What makes one dog breed get a reputation for being more dangerous than others? Should you be more cautious around specific breeds? And does a dog’s breed even matter, or is it always a case of bad training?
Let’s explore some of the world’s most dangerous dogs together. You’ll also learn about what makes us think of certain dog breeds as dangerous. Additionally, we’ll cover the role and history of dog training in building these reputations.
There are a number of reasons people tend to think of certain dog breeds as more dangerous than others. Not all reasons are valid in the same way: Some are hard statistics, others are personal experiences. But they all can play an important role in our understanding of these animals and our discussion about what might make some more dangerous than others.
Here are some of the reasons we tend to consider certain dogs to be the most dangerous dog breeds:
Let’s focus more on that last reason, as I believe it can have the most impact.
Whether it’s right or wrong for us to judge a dog breed based on our limited experiences and the stories we hear about them, it’s something most of us do on some level (myself included). So I’d like to share some personal stories and how they’ve affected me (or not affected me, though you might think it should have).
We saw this in your comments on the original list. For example, we had people saying Pit Bulls aren’t dangerous because their own experiences with the breed have been pleasant. Others shared experiences on the other side of the spectrum.
Personally, I come in somewhere in the middle. I’m not naive enough to think that breed alone makes all pit bulls dangerous or more vicious than other dogs. But I’m also not naive enough to ignore the evidence that this breed has a history of causing more frequent and more serious injuries than most, if not all, others.
Clearly the breed plays some role. Some breeds lean toward different temperaments, or have different loyalties. These might make them great with their own families but naturally suspicious of strangers or other animals or even small children, who have less self-restraint than adults.
Personal experience is also a factor, though. My brother has a small dog. He took the dog outside at his apartment building into the parking lot. Another neighbor was outside with their Pit Bull. It wasn’t on a leash (while this is a requirement, going unleashed isn’t terribly uncommon around here). By all measures the dog would have seemed like a normal, calm family pet.
Until it saw my brother’s dog.
It immediately charged at them and grabbed his dog by the throat. There was no provocation, no unusual noise, and they were across the lot — not close to the pit bull’s owner in any way. My brother was able to rescue his dog by lifting the Pit Bull and literally prying its mouth open (which, by the way, is a stupid thing to do — please don’t ever follow that example). The dog let go and his dog was okay after being treated for its injuries. The Pit Bull then latched onto my brother’s arm though. Again, he was okay after being treated, but the wound wasn’t insignificant. It could have been far worse.
That puts me in that middle ground territory I mentioned before. Personal experience with this breed is terrible. There was no warning sign that the owner trained this dog to attack or fight. In fact, the aggression caught its owner completely off-guard. It just snapped at the sight of a smaller dog. That kind of sudden reaction is far from unheard of with this breed.
But that said, I don’t fault an entire breed (in the case of Pit Bulls, actually three different breeds) for the actions of that single dog. The lack of predictability of some breeds would make them “more dangerous” in my view. But the same goes for poor training and bad behavior by an owner (like allowing any breed with known issues with children or other animals to run free without a leash).
This is far from the only example I could give. Saint Bernards are also sometimes cited as some of the most dangerous dogs. But they’re also known for being calm-tempered and being good with kids. It’s their fierce loyalty that can be an issue.
A family member had one years ago. That dog was a great dog for most of its life. It even helped to stop a burglar in the family’s building. But years later it lunged at another family member who the dog knew for its entire life. They came to visit, and out of the blue the dog lunged and went for her eye. She’s still terrified of the breed to this day (and understandably so after an experience like that).
We can’t explain the unprovoked attack. It might have been a breeding issue. The dog might have been having a bad day in some way. We just don’t know. I understand her fear of the breed. But it’s not one I hold myself as a result — perhaps because I didn’t see it first-hand.
I personally own a mixed breed dog — Border Collie mixed with a Lab. At this stage in her life, I would also consider her to be a dangerous dog, especially around children. She is in no way violent. She’s great with cats and other dogs.
She’s still at that point where she’s young, wants to play all the time, and she doesn’t realize her own size or strength. The hyper aspect is specific to breeds. Both Labs and Border Collies can be very high strung, especially in their first couple of years.
Neighbors and family members don’t want her playing with their tiny dogs, and I think that’s understandable. And I wouldn’t take her out to play with small children for fear that she’d accidentally hurt them by jumping up or knocking them over as she tries to play. Being dangerous isn’t always a case of being naturally vicious, and that’s why so much falls onto the owner. It’s our responsibility to make sure our dogs aren’t put into situations where they’re more likely to cause harm.
If you’ve had experiences that have shaped your own views of what makes for a dangerous dog breed, let us know in the comments. Tell us what happened and whether or not you think it’s a fair way to judge a larger group of dogs based on the action (or actions) you’ve seen first-hand, and why.
Now let’s get to our original list of some of the seemingly most dangerous dogs, based on breeds. Now that you know why certain breeds have earned their “most dangerous dogs” reputations, can you think of others that might also have a similar history? Tell us in the comments.
Every person that I know deeply cares about his or her pets. They are their best friends. They tenderly love each other. Sometimes they eat together, sleep together, and go for walks together.
I’m more of a cat person, but I can’t sit still when I see little puppies or big dogs with big soft fur. I want to hug them, play with them, and give them some of my love and tenderness too. I’ve also seen many adult dogs of different breeds worth praise and true admiration. They are clever, sociable, and funny when you want to play; calm and patient with kids.
And they’re something I can’t credit cats with: They are faithful.
Personally, I don’t know any dog that would bite without warning or just snap. It’s my firm belief that behavior of the dog doesn’t depend on its breed so much as it being the right training and the “master” that matter. In my opinion, humans are most often responsible for dangerous dogs. That said, there might be some truth in the idea that some breeds have more unstable temperaments than others. Knowing this, we should never provoke them.
Think for a minute and analyze your own life. Are we always polite? I can think of several situations when I would have gladly slapped a man in the face, but thank God I’m weak enough and I can control myself (at least I think that I can). Now think about animals. They have instincts too, and they may forget about good manners. It’s not as if they understand them in the same ways we do.
It’s also important for dog owners to protect both other people and their dogs from unexpected circumstances and thus the unpleasant situations. For example, when going outside, they could always use a dog-lead and a muzzle. They could be careful and not let the dog play on its own without a leash, especially when there are other people around. When you have a dog, you become forever responsible for the animal you’ve trained and tamed.
In any case, it’s good to know what breeds of dogs might be most dangerous, just to keep yourself safe. Sometimes the danger in a dog isn’t even a nasty personality, but a matter of them not knowing their own strength.
Even though I personally still find it hard to believe that breed alone determines whether a dog is “dangerous,” you never know what a dog’s owner has taught it. Reliable research into the most dangerous dogs included below comes from the American Veterinary Medical Association, the CDC, and the Humane Society of the United States.
We’ll start with least dangerous of the bunch. Sorry, but there won’t be any terrifying photos today.
Read Also: Ready for a Dog? What Breed?
Origin: Croatia, Middle Ages
Weight: 40-70 lbs
Height: 20-24 inches
Dalmatians are active and energetic dogs, and love to be outdoors. They are very playful and love running.
There’s still no definite info about what this breed was originally bred for. What is known is that it is the oldest spotted breed in Europe, Asia and Africa. They were serving as warriors, hunters, and shepherds long before finally becoming the symbol of the US fireman.
Origin: Germany, 1850s
Weight: 50-64 lbs
Height: 20-25 inches
The boxer is a very strong “square” dog. Boxers love to walk, but the owner should never forget the leash. It’s also better to refrain from aggressive games. Still, boxers recognize all members of the family and can play well with the children.
The boxer breed has its origins in feudal Germany and dates back to the line of bulldogs that existed in Europe in the 16th century. These ancestors lived for hunting wild boars and other big wild animals. The first puppy in the new breed received the name “Box”. Boxer’s qualities, such as their strength, were highly valued by farmers and shopkeepers.
Origin: Canary Islands, Africa, 18th century
Weight: 100-125 lbs
Height: 25-26 inches
The Presa Canario hails from the Canary Islands. Dogs of this breed had two jobs: Hunting – and war. During the 18th century, English traders and merchants came to the Canary Islands, bringing with them their working and gladiator dogs, notably the Mastiff of England and the bulldog. Englishmen also brought with them their traditions of pit fighting for which their breeds and the island dogs were inevitably mixed and eventually bred to produce the ultimate fighter. Nowadays the breed finds use in guarding, handling, and driving cattle.
The dogs of this breed can be gentle and noble with their families, showing great affection to their owners, but are highly suspicious of strangers.
Origin: Switzerland, Middle Ages
Weight: 110-180 lbs
Height: 24-29 inches
Saint Bernards are amazingly big and easygoing dogs, but due to their impressive size they can look a bit awkward. They are quiet and peaceful, love children, and are not inclined to active and rapid games. A Saint Bernard will need all of your attention, so if you spend days in the office, this dog is not for you. They are tremendously strong and, of course, they require a good bit of space.
Most likely, the ancestor of the Saint Bernard was the Alpine Mastiff, a pretty aggressive breed. The original Saint Bernards were working dogs and scouts. They were also much calmer than their Mastiff ancestors. For that reason, they make for excellent home companions today.
Origin: Germany, Middle Ages to 19th century
Weight: 90-120 lbs
Height: 27-32 inches
Great Danes are beautiful and majestic animals, with a gentle and loving nature. They love to play with children and participate in all family events and activities, especially in the outdoors. They are happy to go for a walk and don’t mind the company of other dogs. Despite their gigantic size, Great Danes can even feel quite at home in a city.
In the Middle Ages, these dogs earned their living in dog fighting and by hunting big mammals.
Origin: China, Antiquity
Weight: 40-65 lbs
Height: 18-22 inches
The chow chow is an independent dog often focused only on its own needs. Chow chows need constant physical activity and communication, even if they don’t seem to like being disturbed much.
The chow chow’s original purposes were hunting and helping shepherds.
Origin: Germany, 19th century
Weight: 65-90 lbs
Height: 26-28 inches
Doberman Pinschers (often just called Dobermans) are dogs whose traits emphasize protecting and defending instincts. It is important to avoid any type of aggressive play and struggle with these dogs. Instead, use the games to develop the Doberman’s intelligence. Even though they aren’t small dogs, Dobermans can adapt to life in a city and become a perfect companion for an experienced, physically active owner.
This breed has its roots in in Germany. The breeder Louis Doberman decided to combine the qualities of guard dogs and and the terrier. Luis was a policeman, and so saw the need for a dog that would devotedly defend its owner.
Origin: North America, Ancient times
Weight: 80-110 lbs
Height: 23-28 inches
The Malamute is a friendly dog, but it has rather an independent temper. It’s better to keep this dog in a village, far from the city. Sometimes violent and energetic, they constantly need to move or play.
Note that Malamutes are a working dog breed from a colder climate. So, if you don’t live in the deep north, make your Malamute a nice playground. That’s because they are always in need of physical activity.
The name of the breed comes from a local North American tribe. They used the Malamute to transport goods on a sleigh.
Origin: Siberia, Ancient times
Weight: 35-55 lbs
Height: 20-24 inches
Training a Husky is not that easy. For these reasons, breeder don’t recommend this dog for beginning owners. Initially, these dogs transported goods on a sleigh. Not afraid of cold weather, they’re very active and loving dogs. Huskies love to get together with other members of their breed and howl at the moon.
Origin: Germany, 19th century
Weight: 70-85 lbs
Height: 22-26 inches
German Shepherds are very beautiful dogs, distinguished from other breeds by their reliable and obedient temper. They are in need of constant and serious physical activity though, and they seem to prefer long walks and active games.
Originally (as obvious from the name), the dogs guarded grazing sheep. They are great home guards and often participate in programs for the disabled.
Origin: Germany, 1820s
Weight: 85-110 lbs
Height: 23-27 inches
Rottweilers are powerful dogs with strong jaws, primarily meant to protect. Their original breeders selected those traits especially for that purpose. They often don’t like strangers and other dogs — they are guards at heart, and the dog owner should always remember that.
Origin: US, 19th century
Weight: 30-55 lbs
Height: 18-22 inches
The Pit Bull is named after its original purpose: The questionable amusement of dog fighting in pits. Sad as it is, that bloody tradition has survived in places, and Pit Bulls still have to take their part in it.
Photos source: Flickr
Origin: Southern U.S., 17th century
Weight: 60-120 lbs
Height: 20-28 inches
The American Bulldog is descended from the now-extinct Old English Bulldog, which was bred for farm guarding, livestock herding and bringing down game, and blood sports such as bull-baiting.
Today’s American Bulldog arose from any such dogs brought to America by working-class immigrants, many of them former farmers. In the South, these dogs were an important line of defense against feral hogs.
By the time of World War II, the American Bulldog almost went extinct, but was saved through selective breeding.
These dogs are large, heavy, and have powerful jaws with a typical overbite. They were bred for aggression and protection instincts. While they are suspicious of strangers, they are also very loyal and family-friendly. However, they need lots of space and attention.
Origin: England, 19th century
Weight: 100-130 lbs
Height: 24-27 inches
Bred around 1860 by English gamekeepers, the Bullmastiff’s job was to guard game preserves. They caught poachers, holding them until they could be arrested. They emerged from a cross of the large but non-aggressive Mastiff with the aggressive but smaller, lighter Bulldog.
Starting in the 20th century, they became a distinctive breed.
Today, Bullmastiffs are typical watch and guard dogs. They are fiercely loyal and love their families, but they have an extremely strong territorial instinct, and can be stand-offish towards strangers. When they’re properly trained, Bullmastiffs are also frequently used as gentle therapy dogs.
They are easy to groom, doesn’t shed, but are very prone to drooling. Bullmastiffs generally don’t need too much attention or movement.
Note that this dog was bred to be very quiet, so it won’t audibly warn when it’s startled or otherwise in a bad temper. In combination with their strengths, this makes Bullmastiffs one of the potentially most dangerous dogs.
Note: This post was originally published on April 1, 2009. It has since been updated with a new introduction and further background on the history of dangerous dogs.
View Comments
"Most Dangerous Dogs" ? Gotta be kidding right? Yeah. Surely. Totally uneducated list :D
How could they forget breeds like the Fila Brasiliero, Caucasian Ovtcharka, Alabai, Kangal, Tosa and Bully Kutta? :)
:@
I'm sorry but did you do any research before typing up that bunch of bull sh*t?
Anyone who know the history of Rottweilers can easily say that they were bread for HERDING!
I think most Rotties love other dogs. Most of the Rottie owners I know always has at least 2 of them.
pitbulls are NOT DANGEROUS none of these dogs are the ones who are dangerous are the people who raise them i have two pits my self and one is mentally retarded and the other is the best dog you will ever meet they both listen and would never hurt a fly so tell me again why you think any of these dogs are mean o thats right their owners. treat them right and they will be your best friends forever!
One of my cousins mom has over 7 dogs and all different specis and none of them are dangerous.I say that the reason some dogs are dangerous its because the way the owner treats them. :)
just one post here and then Im done.. For a bit of background, I am a member of and certified decoy for( that's the guy in the bite suit ) an accredited organization whose purpose is to help train and certify police dogs and privately owned working / protection dogs. I make no claims of being an end all expert, but as such, I have an insight into training methods and canine behaviors. We assist and train dogs for detection of explosives and narcotics, open area and building searches, patrol, protection, obedience, and agility. ( note that our agility training is not competitive agility as per AKC agility but rather, teaching dogs to overcome and navigate obstacles they may possibly encounter in "real world" working scenarios.
So, although I believe the original article was written with good intentions, I think it does more harm than good. I believe this because all of the sources quoted where I believe narrow in opinion, based on very specific factors and they all lack what I would consider "equal statistical comparison's" for the lack of better term. I may have missed it, but I didn't see any of the sources quoted address breed popularity and density. There was no comparisons based on equal numbers, but rather the results were based on reported "incidents" with no regard to any other factors. This article should be retitled as "dog breeds to be aware of" or "dog breeds to pay attention to" something other than "The most dangerous dogs" because it very clearly doesn't come anywhere close living up to it's title.
As others have already articulated, I'm mostly in the camp that believes human error is the primary cause of overly aggressive, dangerous dogs. I'm the first to say that there most certainly are exceptions, I've been witness to them, but the fact remains that most of the time, its human influence that damages the dog and not the other way around. I also agree very strongly with Jen's post. Many people are simply "dog ignorant". I fully believe as others have stated, that we, as dog owners and perspective dog owners need to be responsible and realistic. We need to do our best to insure we don't put our dogs and other people into situations that could result in something bad happening. It means we need to know the characteristics and behavioral tendencies of our chosen breed and handle them accordingly. And obviously as such, we need to be aware of and attend to the proper care and treatment of our dogs. There are shelters and kennels and rescue groups stock full of unwanted dogs that are in those circumstances for no other reason than human stupidity and selfishness.
With regard to the "most dangerous dogs" listed in this article.. The first mistake is, as a few others have indicated, there 5 or 6 dog breed not mentioned that are in reality far more dangerous and difficult to handle and train than those listed. The Bully kutta, and Tosa Inu are such examples.
The next point is, a large number of the dog bite incidents quoted by the sources.. are not intentional attacks by dogs. Rather, they are caused by a total lack of knowledge, and respect of canine behavior by handlers, owners and the general public. I do decoy work and trust me, there is a huge difference in a dog giving a single bite for whatever reason vs a dog "attacking" or "fighting" in full prey, fight or defensive drive. Obviously, there are documented cases where a dog or pack of dogs have intentionally attacked a human in full prey or fight drive, but those are the exception and not the rule I agree with Jen and Hannah, if more people simply took the time to be more attentive, and be more realistic and responsible, the number of dog bites, especially bites involving children would drop dramatically.
Are there "bad" dogs, of course there are. But are dogs more or less dangerous based on breed? I would say no. Obviously, like all things in life there are exceptions to every rule but that applies singularly here. Yes, there is the occasional "bad" pit, just like there's the occasional "bad" GSD or Rottie or Golden.. unfortunately, it happens. But, to say pits as a breed or more dangerous than Golden's or Lab's.. I can't agree with that. BSL or breed specific legislation to the best of my research abilities hasn't effected the rate or severity of dogs bites at all in USA. ( I can't speak for other countries ) And as such I see it basically as a way for politicians to pretend to address a social issue or problem without actually have to address it's root cause.
And lastly, Jack, we're all entitled to our opinion but I really wish you'd not use the pit is a 44 mag and other dogs are .22's analogy. First it shows a lack of any realistic firearms knowledge and more than that.. it shows what I'd say is a lack of understanding and experience when it comes to the capabilities of various dog breeds. Pits bite and hold... so they rate a .40 smith and wesson.. maybe.. a bite from a big pit is bad but not nearly as bad a bite from say.. a bully kutta, or a presa or a tosa say.. when we get to these breeds we are now talking .44 mag.. and if you really want a "big gun" bite.. lets talk about a trained eastern bloc GSD or Mally or a trained Bully or Tosa.. trust me jack I work in a bite suit and I know the difference..
Anyway.. just me 2 cents..
Cheers people
G.
one last thing.. my apologies for the grammatical errors in my first post.. I typed this on a netbook and didn't get all the fixes.. my bad
Cheers
Hello Greg
This name of this site; "The Most Dangious Dogs in the World" is certainly not accurate in the content. However I think it incites people to comment and debate. Which I think is good, as it creates communication. Communication leads to Resolution" As I see it; we are all entitled to our opinion be it ignorant, bisaed, or knowledgable in experience. As long as there is communication the truth will eventually prevail. Learning is an intentional and unintentional process, however we as individuals have the responsability to establish what we learn' is in fact the truth.
I think for the mos't part your comments were accurate, When one writes a public comment, one must be very accurate in the content. Below are my thoughts
DOG TRAINING & PITBULLS
Can proper obedience training and owner control make a potentially ' Dangerous Dog a safe canine companion? What about a pit bull with inherent dominance and fighting ability?
I was reading a newspaper article about Walton KY not permitting Pit Bulls in the city. The Pit Bull is a beautiful, magnificent looking animal, with very powerful physical abilities. Like any animal of this magnitude, they demand one’s attention and admiration and in my case, concern and absolute respect for their capacity.
Respect is a little word with many connotations as well as a two way street. From what I see, most people are not worthy of a dogs respect much less obedience.
I must say I have handled only about three or four Pit bulls; so I do not consider myself an authority on that breed. But I am competent and understanding of the psychological makeup of the average dog, which allows me to train them. Any good trainer can train any dog to perform what that dog is physically capable of. A trainer cannot make a dog reliable or a change the breed characteristics a dog is born with. No trainer can insure that training and control will be properly maintained by the owner.
The Pit Bull is fearless and relentless in combat whether in self defense or initiating the opponent. Pitbulls can weigh in at a formidable 100 pounds. They can be a serious threat to the safety of owners, other people and dogs, unless the owners acknowledge and accept their responsibility.
The owners must change the way they think of their dogs. They must learn to recognize and understand how a dog communicates in addition to learning and understanding their dog’s attributes, ability, and capacity.
To a dog we are merely an animal, some of us are big (adults) some are small (infants and children). As regards Pit bulls; there are far too many incidents in which Pit Bulls, at home and in public, have wreaked havoc on people. These incidence of injury, (which are far greater in damages to persons than with the average dog), could not have taken place in most cases, if the owner/handler knew and was attentive to the dog’s communications.
When in public all dogs should be on leash. The leash and collar (capable of restraining the dog in times of stress) is probably the most valuable piece of equipment one can own. The leash will keep your dog from going towards trouble and it enhances handling the dog safely, should trouble come to them.
If a person handling a 100 pound dog was jerked to the ground and retained hold of the leash, it would be very difficult for a 100 pound dog to drag the average 150 pound person for any great of distance in an effort to get to another dog or person.
I am a practicing trainer of dogs for obedience and horses for riding and driving, single or multi hitch. I am nomadic, in that I travel across the U.S.A. in my work. I like to think I keep my opinion open to persuasion, which keeps my mind open to learning. In my travels, I have retrained aggressive dogs and they adjusted well. When I take a dog to train, I work with the owners also. I try to enhance their understanding of what they must learn and practice if they want to maintain a good relationship with their dog. I have found all dogs are not good natured and compatible with the average person. In my travels I see a lot of good natured animals, but also ill natured animals being handled badly.
Most of the time, I found the owners were lacking in their dedication in communication with their dog, which allows the dog to regress back to its former undesirable behavior. This is one of the reasons I do not train Pit Bulls, (Ammendment; or other big' dogs of like innate capacity). I do not want my name referenced as the trainer, should a mishap occur.
The Pit bull is an animal, and other like any animal of like innate capacity, he is subject to good training. However, I personally cannot train him to a degree of reliability within my comfort zone; that to which I can train most dogs. There are approximately 65 million dogs in the U.S.A. Every one of these animals; think, perceive, interpret and react. Although we can and do train our animals to respond only to our personal directive, they can and do respond to circumstance without our directing them.
A dog is like a small child; and we must constantly be aware of what they are doing and thinking if we are to keep them from harm’s way. Both will learn with or without our input so there must be a strong leader to protect and train them. Without that leadership, respect and obedience will not happen. Respect is not an innate attribute of a dog or a child; it must be learned and earned. A dog or child who does not respect humans becomes empowered and becomes the leader in that relationship.
Aggression in any breed is a concern. With Pit Bulls, the consequences of an attack is paramount. I do not trust any person or animal as individuals, until they have proven trustworthy. I give both the same respect I would give a person with a gun in their hand, that being I do not place myself in a position where that persons carelessness will cause me harm.
Safety in handling dogs can only come from recognizing, understanding, learning, and using the mediums of communication the dog uses which, are Visual, that being physical movement of their extremities individually or in correlation, therefore we must be in a position to see the communications, such as the dog’s tail and/or ear movement, their body frame. Sound, that being the levels of barking, growls, whines, moans, therefore we must be in a position to hear the communication, and Tactile, that being; physical touch, therefore we must be in a position to feel the communication, such as the dog pulling on the leash while I am walking him. The dog’s communication conveys his intent or feeling toward something which has got his attention, be it animal, vegetable or mineral.
We breed dogs to develop certain innate features/traits. The Pit Bull and other dogs of like capacity were bred for the purpose of deterring threats by aggressive means. These traits remain in the dog today, although the average person having these dogs today, do not own or need them for the original purpose of breeding. The “need” has turned to a “desire.” Average owners are ignorant of and lack respect for the breeds capacity, training limits, and unreliability as regards obedience. Does this make the Pit Bull a BAD DOG? NO! It makes them dog with traits, just like a sight hound verses a Scent hound. They are both dogs, but have capacities and limits that must be respected. Are there exceptions? YES.
An Obedient, reliable dog follows the handlers command, even though it does not want to. This means when there is a threat, or other stimulus which incites the dog to revert back to his “innate state” of survival; your “training” which the dog learned to trust, will surface and override his natural instincts to fight, flight, or chase. This type of training requires dedication, which I find the majority and average dog owners do not have.
In comparing various breeds of dogs, we must look at their purpose and capacity, much like one would compare guns. For example; if there were a 44 magnum pistol, loaded, laying on a table….it is not dangerous!!! The gun does not think, interpret and react on its own as a dog does. A gun only becomes dangerous when someone picks it up, and is careless with it, or intentionally uses it,
The Pit Bull in comparison to other dogs is (this may be over simplifying) a 44 magnum pistol; whereas the average dog is a 22 pistol. If the same surface of your shoulder is hit with a bullet from a 22 pistol, it is probably going to hurt, and may have residual adverse affect. If that same surface area is hit with a bullet from a 44 magnum; your shoulder will probably be destroyed. I am not an expert in guns but please trust my analogy.
Thinking along these same lines of potential affect of various dogs; I posed a question to myself. The law enforcement agencies use the fear factor of a growling snarling lunging dog. So why do the police not use Pit Bulls in their every day work? The police use other dogs, in high public profile, to support their law enforcement efforts, so why not the pit bull? A dog growling and lunging at the leash is a powerful image and certainly is a deterrent to any hostile approach to that officer. If it were a Pit bull; with my perception and understanding of that dog; my fear and concern would be much greater. The pit bull is rarely used because it isn’t anywhere near as reliable to obedience as the other breeds used in law enforcement. And let’s face it, I would not want to be in a crowd of people where a Pit Bull is on aggression leash and I am restricted from moving away from him.
In closing; Do a group of citizens with a vested interest; have the right to ask for protection of animals through legislation by restricting certain animals and where they may be housed and what materials and specification must be used for such housing? YES Should animal owners be required to ensure their dogs remain on their property, and not place me and mine in peril? YES. Should Animal owners be held accountable for injury and mayhem their animals commit intentionally or unintentionally? YES
Rights of Americans” it seem are no longer “inalienable”, but must now be legislated. That is not the way it should be. We have enough legislation; however irresponsible, ignorant, and selfish people require or cause more legislation. Therefore; we must be diligent and prudent in writing such legislation, and in requiring responsible ownership. Can we require owners of put bulls or certain other breeds to train them? No, but we can and must educate all dog owners.
I plead with you to share with me the manner of training which you use to secure the reliability of obedience of the dog(s) in question. I am sure if you can secure such a status, law enforcement would certainly incorporate them into their present canine program, in addition the various breeders would hail you'; and rightly so' as a worthy and creditable person and trainer, for enhnacing the public acceptance of their breed.
Respectfully
jack vance
The Dogs are good for the house
Great information about these amazing dogs it really helps get some knowledge.
for one pit bulls are not breed for fighting. pits are very friendly dog. so there is no use in give pitbulls a bad name. becouse they are very lovable pet
Pitbulls actually were bread for fighting but the fighting back thenwas far less aggressive, bt they were also bread for bull baiting and baby sittiing, I would also like to say that pitbulls do not have a lOck jaw