File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Hey /an/, I've been watching television and seeing all these reports on dog attacks made me realize something. Owning a guard dog rshould require a permit.

You'd need a special permit (Lets say an A-type permit) for owning a Rottweiler, Doberman, basically any of those evil ass dogs Obtaining such a permit would require the owner to attend to a class that teaches him not to make his dog turn into a killing machine.

Having permits like these would really help:

A. Make sure that the future owners are serious about owning a pet, and won't be ''tired'' of it after a year like so many owners.

B. Reduce the ammounts of animal attacks by domesticated animals.

In my opinion, an owner who dosent know how to command his dog is just as hazardous to a neighbourhood as a man with no gun permit or a man with no drivers liscense.


What do you guys think?
>> Anonymous
This sounds good but like,

the dogs that actually attack people are usually owned by people who TRAIN them to be aggressive. Some people train them to attack PEOPLE.

Those people would just sit through the classes for the permit and then keep going about their business, training their dogs to be aggressive.
>> Anonymous
My sister's rotty is a real sweetheart.

Breeds don't affect the dog's aggression. They just have bad reputations.
>> Anonymous
Pretty worthless idea, if you require a permit for the typical "guard dog" breeds, you'll only have attacks reported for different breeds. The breed doesn't make a "guard dog", how it was trained/socialized does. Soon, you'll need a license for owning any kind of dog over 40lbs... Until someone successfully creates a strain of hyper-active, hyper-aggressive hivemind chihuahuas.

There's nothing inherently wrong with breeds like Rotties or Dobies. It's all in how your raise them. You can have a loving, sweetheart Rottie that will still guard your home.

...Not that ever had any. My Rottie, Cappie, would run away and hide if you clapped your hands loudly. Our big boy, Igor, would stand up... bark once and go back to sleep whenever someone came into the house at night.
>> Anonymous
>a Rottweiler, Doberman, basically any of those evil ass dogs

I lol'd. You can't even make the "it's not how they're raised, they're genetically bred to be fightin' dogs" arguments like you could with pitbulls because rottweilers were bred to be herding dogs, and dobermanns originate as police dogs and are involved in less fatal attacks on humans then german shepherds.

A guard dog is any dog used for the purpose of guarding something.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
i think people should take a class like that no matter breed! so many people get dogs and then dont take care of them. any breed can be nasty and attack, you just hear about those other "evil" breeds becouse they are the ones that do the MOST damage. all people who want a dog should prove there dedication to it by taking a mandatory class and passing a test saying they are fit to own an animal.... thats what i think.
>> Anonymous
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZ5YVMRRsLc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtrjT1E3FVA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teAiRK-y6RA
rotts are so goddamn evil the second one is one of the signs of the apocalypse
>> Anonymous
>>281757

Agreed. Pets are considered property, so owning any pet that has the potential to interfere with the well being of others should require a permit and license to own. Just like cars and guns.
Completely aside from the fact that a well-trained pet is generally happier and a lot more fun to be around.
>> Anonymous
>>281726
While I think that this idea stems from a misunderstanding of animal behavior, I think it might be a good idea to have courses on proper animal training required before buying any dog. Sort of like driver's ed and gun safety classes.
>> Anonymous
rots when trained correctly are gentle and friendly as can be, when abused or trained to attack they have the power to kill an adult. Its the owners fault not the dogs, but people are douchebags.
>> Anonymous
wow i have a rott and hes the biggest pussy ever
for example i took him for a walk in the park, every thing seemed fine then out of no where GOOSE, my grover got so scared he pulled the leash out my hand and hid under a car and peed him self
>> Anonymous
>>281772
my 5'8" uncle charged after my rot once for shits and giggles, the dog ran away wimpering and pissing the whole way it ran and then hid behind my mom. It was also terrified of a chiuhaha
>> Anonymous
Look at the bite stats.

onoes pdf: http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%201982%20to%202006%20Clifton.pdf

Labs bit way more people than say, Dobies. A Doxie killed someone.

I mean, jesus, any dog in the wrong hands, from the wrong breeding, can kill a child especially. A BEAGLE killed someone.
>> Anonymous
>>281737

Also, no. Undersocialized dogs are the ones who bite, because they've never been taught to feel safe and at ease around all types of people, in all situations.

Remember, the prime socialization window is 6-12 weeks. Beyond that? You're fighting the uphilliest of battles.

(Everyone should read Jean Donaldson's "Culture Clash" before obtaining a dog.)
>> Anonymous
Also also, dogs typically attack when in a pack situation.

It's probably not a good idea to:

*own a lot of dogs at once, esp if any of them are intact
*let your dogs roam free, where they're likely to pack up
*be Caesar Millan, because then you're a mauling victim waiting to happen
>> Anonymous
If the "bad" breeds were made less onbtainable, then people wanting a vicious dog would just move on to another breed.

Statistics are flawed- most people can't correctly identify a pitbull, so any short-haired mean dog is a pitbull, and any dog with up-ears is a shepherd. So you can't decide which dogs to put restrictions on based on that.

If the idea is to restrict any dog with the potential to kill, that would be all of them- I've even seen a news report of a pomeranian killing an infant. Breeds have certain characteristics, but there are ALWAYS deviations from the expected temperament- from vicious golden retrievers to passive dobermans.
>> Anonymous
The difference between a golden retriever and, say, a doberman isn't temperment, its the jaws.

Dobies are bred to have strong jaws, retrievers bred to have soft mouths.
>> Anonymous
>>281826
And yet a golden retriever could still kill someone if it meant business, and dobermans are used to save lives all the time as service dogs. You just can't judge by breed.
>> Anonymous
>>281755
fuck yes shih tsu guard dog
>> Anonymous
>>281838
Shi-tzus aren't dogs, they're furry loafs of fail.
>> Anonymous
>>281726
Whiny socialist ass.
>> Anonymous
>>281798
WTF kind of wonky 'bite stats' admits to including things like an infant being crushed in bed by a rottweiler, an elderly person being killed by being knocked down by her dog (but not bitten), children being strangled by leashes, and an elderly woman scared to death by a terrier?
>> sage
ITT: morons who don't understand the basics of nature/nuture and who base their knowledge on the nazi hate machine that is FOXNews
>> Anonymous
>>281830
>>281844

Possibly trolls, definitely idiots.
>> Anonymous
Yes, great idea. I LOVE having more government control over mundane aspects of my life. It makes me so happy.
>> Anonymous
>>281844
this comment = complete fail

and no these dogs are not evil. They are as sweet and lovable as any other dog. There is no easy cure short of completely eradicating a breed. We must get to the root of the problem, which is people using their pets as extensions of their dicks. People always think they are in danger of some sort, so they build walls around them with stuff to show off their status and to defend them against phantoms that don't exist. This is the result of a materialistic, dumbed down, capitalist and patriarchal society.

That is a natural symptom of the society we live in. Until society is changed, solutions such as these will remain merely bandages on a gaping wound. You must get to the root of the issue.

Instead of punishing the rest of us who don't wish to have guard dogs, we should go after those with a proven history of animal abuse. It may not be very preventative, but It's better than nothing. As far as I'm concerned, I don't think the law is strict enough when it comes to animal rights
>> Anonymous
>>281898
more liberal whining
>> Anonymous
I thick the owners should just be held responsible for the actions their dog. If your dog attacks someone, you should be charged as if YOU attacked them.

Dog mauls a kid? Charge owner with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and attempted manslaughter (*). After a few convictions, owners will start to think twice about training their dogs to attack strangers with no reason.

(*) And you're welcome to claim self-defense if you can prove that the attack was somehow justified.
>> Anonymous
People don't turn dogs into killing machines on accident. They do it on purpose, how is making them sit through a class or obtaining a permit going to change that?

Also, just like guns, drugs, public nudity, theft, public nudity, and murder, people are going to do it anyways.

All you would be doing by making people get a permit is to create even more of a black market for these kinds of dogs.
>> Anonymous
>>281904
They can charge them with murder, manslaughter, and a few other things.
>> Anonymous
>>281798
>A doxie killed someone
WHAT?