makes me wonder about your morals.

**James Deuce** · 30th August 2007, 01:33

What have morals got to do with it?

Dogs are social pack animals only latterly removed from Wolf form solely by Human breeding.

The second deadliest animal (to humans) after the Hippo on the African continent are African Wild Dogs.

Dogs require strict discipline and formality in terms of a hierarchy within a family unit. Sod all people have the qualities required to train and maintain a dog as a safe pet.

Highly trained working dogs on the other hand, from help for the disabled, to Police work, to Customs drug sniffers, to farm dogs are worth their weight in gold.

A poorly trained dog in an urban environment is a huge liability and it will hurt someone.

Ban dogs.

**skidMark** · 30th August 2007, 01:53

Originally Posted by Jim2

What have morals got to do with it?

Dogs are social pack animals only latterly removed from Wolf form solely by Human breeding.

The second deadliest animal (to humans) after the Hippo on the African continent are African Wild Dogs.

Dogs require strict discipline and formality in terms of a hierarchy within a family unit. Sod all people have the qualities required to train and maintain a dog as a safe pet.

Highly trained working dogs on the other hand, from help for the disabled, to Police work, to Customs drug sniffers, to farm dogs are worth their weight in gold.

A poorly trained dog in an urban environment is a huge liability and it will hurt someone.

Ban dogs.

ok well that is a fair view....yes i agree if they have not been trained properly they are dangerous but as a well trained pet they and a great animal and can be an amazing part of a family

**deanohit** · 30th August 2007, 08:24

Sorry Jim2, but I want some things cleared. Do you consider a trained hunting dog a working dog?
I reckon there are alot of people out there with dogs who shouldnt have them.
Having a dog is a big responsibility. You have to not only feed it and look after it, you have to train it, and then you have to watch it. I have always been careful as to where my dog is allowed. When there are kids around, the dog is outside in his kennel. Even though he has always been well behaved with kids, he did growl at a 4 year old once as I stated earlier and I still trust him, but I would rather not risk it.

**janno** · 30th August 2007, 08:50

I'd say this whole event was about a poorly trained dog with dominance issues who was merely trying to remove the threat to its pack standing, with tragic results.

I wish people would realise that not all dogs are the same, and breed traits do have to be taken into account.

Huskies are magnificent animals, but are a totally different kettle of fish from, say, a Cavalier King Charles. One previous partner had two, and said the only reason he was able to keep them in an urban setting was the fact that he was a geologist surveying vast areas of Central Otago by foot, and the dogs went with him. So they got 10 hours a day of exercise, and were really well trained. I mean, he was really, REALLY tough on them. Not one indiscretion was tolerated, but the dogs knew their pack order and didn't try to challenge it.

The other people I knew who had them used to race them in teams, but with wheels on the sled or whatever, instead of over snow. So once again, miles and miles of running per day.

After having Blue Heelers for 15 years, I'm quite happy to have a couple of friendly little schipperkes. Really nice to have easy going, sociable dogs. The blues were very much one person animals and owning them was a huge responsibility. (Still treasured them - don't get me wrong, but it was constant vigilance the whole time.)

**Ocean1** · 30th August 2007, 08:56

Got to agree with Jim to some extent, too many poorly trained dogs in suburbia. I like dogs, most of 'em, but so many live pathetic bored lives because their owners don't follow through on the commitment required when they bought that cute pupy. Dogs and kids often don't mix, the dog will try to establish it's place in the pecking order, it's what they do. If it's not well trained that can get ugly.

Also pissed that "they" didn't ban some of the more dangerous breeds when they had the chance. There were bugger all pit bulls in the country then, easy enough to control. Now it'd be all but impossible. And yes, in spite of claims to the contrary there are breeds that are more likely to attack people. Some breeds are close decendants to either those bred for war or for fighting, they have traits you'd really rather not have co-existing with your kids.

Working dogs are a completely different animal, usually by breed and certainly by training. Very valuable members of rural society because of that training. However, a farmer wouldn't hesitate to put a badly behaved dog down, and that's entirely appropriate.

**James Deuce** · 30th August 2007, 09:12

Originally Posted by deanohit

Sorry Jim2, but I want some things cleared. Do you consider a trained hunting dog a working dog?
I reckon there are alot of people out there with dogs who shouldnt have them.
Having a dog is a big responsibility. You have to not only feed it and look after it, you have to train it, and then you have to watch it. I have always been careful as to where my dog is allowed. When there are kids around, the dog is outside in his kennel. Even though he has always been well behaved with kids, he did growl at a 4 year old once as I stated earlier and I still trust him, but I would rather not risk it.

Yes I do.

But, I don't believe hunting dogs should be housed in an urban environment. It's just asking for trouble. A decent hunting dog has much bigger cojones than any gang member's rabid Staffie, with the added "bonus" of a fair bit of capability in the independent action stakes.

The very worst thing you can do is buy a dog and then have everybody vacate the house for 8-10 hours. They are very social and it's really damaging to their psyche. Too many people who have dogs do not have the time to provide the necessary care. If both adults in the house are working, don't get a dog for a pet. It will be psycho in short order.

**LilSel** · 30th August 2007, 09:36

Very sad... I have an Alaskan Malamute (bigger than husky) that weighs more than my partner (go figure)... my nephews play with her etc & they are young... they are not unsafe dogs by any means. As stated in the article, what occured was uncharacteristic of the breed. It is a tragic accident. I feel for the family.

**Animal** · 30th August 2007, 11:11

Originally Posted by janno

Hells Bells! This one's a shocker!! Very sad . . .

Shit, that's terrible! Those poor people!

**Animal** · 30th August 2007, 11:19

There's a lot of merit in McJim's view on working dogs vs pets. I don't think people recognise the responsibility that goes with acquiring a dog. It's so much more than just the "having" a dog, it's the training, control, and containment. As we've seen in recent months, in far too many cases it's the clueless and irresponsible owners of the dogs that need training, control and containment.

Was that even worth two cents?

**fireball** · 30th August 2007, 11:38

Originally Posted by CADanimal

There's a lot of merit in McJim's view on working dogs vs pets. I don't think people recognise the responsibility that goes with acquiring a dog. It's so much more than just the "having" a dog, it's the training, control, and containment. As we've seen in recent months, in far too many cases
it's the clueless and irresponsible owners of the dogs that need training, control and containment.

Was that even worth two cents?

i second that

**deanohit** · 31st August 2007, 09:19

Originally Posted by Jim2

Yes I do.

But, I don't believe hunting dogs should be housed in an urban environment. It's just asking for trouble. A decent hunting dog has much bigger cojones than any gang member's rabid Staffie, with the added "bonus" of a fair bit of capability in the independent action stakes.

The very worst thing you can do is buy a dog and then have everybody vacate the house for 8-10 hours. They are very social and it's really damaging to their psyche. Too many people who have dogs do not have the time to provide the necessary care. If both adults in the house are working, don't get a dog for a pet. It will be psycho in short order.

Fair enough. I agree with what your saying as well about dogs been left alone all day. When I moved up to Tauranga, I left my dog with my mum

who was happy to have him. There, he has complete reign over a very large area with other dogs around him rather than move him into a built up area where he wouldn't be allowed to be the great dog that he is.
All too often a family will see only the cute little puppy eyes and think the dog will be like that fore ever, with out realising that it will grow bigger and have a mind of it's own, but still be dependant on you.