Should they all be saved?

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 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.

Hey Badrap,

To use your own definitions, I feel certain that throwing out one set of definitions for "good" pet owners (especially one that is made by this forum's participants--lol!) and then attemting to *legislate* that is, technically, fascist because in that situation the legislation would be the "actual exercise of strong autocratic... control".

Fascism is a loaded word. What I meant by it was that the drive to make the world exactly like you (one person) wants it is the same (fascist) tendency that creates BSL. And that laws never work the way we want them to. They're pretty blunt instruments.

Not calling you Hitler! Just pointing out that we all want a law that makes everything Our Way. And that this desire, even if we are "right," gets quite distorted when one goes to implement laws.

I mean, the people in my community who are really most supportive of BSL are dog owners, for goodness' sake. Dog owners who need dog runs and are tired of dogfights. I think it's interesting that they are, technically, right. They should be able to enjoy a public space, and while pits are not the only dogs in a dogrun that fight, I do feel confident saying that they create the scariest fights in the run, and that they fight in dogruns (at least my local dogrun) more often than any other single breed.

My point is that this perfectly reasonable desire has been translated into BSL. Your perfectly reasonable desire to hold owners responsible for their dogs' aggression... think about how that could be distorted if it became law. I mean, aggression is a normal behavior in dogs, just like it is in people.

I'm just saying that laws are funny. This is now completely OT.

Great post, Jamie.

Edited to add: I wanted to make sure it's clear that I am completely opposed to BSL.

Badrap, please reread Amstaffy's staff.  In it don't you read when the situation arose she SAVED and then gave the dogs a second chance.  It was not an off-the-cuff decision that unprovoked human aggression equals to the bridge.  My point is in dealing with the life and death of the dog emotions come into play and that determines and defines the responsibility the owners will take on.

ORIGINAL: Awsomedog

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

**Content Removed**
Continued off topic posting

the entire dog training community.

 
even the Monks of New Skete (sp?), the ones to first "popularize" the alpha roll, have expressed deep regret about ever recommending it.
 

not the entire dog training community

Right - just the ones that have entered the twenty-first century.  BTW, there are still some people who think the Earth is flat.

**Content removed**
Rude and attacking behavior
 

Deb,
 It's sad isn't it that instead of punishing the "creators" of the situation that John Q wants to punish=banish the breeds...I've never gotten the impression you were pro-BSL.  []
 

ORIGINAL: DPU

Badrap, please reread Amstaffy's staff.  In it don't you read when the situation arose she SAVED and then gave the dogs a second chance.  It was not an off-the-cuff decision that unprovoked human aggression equals to the bridge.  My point is in dealing with the life and death of the dog emotions come into play and that determines and defines the responsibility the owners will take on.

 
DPU,
 You're right. Every dog has a chance with me. I evaluate them under many different situations and no dog goes to the bridge before an attempt to change the behavior. As with Hannibal I will not "just place" a dog I am not comfortable that they will be fine under all circumstances. I have enough room, time and money to provide for any dog I bring here. There is no rush and no matter how long it takes they are safe while with me unless they prove that they are not a safe representative of my breed.
 
Emotions do come into play, as with the case of the second dog I spoke of above. Sonny, he was my first bred-by champion. born purple, resesitated by DH, we decided to keep him instead of the show quality boy who was sold as a pet and neutered. It was our obligation as his breder to make what ever choice needed to be made for him. He was never imagined to be a show dog. We were tickeled pink he could eat, be house broken and was the loving dog he matured to be. Just for fun I started showing him a little just for fun and he finished rather quickly. He wasn't a bad looking dog and enjoyed showing as well as doing breed booths. As he aged he was not dog aggressive and passed his health clearances. One day he bit me, I passed it off that he didn't see it was me as I was reaching in his crate for his empty bowl and was standing over the crate. He was then his normal loving self, until the day he attacked the front of his crate after coming in from his last potty and time for bed. He had a look in his eye that was not Sonny, he was barking, growling and biting the crate door trying to bite me. It was truely scary and heartbreaking to see my loving boy act this way. I got down in front of the crate and talked to him. I put my hand flat on thee front of the door thinking he'd smell me and return to his senses..nope, he continued. I felt that if I had stuck my fingers in the grid I would have lost a finger or two. I've been bitten by dogs growing up, it hurts it heals but this stirred me deep inside. As time has passed and I've reflected upon Sonny's behavior no one else would have given him the length of life he had with me. We had him evaluated by a behaviorist as well as a trainer. This was not normal behavior for him which is what lead us to springer rage/seizures. We found our property and moved out of the populated area we were living in. Now in the country and knowing how my dogs are not let unattended I knew he'd be fine with me. After all he was my pet, my first bred-by champion, my buddy! More and more the behavior was seen. Seeing it turned out to be the blessing. Sonny would get a look in his eyes, it was like a devil dog and you knew he couldn't be approached until it passed. We could talk it out of him and you could never rremove him from his run until it passed as hee would lunge out at you. Once his eyes returned to his normal loving look all was fine. The problem with that was, what if it happened when we were playing? Throwing a ball, playing tug or just taking a walk around our 3+ acres? We were always on edge watching for the "sign". He was maintained but it wasn't easy and I would never suggest anyone put thyemselves or their family in the place I did. It was dangerous and I was the one who handled him because I was willing to take the bite since I didn't want to deal with the heartbreak.
 
It isn't easy but we seem to have choosen this life and hope to save as many as we can. It isn't easy to realize we can't save them all. I think it makes us feel vulnerable when in fact once we learn it it should make us stronger knowing that we are doing the best we can and some of this is out of our hands.

So well said, Jaime, and a testament to the fact that even good breeders and responsible dog owners like yourself are visited by unfortunate accidents of birth.  Rage syndrome, tumors, and epilepsy, whatever - serious aggression can be unpredictable, always unfortunate, and not always the human's fault.  

ORIGINAL: badrap

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.

 
Badrap, not to put you on the spot, but I sense good intentions without emotions in play.  Please read the link and see if emotions has a place in deciding the fate of a dog.
 
[linkhttp://www.nsalamerica.org/campaigns/chihuahuas/]http://www.nsalamerica.org/campaigns/chihuahuas/[/link]

i give up.  i'm a cold hearted dog killer.  i don't know enough about fascism to comment that dropping that word should never done lightly, and never used to describe the democratic process.

i guess the point of the post was to comment on whether or not all dogs should be saved, regardless of the level of aggression they've shown, but what it evolved into is the best way TO save them.  i probably lead the charge in moving it off topic, so i apologize.

i've said it about 5 times in this thread, and i'm going to say it again:  i don't hear very many posters offering solutions.  for every solution i offered, someone found something wrong with it, but never offered something else in return.. just pointed out the errors, naivete, and emotionlessness of my suggestions.  i didn't say my solutions were the end-all, or the best, or even GOOD.. they were just ideas to get the ball rolling.  that's how democracy works- someone comes up with HER best ideas, and then, through the process, we work in a variety of ideas to make a solution that is in the best interest of everybody.  the process doesn't work if everyone shoots down ideas without offering replacement ideas. 

why everyone is so eager to discuss the PROBLEM but not come up with a SOLUTION is way beyond me.

Hey Badrap,

I am not going to continue the fascism thing... I do think there is a difference between the democratic process and laws that make all dog owners like the dog owners on this forum, to take an example. But whatever.

I know what you mean about solutions. I was going to write a long thing about how people solve problems where I live, but it got seriously off topic. Basically, they talk to one another. They do what we are doing right now, so don't worry.

About emotions. I have been trying to figure out a way to say this without coming off sounding cold. I think that looking at this vast problem in terms of its emotional content privileges dog owners/fosterers/lovers over the dogs themselves. And it does nothing to fix the problem and much to make the problem worse.

The bottom line is that killing dogs is terrible, and it is even more terrible that we make them *so that we can kill them*. That's really f'ed up of us. Having that kind of control over any animal's life is wrong. The more in touch I am with that, the less I want to keep a pet at all.

But we do keep pets, as a culture, and this is a forum full of people who, necessarily, have made a choice to have total control over another sentient creature's life. And total control means total responsibility. I would *gladly* have kept my aggressive dog alive, even though she endangered the children and other animals in my community and was less and less happy herself, because I loved her, and because I didn't want to make the decision to kill her. When I looked at my own problem emotionally, all I did was fight for my dog's life. I fought with my husband, my behaviorist, the local no-kill shelter folks (who begged me to be rational and put the dog down), and my vet. And when I was done fighting, I saw clearly that the only one who benefitted from all that fighting was me. Not my dog. It wasn't about her. It was about me evading my own responsibility.

I think this experience translates into the original question posed, which is what about culling dogs that are in shelters that are just a little aggressive?

I think it is a terrible thing to do, frankly, this whole pet ownership thing. But since we are doing it, there are simply way too many dogs, and it is terrible *not* to make choices about who gets culled and who does not.

To make choices about which dogs live and which dogs die is to take responsibility for the full weight of what pet ownership is.

ORIGINAL: fisher6000

I think it is a terrible thing to do, frankly, this whole pet ownership thing. But since we are doing it, there are simply way too many dogs, and it is terrible *not* to make choices about who gets culled and who does not.

Instead of looking at as "too many dogs", maybe look at it a too few volunteers to help place these dogs.  It is a sorry state not to get accurate stastics.  Depending on where you look there are between 45 million to 65 million dogs in the US.  An average dog owner has 1.5 dogs so there are 30 to 40 million households that have dogs.  Most have to be living successfully.  There are 2 millions dogs in shelters waiting dispositions.  How many of those 30 to 40 million household would take in a new dog.  Probably alot.  Plus if there 300 million people in the US in 135 million families, can't they be tapped to become a dog owner. 

Emotions is the key ingredient to move people to do the right thing.  How can anyone says it hurts the dog.

i just read through this thread , and not every dog can be saved . if a dog is deemed dangerous and unpredictable to the public ,then the most kindest thing you can do for this dog is humanely pts.public safety is the number one factor.

Issues like this makes me even more positive about my idea to someday have a sancutary where "unadoptable" dogs/cats/etc. can have a place to live out their days.  Though it will take time and more money then I can think of having at the moment I feel that all these rescues who have mostly "adoptable" pets aren't doing anything wrong...it's great.  However, those who are not adoptable should still have an enjoyable life.  Their situation would determine what type of setting they'd stay in, but at the least they'd have a nice comfortable place inside and plenty of running and play space outside.  It sounds out there, but the unadoptable dogs deserve a life as well.  Some of them are fine with other dogs but because some ignorant human treated them poorly cannot be handled.  Doesn't mean they should be PTS...if they get along with other dogs then let them live with other dogs.  That's my idea for a sanctuary.

The other thing is that I cannot stand breed discrimination.  Yes, certain breeds have certain inherited traits.  But when it comes down to it the majority of aggressive behavoir comes from those who rase the dog or cat.  An email I recieved regarding certain states banning pit bulls had one of my favorite anti breed discrimination quotes..."Punish the deed, not the breed".


I did not have time to go through every post here, but I thought i'd just say something.