Should they all be saved?

well, i'm not sure what you are asking, if this is referring to shelter dogs, obviously we can't save them all. []

Usually when they arrive at the shelter, they've HAD a second/third/tenth chance (Unless its uncontrollable circumstances- moving etc...), but when there, they get a temperment test. another chance. Sometimes they are just... unsalvageable -- a human life -- although this might sound mean-- is more valuable than a dog that could turn on anyone.

Sometimes its better to just let them go... they will be happier.

I agree, some just can't be saved.[&o]

SHOULD all dogs be saved regardless of aggression issues?

[&:] No, I don't think ALL dogs should be saved regardless of aggression issues.  I think there are some cases that it would be more inhumane to keep the dog alive than to PTS.  There are some dogs that just should not be adopted out to a family.  Some dogs, for whatever reason, whether it's abuse history or just lack of socialization, but some will just not bond with a human, they are extremely fearful and untrusting.  I think that's even a terrible existence for a person.  If that type of dog finds himself  in a shelter, I think it is more humane to help him pass on to the bridge. 

Does every dog deserve a second chance?  What do you think?

Yes I do.  One of the rescues that I know has a dog that is in foster care right now who has a bite history tagged to him; however, the man he bit used to beat him with a belt when he "wouldn't listen".  I guess the dog got sick of it and bit him one day.  The dog ended up being returned to the rescue, only now he he has MORE issues than he ever did.  He is a really sweet natured dog, but he does not like to be touched on his hind legs or he gets snappy (that was not an issue before his placement 2 years ago[])  He may be with this foster forever (he's a pit mix).  But I think he does deserve another chance.  It's not his fault people are such idiots.[:@]

Since the OP includes my id, I feel I need to respond.  I do not think you will have any disagreements amongs posters, including myself.  I am glad you are silent on the real choices that are made because that is how it should be.

I think the more important point, since, due to sheer numbers, we cannot save them all, is how do we prevent dogs from going into the shelters in the first place.  For every newbie who has come here asking advice on breeding their little puppy mill dog, there are thousands more.  They get huffy when we tell them Fifi isn't breeding material. Well meaning people, most of them are, who just love their dogs, but who have no idea how they would be contibuting to the gravity of the situation that dogs find themselves in. 
As to the question of whether to save all the dogs that are already in shelters, the answer is a clear "no".  While trainers might be able to salvage, and manage, a truly aggressive dog, we can't afford the liability any more than anyone else, and we have families, sometimes including children, and guests, just like anyone else.  So, who is to provide homes for these less than trustworthy dogs?  Nice to think that they can be rehabbed into someone's nice family pet, but there are really dedicated and dog savvy members here who are managing such dogs at great effort and personal cost - do we really think the Cleavers want to do the same?  The Cleavers want Lassie.  Gawd, they can't understand why a nine week old puppy isn't housetrained yet, and they are sometimes horrified at the effort it takes to train a puppy not to nip and jump up on people - do we really think they will all want to follow Jean Donaldson or Brenda Aloff's resource guarding protocol with every member of their social network to rehab a food aggressive Fido who is snarling and snapping at them? 
One thing that could help us not to be killing wonderful pets, and sending SA and DA dogs home with the Cleavers are partnerships between trainers and shelters.  But, to be honest, some don't take advantage of the offer of trainers to do temperament evaluations even it is offered to them free.  I usually recommend that adopters go to the large kill shelters that have behavior programs.  Someone has evaluated those dogs, and at least considered them safe, and the likelihood is that the larger shelters have the moolah to hire someone with legitimate credentials.  The no kills are, unfortunately, sometimes a repository for animals that should have been euthanized, but they "want to save them all".  Granted, there are some great no kills, but the ones that aren't - well, just not a great place to get a dog unless you can accurately evaluate the dog yourself.
This issue is one reason Sue Sternberg is so controversial.  She does not think they all should be saved, and is a proponent of trying to save the best family dogs.  Her book, "Successful Dog Adoptions" is an interesting insight for anyone who is interested in this subject. 

I say yes, all of them should be saved, it is impossible since they are so many but they should, is not impossible to rehab, you just have to know how

I agree with espencer. I would imagine that there are those out there who would say that Ogre should not have been saved, given all of his issues. With alot of work and alot of understanding, he is turning into an incredible dog. Yes, he was aggressive when I got him...and right now he still has the potential to be under the right circumstances. I think the solution lies in the realization that not ALL dogs are suitable for ALL homes. I think all shelters should temperament test their dogs extensively and place them in homes accordingly. I don't think one dog should be euthanized because of aggression issues just so that another dog, who happened to be lucky enough to avoid those issues, can find a home. All dogs deserve homes equally, IMO. I realize that it can't be that way, and because of pet overpopulation some unfortunate choices have to be made about who to save...but aggression issues, even extreme ones, meaning automatic death for the dog? No. IMO, they SHOULD all be saved. Whether that's possible or not is another issue.

Given the wrong combination of circumstances most, if not all, dogs are capable of a bite. I have one of them, and while he wouldn't be suitable for many homes, he's cherished here. However, he's not a truly aggressive dog and we live in a low key household.
 
Since a large portion of dogs are going to be euthanized anyway, it makes more sense to spend the financial resources on dogs that will make the best pets. My big exception there, is that it breaks my heart to see lovely seniors (or even middle aged dogs) TS for no reason other than age.

Someone has evaluated those dogs, and at least considered them safe, and the likelihood is that the larger shelters have the moolah to hire someone with legitimate credentials

 
I think the adopters are the ones that need to be evaluated.  An idiot who knows nothing about how dogs work can turn a great dog into a liability in not too much time.  Or, make an iffy dog worse quickly.  And, just because a dog is of a certain breed like a golden doesn't mean he's suitable for a family with kids. 
 
The other day I was at the SPCA around here.  There was a golden who was very snarly.  There was a lab mix who did everything I asked of him thru the cage!  I asked him to sit, down, etc.  He did it all.  He was definately worth a second look.  But, everyone kept looking at the golden even after I mentioned he was "snarly".  I could see that an accident waiting to happen.  And, they do have extensive temperment testing and all the evaluation reports on the cages.  Do you think people read that stuff??? NOPE!! 
 
There was another dog that I was sitting with.  He was acting so cute, putting his butt in the cage bars so I could pet him.  A lot of people were coming over because he was being so good with me.  As soon as he saw the other people he growled and showed teeth.  WHY??  Because they stood up over him, I was down next to him and they were staring him in the face!  They don't know!
 
I think there is a person out there for most of these dogs.  But, they would be better off euthanized than being adopted by the wrong person. 

Every dog SHOULD be saved. But sadly not all dogs CAN be saved.
 
Rescues do a great work, but every case involves time and money, just stating the basics. Yes, even the so called lost cases have a home and a owner who match with them and their needs waiting for them, but as in the wild when resources are scarce there is need to establish priorities.

ORIGINAL: Stacita

Given the wrong combination of circumstances most, if not all, dogs are capable of a bite. I have one of them, and while he wouldn't be suitable for many homes, he's cherished here. However, he's not a truly aggressive dog and we live in a low key household.

Since a large portion of dogs are going to be euthanized anyway, it makes more sense to spend the financial resources on dogs that will make the best pets. My big exception there, is that it breaks my heart to see lovely seniors (or even middle aged dogs) TS for no reason other than age.

Me, too.  And, I say that knowing that my Fergie, who we adopted at the age of 11, has been giving us joy for seven years.  Some people don't have their dogs that they adopt as puppies for that long...

espencer and others on the side of "save them all" - I think you are expressing the world as we all wish it could be, but, sadly, not the way it is right now.  If we could guarantee that every aggressive dog would never find himself in the context of being too close to that pesky toddler, if we could make sure that no wonderful dog young or old was killed to save another, if we had a miracle cure for inappropriate (to us) aggression...  Knowing how to rehab aggressive dogs does not make it economically or morally right to do so, given that twenty nice dogs could die due to the time and money it takes to do that.  Granted, some of you have saved such dogs - I did it myself.  But, it was accidental, just the result of getting a dog and then finding out that some remedial work needed to be done.  But, to be honest, if I were a shelter manager, it would be heartbreaking to kill Lassie and turn Cujo loose on the public.  This is a hard question, not to be taken lightly in view of the damage that some of these dogs inevitably cause.

I think there is a person out there for most of these dogs.  But, they would be better off euthanized than being adopted by the wrong person.

I'm sure you are at least partially right - but, even the owner of an aggressive dog lives in our universe, and it isn't easy when your dog is the one who has to be muzzled, can't go to the dog park, is snarly with children, barrier aggressive, fear aggressive, downright dominant or territorially aggressive.  You are constantly devoting so much time to the management of the dog.  The unfortunate consequence to some dogs is that they fall into the hands of people who do not necessarily really know how to "rehab" (I use the word loosely, because aggression does not just disappear, it is simply managed better).  Some of you have even had experience with that (fisher comes to mind).

just because a dog is of a certain breed like a golden doesn't mean he's suitable for a family with kids.

I wish this was a sticky LOL.

The way I read this post...I got "even if a dog is salvageable", why waste our time, PTS, then go to the shelter and get a nicer, safer dog.

Everyone has a different definition of salvageable.

Everyone has a different definition of aggression. The dog killed a cat, he is aggressive.  Chases/barks at the mail carrier, he is aggressive.

Everyone has a different definition of  nice and safe. The dog ran after the children, not nice and safe.

Of course they all should not be saved.  If the dog is snapping/biting at everything that moves, then he has to be in terrible misery.

Yes, he does deserve a second chance to see if a better environment will work. I am not so much in the leadership camp as I am the stress related camp. Which takes into consideration other factors such as biological,  health and genetics.

point blank - IMO, not every dog should be "saved", if by saved you mean managed or contained (or something) to live out the rest of their lives.  This applies to aggression, fearfulness, illness, and a host of other reasons.  There are plenty of dogs that folks are spending their ego's on trying to "save" that should be humanely euthanized and allowed to live a presumably less stressful life "over the bridge".