Should they all be saved?

I agree, but how can we expect it to be enforced with animals when you can overfeed your kids and ruin them and not be in trouble with the law?

I agree, and I think this comment gets to the heart of the matter. It is one thing to judge other people on an internet forum, and another to live in a society where everyone is free to make their own choices. I mean, the people here who oppose "bad" legislation (BSL) are sometimes eager to invoke the need for more dog legislation that they consider "good" (as in "the person who screwed up the dog should have been held accountable...")

I absolutely agree that much of the bad treatment dogs get in this culture is garden-variety neglect and misunderstanding. And I agree that the effects of this bad treatment can be quite severe (see Mudpuppy's fear biting example). But jumping to legislate is, technically, fascist. I am not sure it's such a good idea.

When you stop to think that even people who come to this board, because they like dogs and want to do the right thing, don't take their dogs to classes (even if it's just for socialization purposes), and sometimes wait three days before they go the vet (it's so expensive, after all - meanwhile, the dog has pancreatitis or something).  You won't even be able to enforce any legislation - NYC has what - 17 animal cops for the whole city????
Education, education, education.  The legislation that you want is for school systems to be required to provide humane education.  It's also a great way to prevent violence and bullying.
You can do your little piece, too.  Adopt a classroom!!!!!  www.nahee.org

good luck with the education campaign anne. There's a forum on this very board where they are right now advocating "the alpha roll", a discredited technique very likely to create aggressive dogs.

Oh no please, please don't let this turn into an alpha roll thread...... that would be WAAAAAAY o/t......

What??? Alpha rolling again????? Oh no we all are going to die!!!, buaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa [&:]

ORIGINAL: fisher6000
But jumping to legislate is, technically, fascist. I am not sure it's such a good idea.

 
fascist:
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control fascism and brutality -- J. W. Aldridge>

i don't believe that passing legislation that has to be voted into law is "technically" fascist at all.  but perhaps i interpret the definition of fascism differently than you do.

and i DO believe there is a BIG difference between GOOD and BAD legislation.  bad legislation makes blanket statements and uses assumtions.  good legislation uses verifiable statistics and careful language as to incriminate only criminals.  again, i don't hear any alternative solutions offered here, only arguments.

I know that the intent of this is good, but research now shows that you incur higher levels of spay incontinence if you spay prior to five months of age, and that the percent of spay incontinent females goes down the later you spay up to about eight months of age. 

i wasn't suggesting early spay, i was suggesting mandatory spay.  i believe the responsibility here would lie with the breeder, to make sure the adoptive families are following up on the mandatory medical care- not just spay/neuter, but heartworm prevention and other appropriate vaccinations.  i agree with spaying at the optimal time in the dog's development.

As a keeper of one of the breeds being ruined by humans I'll weigh in too...NO they can't and shouldn't all be saved. Not for the breeds that they are but for the people who own them, don't train them with even the slightest social skills and then make un-educated choices to breed them for all the wrong reasons.
 
I'm sure no one here wants to hear about culling but to be honest, the breeders, of all breeds did it years ago and they were seleective on who they bred but the rule was and still is to breed better dogs. Dogs who didn't fit the mold of temperament and type were destroyed. Sure, many a good pet was lost but the pet population was not as it is in this day and age and you surely didn't hear of so many animal attacks on humans.
 
I've rescued/fostered several with issues, some can be re-homed but there are some that shouldn't and rather then take the chance of someone being injured some dogs just need to be free of the demons that live in their heads.

i would like to say that i support culling if it means maintaining the integrity of the breed and controlling the overpopulation problems that we have right now.
 
thank you for weighing in, jaime, and for phrasing your opinion the way that you did.

ORIGINAL: amstaffy

I've rescued/fostered several with issues, some can be re-homed but there are some that shouldn't and rather then take the chance of someone being injured some dogs just need to be free of the demons that live in their heads.

 
No sure if the last statement is based on actual experience where the dog is standing in front you and you control the dog's fate.  If so, I respect that statement, if not please let me know your feelings when you are in the situation.  This thread is 7 pages long and I made my point of view in the early pages.  I felt it needs to be repeated. 

ORIGINAL: DPU

ORIGINAL: amstaffy

I've rescued/fostered several with issues, some can be re-homed but there are some that shouldn't and rather then take the chance of someone being injured some dogs just need to be free of the demons that live in their heads.

No sure if the last statement is based on actual experience where the dog is standing in front you and you control the dog's fate. 

 
i put in bold where she said it was HER that did the fostering.  i don't think it gets any clearer than that.

ORIGINAL: mudpuppy

good luck with the education campaign anne. There's a forum on this very board where they are right now advocating "the alpha roll", a discredited technique very likely to create aggressive dogs.

**content removed**
Off topic and attacking behavior

ORIGINAL: amstaffy

I'm sure no one here wants to hear about culling but to be honest, the breeders, of all breeds did it years ago and they were seleective on who they bred but the rule was and still is to breed better dogs. Dogs who didn't fit the mold of temperament and type were destroyed. Sure, many a good pet was lost but the pet population was not as it is in this day and age and you surely didn't hear of so many animal attacks on humans.

 
I am not in the know on breeding but my understanding that in a Harlequin Great Dane litter, there is a likelihood of a pup being albino and deaf.  I was told those dogs are culled.  When I went to select a pup, there she was amongs the litter, my future Blizzard, THE best dog I have had the honor to know.  So I broke all the rules in selecting a puppy, female litter mates and albino.  But this is my experience and why at times I am ambiguous with the popular opinion. 

DPU, my feelings are from experience.
 
I bred a litter a good many years ago, the sire to the litter is my soon to be 13 YO who has a rock solid temperament. The dam of the litter came from a breeder who also was known for solid dogs. All pups in the litter were close so I got to see how they turned out and got reports and pictures often. The boy I kept to show was great, he was showing and was pointed, on his way to being my first bred-by champion until after he turned 18 months when he started showing unprovoked aggression toward people when we were in public. This boy continued to escalate the behavior with no found health issues. He was not a fearful dog, in fact he was very confident. He was NOT animal aggressive. He soon became a dog that would make his way to the bridge because of his actions.
 My breed has no room for human aggressive dogs. I will tolerate and do, dog on dog aggression due to breeding and history of the breed. I have made arrangements for a dog who has chomped into me, he was not a dog who exhibited traditional human aggression, he was more on a seizure type of aggression similar to springer rage. He was maintained by me when we moved out to the country but had we not moved he too would have made his way to the bridge as I will never allow the possibility of unprovoked human aggression when I see the signs and the dogs temperament is not changing. Society doesn't need this type of dog. BTW, all other littermates are doing well to this day. One of my customers owns his brother and he lives with children and two other dogs.
 
 I've rehabilitated a fighting dog yes, a real fighting dog with broken teeth and scars to prove her worth... so animal aggressive that she attacked a porcelin duck on my well when she slipped past one of the kids when they were young. She was my first experience with APBT's...trial by fire I guess you might say. She turned me onto the breed with her willingness to learn, dedication, love and loyalty. She quickly learned what was not acceptable and turned her behavior around from the unwanteed. Hers was not a temperament issue.
 
Some dogs do show us it is their owners that have caused their issues and can be worked into a good pet as with Hannibal, our most recent rescue. It's taken over a year for him but the progress is unbelievable. If not for his great temperament he too would have made his way to the bridge. When dealing with a breed that should NOT be human aggressive and you come accross one who exhibits they are in an unprovoked situation it is time to make the dreaded decission even as hard as it is on our hearts we must be strong enough to do the right thing.
 
I truely hope your not struggling with the choice, it isn't an easy thing to do but you must always keep in mind that human life and liabilty must come first.

ORIGINAL: amstaffy

DPU, my feelings are from experience....

...I truely hope your not struggling with the choice, it isn't an easy thing to do but you must always keep in mind that human life and liabilty must come first.

My feelings are also from my experience.  Not currently struggling with a choice, but have 2 experiences which I handled in different ways with one being PTS.  I expect to be faced with a similar situation in the future.  The memory of the bite pain disappears over time.  The emotional struggle stays.  In my early post I defined what I considered to be the definition of Save.  And Save includes consideration if the dog is truly human aggressive and giving time to determines that hurts no other humans or has no liability issues. 

ORIGINAL: DPU
Save includes consideration if the dog is truly human aggressive and giving time to determines that hurts no other humans or has no liability issues. 

 
i think Amstaffy's post was quite breed specific.  there is a bigger liability issue with human aggressive "bully breeds" than with most other breeds, and as she said, there is NO place for unprovoked human aggression within those breeds.  this unprovoked human aggression in high profile breeds is the root of BSL.
 
this illustrates my earlier point that in order to control BSL, we may need to destroy some dogs.