Quote:
|
Originally Posted by NoCarrier
What kind of stupid dumbass you are? Some dogs are more dangerous than others.
Stats from the CDC show that pit bull terriers, Rottweilers, German shepherds, Siberian Huskies and wolf hybrids. Were involved in 129 of the 177 fatal attacks on people in the U.S. from 1979 to 1994.
And this does not include the non fatal attacks. Yes, the dogs owners are really important with the dog's behavior. But that doesn't mean a rottweiler can be less dangerous.
Seriously, Are you that fucking retarded?
|
http://www.fataldogattacks.com/ - you should read the whole article.
From 1965 - 2001, there have been at least 36 different breeds/types of dog that have been involved in a fatal attack in the United States. (This number rises to at least 52 breeds/types when surveying fatal attacks worldwide). We are increasingly becoming a society that has less and less tolerance and understanding of natural canine behaviors. Breed specific behaviors that have been respected and selected for over the centuries are now often viewed as unnatural or dangerous. Dogs have throughout the centuries served as protectors and guardians of our property, possessions and families. Dogs have also been used for thousands of years to track, chase and hunt both large and small animals. These natural and selected-for canine behaviors seem to now eliciting fear, shock and a sense of distrust among many people.
There seems to be an ever growing expectation of a "behaviorally homogenized" dog - "Benji" in the shape of a Rottweiler. Breeds of dogs with greater protection instincts or an elevated prey-drive are often unfairly viewed as "aggressive or dangerous". No breed of dog is inherently vicious, as all breeds of dogs were created and are maintained exclusively to serve and co-exist with humans. The problem exists not within the breed of dog, but rather within the owners that fail to control, supervise, maintain and properly train the breed of dog they choose to keep.