Should they all be saved?

Well I think it should be taken into consideration of what caused the severe bite history.

A bad handler or trainer continously using punishment? Putting the dog in situations even after it is known that said situations could cause a bite?

All dogs have the ability to bite.  And all have circumstances under which it will eventually bite.

It may not always be the fault of the dog.  Most likely if anyone besides Lori owned Willow, she would have a bite history. Maybe even a severe bite history.

Dogs with severe bite history cannot be trusted again (IMO),

ORIGINAL: DPU

ORIGINAL: Chuffy

Dogs with severe bite history cannot be trusted again (IMO), so to answer my own question, no, I don't think they all should be saved.  It looks like I'm firmly with sillysally and stormyknight on that one.

With respect, who are you to tell me or anyone else I can not Save this dog.  I have stated for myself there will be a mistrust but the dog is welcome into my home.  Proclaiming kill the dog with no experience as foundation is just plain wrong.

OK, heave a sigh and try to rephrase.... you can read that as what *I* would do if I were faced with that decision, either with an aggressive dog in my household or still working in a shelter and with the responsibility to make the decisions about who gets PTS and who gets adopted.  (which I did not have when I did work there, in part because it was no kill anyway).

My own personal opinions and beliefs do not impact on YOU in anyway.  If you made an error in your judgement or management, if you "Saved" a dog that later attacked someone, ripped off a face or killed a child - well then it is up to you to shoulder that responsibility and live with your decision for the rest of your life.  If you have a great deal of experience and you trust your judgement and "know" (and I mean really KNOW) that you can manage that dog so that he is safe, then I do genuinely applaud you and of course I'm not "telling you" that you shouldn't "save" this or that dog.  If I knew about your decisions I may not agree with them - but so what?  People are allowed to have an opinion and disagree all they want.  This is a thread asking for people's opinions.  It's pointless in the great sceme of things but it keeps us busy.

If I were your next door neighbour and had small children.... then perhaps I might "tell you" that "you should not save dog X", if I felt there was a danger to them in any way.  As it is, you are in another part of the world to me and I don't waste my time presuming to tell you how to live your life.  I'm just sharing an opinion on a subject, which is what this thread is for.
 
Edited to add - I don't think there was anything in my post to suggest I was directing it at YOU specifically.... or at anyone else. 

All dogs have the ability to bite. And all have circumstances under which it will eventually bite.

 
That is a very pertinent point.  Unfortunately, when a dog learns to deal with a situation by biting, he cannot unlearn it.  If he is mistreated and bites as a result, he is still (IMO) something of a liability when re-homed somewhere where he is treated kindly and would need very careful management and handling.  The more severe the aggression, the more careful the management needs to be.... until you get to a point where it's too much.  Perhaps it's too much for that owner, or that neighbourhood, or that set of circumstances, or that shelter.... or perhaps it's just too much for that poor dog and it's unfair for him to live out the rest of his life like that.
 
I think I should add that I don't see it as a black and white issue, a digital state of "dangerous/not dangerous" or "aggressive/not aggressive".  ALL dogs are dangerous/aggressive to a greater or lesser degree.  It is something that should be decided case by case.... as I said before, it depends how you define "dangerously aggressive" or "a severe bite history" and this will vary wildly depending on the person reviewing each case.... and on the case itself.

ORIGINAL: Chuffy
My own personal opinions and beliefs do not impact on YOU in anyway.

This is where you are wrong and I sighted an example in one of my post.  Not you specifically, but your comments do influence others and in my example, the forum created fear in me for a specific breed of dog.

Unfortunately, you cannot stop people having opinions, or even expressing them.  Particularly on internet discussion forums. 

That is why in certain areas such as whether a dog lives or dies, opinions should not be expressed freely without the emotional content of experience.  In this thread, let the caretake tend to the dog and when asked, express your opinion.  Don't judge the decision of the caretaker.

In that case, either it was wrong of me to open a thread, asking people to freely offer their opinions on the subject, or it is wrong of you to participate in the discussion.  Perhaps I should ask admin to delete the thread.....

I think we had a thread going like this one a while back. If I am not mistaken we even brought Ed Frawley into it, he handles handler aggressive dogs.
 
I feel every dog should be given a second chance, if it doesn't work out at least there was an attempt.
On the shelter issue, any shelter I have ever seen or been in would not adopt out a dog with severe issues.
On the other hand, rescue operations are aware of their foster's and adopter's capability, so there one would see more of a second chance for a dog.......I do speak with experience[] 

ORIGINAL: DPU

That is why in certain areas such as whether a dog lives or dies, opinions should not be expressed freely without the emotional content of experience.  In this thread, let the caretake tend to the dog and when asked, express your opinion.  Don't judge the decision of the caretaker.

I do not understand why you have such a problem with the free flow of ideas on a PUBLIC MESSAGE board, particularly when those that you are having such a problem with are doing nothing more then disagreeing with you in what I think is a fairly pleasent manner.  I am NOT telling you what to do with your dog.  I am saying what *I* believe should be done.  If you don't like that, well, tough skittles.  I can only control my own opinions and thoughts, not those of others.  I am not going to alter or refuse to express them because they might make someone unhappy.

Then the whole positve reinforcement thing concerning helping (curing may be the wrong word) aggression is kaput then?

Aggression is just a behavior...a behavior can be put on extinction, and a new behavior put in it's place.

Desensitization...kaput also?

What about the Ali Brown's and Emma Parson's of the world?  Classes are popping up everywhere  using their methods.

That is a very pertinent point.  Unfortunately, when a dog learns to deal with a situation by biting, he cannot unlearn it. 

No it's not kaput. It's that a dog with a bad history has tendencies to revert to that history. A dog that has successfully counter cruised will look for opportunities. A dog that has bitten generally finds success in it. The bad person or dog leaves them alone--at least for the short term. When a dog finds success in a behavior, it is much harder to extinguish.
 
Floyd is not a hard case, but most people would have euthanized him. He was found in one of the worst parts of Sacramento, intact, severely underweight, and bit the animal control officer. He spent six months in the pound under quarantine without ever leaving his cage and no contact. I can only assume that worsened any problems he previously had.
 
Floyd is fear aggressive and territorial with humans. He's OK with dogs. His assets are that he's very willing to please, very bonded, and never cheats. He has absolutely no desire to escape. If he knows a command, he never tries to fudge. Excellent bonding has made him safe with DH & I. We never startle any of our dogs, but with Floyd it's more important. He's nicely trained. He's fine on leash. He would not run up to a human or dog and create a situation. We absolutely never force anything. It took over a year before he laid on his back wanting his belly rubbed. He's never been in the bathtub to this day, although he's been hose bathed.
 
Our job is to prevent situations. We have a ritual every single time a person comes over. Floyd has to go to his room with the door closed even when he's met these people before. After about five minutes of him hearing us, I open the door and let him choose whether to socialize or not. If I don't trust the people he doesn't come out. Period. Then he's given treats and ball playing from the guests. He looks at others as both intruders and something to fear. After that he's fine for the rest of the night with people that are non probelmatic people. With problematic people, he stays exactly beside me and I intervene or he stays in his room.
 
I trust that he won't bite again. Training and management keep him safe. The one situation where he'd likely bite is if someone came in when we were not home. Even then, I don't see him as having potential to maul, but to make the person leave him alone. It would take extensive work with one person to make it a safe situation for them to enter the property in our absence.
 
So....My opinion is that it's not for everyone. There's various degrees of rehab. Floyd's is rather low. He's a very rewarding dog for us, but he'd be inappropriate for many homes. If he didn't have his trainability and strong bonding, he'd be inappropriate for us.
 
But, yes he's a happy dog. There's a lot of reward and it's been a very successful adoption.

If you have a dog that bites people and dogs with such ferocity that it tends to cost about one thousand dollars (and a very scary emergency trip to the vet or doctor) whenever you make a handling error, this is not a theoretical question.

Having a truly dangerous dog means that you could wind up being legally and morally responsible for killing a small child or someone else's dog, or seriously maiming an adult.

Trust me. Any person here faced with a truly dangerous dog will kill that dog in a heartbeat when faced with the moral and legal reality of owning such a dog. It's wrong to own a dog that could kill or seriously hurt someone. And it can ruin you financially.

It is all well and good for people to talk about fixing dogs, because most "aggressive" dogs aren't particularly dangerous and IMO can be "fixed." Dangerous dogs are rare.

But honestly, I laugh out loud when I think about people trying to explain some of the beliefs expressed about the "rights" of dogs to someone like a judge, or the parents of the kid your dog killed. Legally and morally, my dog is 100% my responsibility.

I find it sad that we have so much control over dogs though this is a good and bad thing so its sad lol

If you have a dog that bites people and dogs with such ferocity that it tends to cost about one thousand dollars (and a very scary emergency trip to the vet or doctor) whenever you make a handling error, this is not a theoretical question.

Having a truly dangerous dog means that you could wind up being legally and morally responsible for killing a small child or someone else's dog, or seriously maiming an adult.

Trust me. Any person here faced with a truly dangerous dog will kill that dog in a heartbeat when faced with the moral and legal reality of owning such a dog. It's wrong to own a dog that could kill or seriously hurt someone. And it can ruin you financially.

 
I absolutely agree.

I find it sad that we have so much control over dogs though this is a good and bad thing so its sad lol

Yeah. I absolutely agree.