Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaneman
I've been working with a lot of "dangerous" aggressive dogs lately and have found in every single case (that I've personally worked on) the behavior was a direct response to human influence.
...
I think the truth of the matter is likely that a lot of people want big working or hunting type dogs without being willing to do the work required to ensure a lifetime of stability.
|
I can definitely believe & agree with that - and there lies the rub. Playing devils' advocate (not arguing for 'bans') - many owners are simply not going to treat/train/discipline a dog properly, and those dogs are typically the ones with the capacity to be 'dangerous', regardless of breed (though obviously size/musculature can make a big difference). There are good responsible owners such as yourself who raise/train dogs properly, but there are also plenty who to some degree are neglectful/abusive or simply not knowledgeable enough to properly train a potentially dangerous animal. What then? Where's the balance between personal rights to keep & train/not train animals as one sees fit (barring outright neglect/abuse), vs. the rights of society to not have themselves or their kids exposed to potentially dangerous improperly trained/restrained animals?
(disclaimer: I know in the scope of things, dog attacks are one of the last things I'd worry about if I had kids, especially since I would make sure my kids knew not to be little brats & provoke a dog - just internet debatin' )