Should they all be saved?

If they cannot be adopted out, keep them in a certain shelter and allow them to live out their lives in comfort and peace.

 
 
have you ever met a severely undersocialized severely abused dog of poor breeding freaking out on an hourly basis in the quietest corner of a shelter while on anti-anxiety meds? 
Sometimes the kindest thing one can offer is the peace of a humane death.
 

mudpuppy, your characterization is so true, and so sad.  Until you have seen it, you can't imagine it. 

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs

awsomedog, no one here is leading any "parade to kill dogs" and I find that an extremely insulting remark, and a personal attack.

ORIGINAL: awsomedog
If your not in the parade, I'm not speaking to you, so get over yourself. and how many times have you actually taken shots at me? Including! (cause no one here is as stupid as you think) starting a thread called "macho trainers". Then your...what? what did i do stance was laughable. Did I throw a fit like the one your throughing now? No. My post was not directed at you (unless your in that parade). And I'm reading a lot of we've got to kill (pts) dogs in this thread.

Believe me, this is a personal attack, not just on me, but on any member here.  None of the idog members that I know, including you, for that matter, would be apt to lead a "parade to kill dogs".   A legitimate discussion of limited resources and of liability issues is not a "parade to kill dogs".  You bristle at the thought that someone would characterize you as "macho", which I did not do - read the OP - nowhere does it say "awsomedog" is a macho trainer.  Yet, you tell people who are trying to discuss a tough topic on a dog forum that they are leading a parade...IMO, that is inflammatory and troll-like behavior, but since I only have a degree in human psychology, what do I know?  Again, you have managed to turn a thread unpleasant and into a sparring match, so I am bowing out of this one, and will leave you in the vacuum you created.  Have a nice day. []

ORIGINAL: Awsomedog

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs

Who kills more? Dog to human, or human to dog?

Human to dog, and that includes killing their spirits.

What strikes me as odd, is...it's same people calling me and some others mean and macho trainers......

 
????  No one has called you a macho trainer..... have they?  [&:]

ORIGINAL: Awsomedog

what this really gets to the heart of is the tragedy of BYB and the abuse that brings this issue to light.  euthanizing a dog who has attacked may be necessary, but it is also fighting the problem from the wrong end.  i know the resources simply aren't there, but in the event of a *real* attack, the lineage of the dog should be determined and investigated.  the people responsible for breeding the dog should be investigated, and if necessary, held accountable for recklessly endangering the rest of us and our dogs by intentionally producing attack dogs. 

by arguing whether or not they should be saved, we are missing the point, which really is, "what made them that way to begin with?"  this is the way to combat BSL and media bias- to make people understand that HUMANS are ultimately responsible for the actions of a dog, whether it be through poor breeding, abuse, or lack of training.

IMO...the smartest thing said so far in this thread.

I agree whole heartedly with these sentiments. 

A-dog I would be interested to know if your comment means that you do agree that euthanasia is sometimes necessary?  Only your posts so far seem to indicate that it shouldn't happen.... my understanding of your comments so far has been that dogs should not be "killed" for human mistakes, but that every effort should be made to rehab them regardless of the danger this may pose to society?  We can all agree that it shouldn't happen and that dogs should be bred and raised to avoid it, but once it has happened.... what then?  Do you see the killing of these dogs as the killing of innocents?  As murder?  I would be very interested (read: nosy []) to learn your viewpoint on this.

Edit to add:  Same question to JM.... do you consider euthanasing dogs that are dangerous through no fault of their own as murder?   What about the mental state of the dog?  His quality of life, his happiness?  If there is none to be had is it not just as selfish to keep him alive "in a shelter somewhere" because no one has succeeded in rehabbing him and we don't want to feel guilty about "killing" him?  Let's face it, do you really think a seriously aggressive, dangerous dog is happy?  Is euthanasia not just as much of a kindness to that animal as when it is done to a dog who is severely ill physically and cannot be helped?  Is the aggressive-unhappy dog not in just as much pain in his own way?

Nobody should feel offended, crap gets tossed both ways[]

I'm sorry...lol...how many times have you called me a troll Anne? I'd love to see you glass house one day.

As far as leading the parade on killing (pts) dogs goes, I'm hearing a lot of...this dog should be put down because of aggression.  How do we know that they're even capable qualified to make that decision?

Let's look at this statement.

have you ever met a severely undersocialized severely abused dog of poor breeding freaking out on an hourly basis in the quietest corner of a shelter while on anti-anxiety meds? 
Sometimes the kindest thing one can offer is the peace of a humane death.

#1. Most people who work in shelters may not actually know the true complete background of a dog in there shelter. Which means they could be wrong about the dog. #2. Yes I've seen dogs that appear like that in shelters, and have seen some of them turned around to live a normal life. #3. Sometimes IMPO the kindest thing one can offer is...at least a chance.

And finally...even one of your fans knew what your "macho trainers" thread really was. I may speak curtly, but at least I'm honest. And I don't even have a degree in "human psychology". I think your whining about me is nothing more than a ploy to have me kicked off. If it works...well then. I just hope that the admin...like some members here can see your real motives.

Have a nice day.[]

ORIGINAL: Chuffy

ORIGINAL: Awsomedog

ORIGINAL: spiritdogs

Who kills more? Dog to human, or human to dog?

Human to dog, and that includes killing their spirits.

What strikes me as odd, is...it's same people calling me and some others mean and macho trainers......

????  No one has called you a macho trainer..... have they?  [&:]

Gee...I'm not sure. Does it count if they do it but pretend their not.[]

i missed a few day since my response on p #1... wow... the situation is escalating and its making me mad. Are we just as uncivilized and aggressive as the dogs that are being killed? i'm outta here

ORIGINAL: Chuffy


A-dog I would be interested to know if your comment means that you do agree that euthanasia is sometimes necessary?  Only your posts so far seem to indicate that it shouldn't happen.... my understanding of your comments so far has been that dogs should not be "killed" for human mistakes, but that every effort should be made to rehab them regardless of the danger this may pose to society?

I've never said a aggressive dog should be out in society, therefore there is no "danger".

We can all agree that it shouldn't happen and that dogs should be bred and raised to avoid it, but once it has happened.... what then?  Do you see the killing of these dogs as the killing of innocents?  As murder?  I would be very interested (read: nosy []) to learn your viewpoint on this.

It depends on what happened. If a dog bites someone, no it should not be put down. If a dog kills someone the owners should be jailed for life. The however the dog should be sent somewhere where there is never a chance of that happening again. And if there's no threat, and the dog is still killed, (pts) is it being done for anyother reason than...REVENGE?

This thread was not based on the premise of seriously aggressive, dangerous dogs (which are pretty rare) that has already went through the gamut of behavorists/trainers/vets and still cannot find peace within itself

but.....

 if a dog is "salvageable" I question whether they SHOULD be "salvaged" over the thousands of nicer, safer animals doomed to die in shelters....

You are changing the rules in the middle of the game. (metaphorically speaking)

My point is, yes, every attempt should be made to rehab them.  Vets, trainers, behavorists.  They have the same right as nicer and safer animals.

It is not the aggressive dogs fault that the nice and safe animals were given up by their irresponsible humans.  And they shouldn't have to pay the price.

Edit to add:  Same question to JM.... do you consider euthanasing dogs that are dangerous through no fault of their own as murder?   What about the mental state of the dog?  His quality of life, his happiness?  If there is none to be had is it not just as selfish to keep him alive "in a shelter somewhere" because no one has succeeded in rehabbing him and we don't want to feel guilty about "killing" him?  Let's face it, do you really think a seriously aggressive, dangerous dog is happy?  Is euthanasia not just as much of a kindness to that animal as when it is done to a dog who is severely ill physically and cannot be helped?  Is the aggressive-unhappy dog not in just as much pain in his own way?

seriously aggressive, dangerous dogs (which are pretty rare) that has already went through the gamut of behavorists/trainers/vets and still cannot find peace within itself

 
interesting that everyone is assuming that aggressive dogs are unhappy. Sure, most dog aggression is based in fear, but not always. The scariest dog I have ever met seems pretty happy and at peace. His aggressive acts towards both dogs and humans are very deliberate. I liken him to a sociopathic human. The fault here is that he was bred in the first place.
 

well, I am pretty sure that we are talking of two different types of dogs and aggression.

 Most likely no one here believes that all aggression is fear based.  Actually, I think that may be the point of some others. That it is not fear based and can be trained out of a dog.

interesting that everyone is assuming that aggressive dogs are unhappy. Sure, most dog aggression is based in fear, but not always. The scariest dog I have ever met seems pretty happy and at peace. His aggressive acts towards both dogs and humans are very deliberate. I liken him to a sociopathic human. The fault here is that he was bred in the first place.

ORIGINAL: Awsomedog





Perhaps those of you leading the parade to kill (pts) dogs should start working harder to do something about the humans who are creating these problems to begin with.

All I will say is this: Yes I believe euthanasia is the kindest thing we can do in some cirucmstances. Does it still sadden me? Of course, but that is the reality of living in the world we live in and implying that a.) we are somehow happy about euthanizing and lead some sort of parade; and b.) that I'm not working hard enough to fix the problem is not only absurd but downright insulting. Don't talk to me about working harder to fix humans until you have spent a week in my shoes, trying to fix the crap that walks in my door.

ORIGINAL: JM

Yes, humans have created the problem and I think they should have to foot the bill to fix the problem.

All dogs should be saved.  If we don't have the facilities, build them.  Hire trainers. Behavorists and even vets. Require volunteer work from everyone.

If they cannot be adopted out, keep them in a certain shelter and allow them to live out their lives in comfort and peace. 

We owe them nothing less.  If we (humans in general) are to be god like in our "dominion over animals" then we need to pony up to the responsibility.... instead of killing the animal because we are afraid that it may hurt one of "us", or just being too irresponsible to deal with it.

I'm not being a smartass, although I'm sure it will seem like it when I ask this question. I agree with you to a certain extent in that adoptable dogs should be saved and facilities/staff should be brought in to accomodate the masses. How do you suggest that we come up with the funds to do this? In a society where animals are disposable and people look out for themselves, how in the world can we expect an idea like this to actually happen? Aggressive spay neuter campaigns? Even more aggressive fundraising throughout the nation? Enforcing a tax on people that give up animals at shelters? Legalizing murder of people that put dogs in positions to be euthanized through lack of training, socialization, or care? (Just joking about the last one but you get my drift.) I really am curious to know how you think this could be a realistic possibility for the average shelter in the U.S.