I Have GREAT dogs

spiritdogs

oranges81

 I was going to stay out of it. But I'll make one post and be done with it since I have already spoken to Amanda, and she knows my standing.

On that note:  There were numerous signs on the fence, the JW's had been asked repeatedly not to come back.  And yet they walked to the BACK door knowing all this.  I'm sorry but I would feel more sympathetic if this was their first visit. Also Amanda had stated that there were burglaries in the neighbor hood.  The Doberman is bred to protect their family and that is exactly what they did.  In hindsight, would it have been better if they just did a bark and hold, probably. But even then, the guy probably would have tried to run and still end up bitten.

In my experience,  the JW's around here do not give up unless extreme measures are taken. They would not leave my house alone until I set Maze on them. Did she bite? No, she's not trained that way. But she did give them one heck of a scare. And sometimes that's what it takes. 

And if the person at the door had been a crash victim or a delivery guy, the dogs probably would have acted differently. But they picked up on Amanda's fear of a coyote or a burglar and it fed their response. 

I'm backing out now but just one last thing.

Good on ya Bev and Cher!

 

Someone whose car had broken down or had an accident would probably NOT be climbing trees

 They might of a pair of dobes were coming at them--I know I would!  The way I read it was that the guy climbed the tree after he saw the dogs headed for him.....

oranges81

And if the person at the door had been a crash victim or a delivery guy, the dogs probably would have acted differently. But they picked up on Amanda's fear of a coyote or a burglar and it fed their response. 

Just out of curiosity, how would the dogs know the difference between a crash victim, a delivery driver, and a JW?  

rwbeagles

grab01

Firstly, I'll note that I'm not certain any of my dogs would do more than bark.

 

In this state, you woudln't want to encourage more, really. Here in Texas YOU can be found guilty of a 3rd degree felony if your dog commits grevious injury to another human being. Now...in theory this law would not apply here...but again...I would not want my family or my dogs being put thru that NOR at the mercy of a justice system that has proven itself again and again to lack common sense and be utterly based upon media perception at times. Nor would I care to be taken to court by an organized Church....even if they have NO CHANCE of winning...who needs that in their life?

I am glad everyone is okay...and frankly some of the religious bashing and making fun going on here is pretty sad. If this had been a different situation and yes a different person posting most here would have a vastly different reponse. I recall someone actually being JUMPED ON because their Pits killed a coyote and poor coyote and mean doggies, but,  because these human beings are a certain religion "oh well they deserved it". That is borderline depressing.

This x100......

I can't sit here and lie--I would be beyond horrified if this were my dogs--to the point that awful, life changing decisions might have to be made.  However, I expect different things of my dogs I suppose.  Either way, I'm glad that the dogs are OK and will be allowed to stay the Amanda's home, and I hope that the man who was bitten was not too badly injured....

At this time of year and in this economy times are rough and crime is up. Taking extra precautions to protect oneself and property is also up. In my own neighborhood crime is up and we have been warned to watch our dogs, because some are being poisoned so that people can gain access to homes.

Amanda had mentioned that there were burglaries in her neighborhood. I also knew that she had seen a coyote outside the fence earlier that morning. She was alone and there were strange men in her yard, banging on her back door. I don't care who they were or why they were there. She reacted as fast as she could under the circumstances. She did not do anything wrong. Her dogs were free in their yard, not out roaming the street taking pot shots at strangers. I too would be proud of them.

Was the outcome ideal, of course not. Could the situation have been worse? Sure, much much worse. What if they had been robbers? Her dogs and she herself could all have been hurt very badly. I will never believe that at some point Amanda did not think that and thank god that the situation was not any worse than it already was. I too would be proud of my dogs.

rwbeagles

grab01

Firstly, I'll note that I'm not certain any of my dogs would do more than bark.

 In this state, you woudln't want to encourage more, really. .

Oh, I'm fine with just their alert barking (and a few won't even do that). I just have no idea what their reaction would be if someone were attempting to harm one of us/break into the house..thankfully we've never had to find out and I hope we won't have to. I find having a Chow deters people by appearance alone...even if my Chow happens to be very people loving.

I was actually very glad of Grimm's barking-only tendency the other day when the landlord came by unannounced and walked into the gated yard with the muppet barking at him.  Grimm stopped barking and came inside immediately, though I have to wonder why, if you see me coming TO the door, you wouldn't just wait another three seconds for me to get the dog first. But, my landlord isn't always a thinking person. Grimm is very much an "I'll just alert mom to the situation and let her deal with it" kind of dog.

I have removed my initial post due to the fact that it may have been insensitive.  I had no intentions of insulting or demeaning any religion, & if I did so, I apologize.

My dogs do handle every situation differently.  They are never left out in the yard unattended.  We commonly have feral hogs on our property which can & do take the yard fence down & enter the yard.  It would not be safe, imo, to leave them outside unattended. 

When they are in the yard, even with us present, they make it quite obvious that it would not be wise to enter our gate without a memeber of our family escorting you in & making introductions.  After introductions are made, they, with the exception of Brutus who we manage, are very accepting of new people in their yard.  Inside the house, a doorbell or knock at the door is a cue for them to go to their beds & stay there until instructed otherwise.  Brutus crates himself in this situation.  Obviously, I have not trained for the situation that I was faced with yesterday. 

What I want to say in this thread because a few posts are showing some misconceptions about SchH and other training is that Schutzhund protection is NOT guard dog training and NOT personal protection training.  How a dog follows through with a real threat and the level of obedience and control are GENETIC.  Dogs predisposed to certain behaviors will show them regardless of whether they are training for SchH, PPD, ring, police K9, etc.  I'm not speaking about Amanda's dogs or my dogs, but just in general.  A nervy dog that bites for the wrong reasons is going to be that way and do so regardless of whether it is trained for SchH or not. 

What is a "real threat" and what is not obviously varies person to person as it also varies dog to dog.  To me and my dogs a real threat is one that is physically threatens me or the dog or both in close proximity.  Someone else may have a different idea and get dogs that show a lower or higher threshold depending on their definition of threat and how they would expect their dog to react.  That threshold is genetic, it can only to a small extent be pushed one way or the other, and in fact generally in any form of protection training you find out where the dog's threshold lies and mold the training from there, not try to train the dog in one direction or the other. 

The point is that good owners of working breeds who are bred and trained in any sort of protection automatically have the responsibility of understanding how their dog reacts to a threat, what is their threshold, how sharp is the dog, what is the balance of prey/defense/fight aggression, etc. 

I would be upset if my dogs had done this, however, I would not have a gun to pull out and fire into the air.  I was raised in a different culture and environment than Amanda, and there are definately regional differences in what is and what is not ok.  I do have to say, I have to admire Amanda's cojones tho and the amount of time and energy she puts into training her dogs.

One of my brothers lives in an area of high crime, transients, gangs.  Most of the houses have high fences in the back yard, with large dogs running around.  They had lots of law suits.  Somebody would jump a fence after dark, get chewed on a bit, make lots of money.  The residents changed the law.  Now, if you are in somebodies back yard with out permission, don't even think about hurting the dog just because he has a good hold on your leg.  "No trespassing" means just that.  Why should a law breaker have rights over the property owner?  Being stupid should have some cost attached.  I imagine the bite marks will leave a lasting impression.

Lots of carry instructors and defense experts teach that the first warning shot is into the center of mass.

Duties to trespassers -Wikipedia

With respect to the duties owed to trespassers, there are two types of trespassers to consider. First, there is the undiscovered trespasser, to whom the property owner owes only a duty not to "trap" or wilfully harm the trespasser. As the outset, the concept of traps was narrowly defined. More recently, courts have engaged in some creativity, adopting a broader interpretation of a trap.

Second, there is the anticipated or discovered trespasser. To those parties, the landowner owes a duty of common humanity (See British Railways Board v. Herrington)—a duty to warn them of deadly conditions on the land which would be hidden to them, but of which the property owner is aware. A warning sign at the entrance to the land will suffice for this purpose. However, a property owner is under no duty to ascertain hazards on his property, and cannot be held liable for failing to discover a deadly hazard which injures a trespasser.

Furthermore, an adult trespasser who is injured while on a defendant's property cannot sue under a theory of strict liability, even if the landowner was engaged in ultrahazardous activities, such as the keeping of wild animals, or the use of explosives. Instead, the trespasser must prove that the property owner intentionally or wantonly injured the plaintiff to recover. The exception is a child who is trespassing to play on ultra-hazardous items on the land. Since these trespassers are considered "anticipated" they are excepted under the doctrine of attractive nuisance.

A property owner may use reasonable (typically meaning nondeadly) force to prevent a person from trespassing on his, her or its land, or to expel a trespasser. However, a property owner may not force a trespasser off his land if doing so would expose the trespasser to a risk of serious injury. For example, a trespasser who takes shelter in a stranger's barn during a powerful storm cannot be expelled until the storm is over.

Many jurisdictions within the United States have passed statutes to modify or clarify the common law duties owed by a property owner to a trespasser (for example, by explicitly permitting the property owner to use deadly force to expel trespassers).^[cita

BEVOLASVEGAS

I have removed my initial post due to the fact that it may have been insensitive.  I had no intentions of insulting or demeaning any religion, & if I did so, I apologize.

My dogs do handle every situation differently.  They are never left out in the yard unattended.  We commonly have feral hogs on our property which can & do take the yard fence down & enter the yard.  It would not be safe, imo, to leave them outside unattended. 

When they are in the yard, even with us present, they make it quite obvious that it would not be wise to enter our gate without a memeber of our family escorting you in & making introductions.  After introductions are made, they, with the exception of Brutus who we manage, are very accepting of new people in their yard.  Inside the house, a doorbell or knock at the door is a cue for them to go to their beds & stay there until instructed otherwise.  Brutus crates himself in this situation.  Obviously, I have not trained for the situation that I was faced with yesterday. 

You are a nice person, Amanda, and I don't think you would be intentionally insensitive.  But, to be honest, I think JW's can be very persistent to the point of annoyance.  Religion is each person's business, and I am probably one of the most tolerant people you'll find in terms of honoring other peoples' right to practice their faith.  However, I do take huge offense to someone foisting their views on me when I have told them I'm not interested in conversion of any kind, and asked them to desist.  It's just plain rude and unacceptable.  To me, that doesn't indicate prejudice against anything but the rudeness of zealots, and would apply no matter what faith they were from.

BEVOLASVEGAS

Obviously, I have not trained for the situation that I was faced with yesterday. 

And, herewithin lies the problem.  We as dog owners cannot possibly train or predict every possible life scenario.  I cannot even manage my dog for every like situation that could come up.  People need to read signs, use common sense, respect what they are being told.  The dog owner is supposed to be able to predict every possible scenario and prevent it, yet 2 grown men cannot read a sign??? 

You do have great dogs, Amanda. 

 Is the gate the kind you can lock?  We ended up locking ours from the inside after the meter reading kept strolling in.....they just use the scope thingy to read it now....

Amanda, I imagine you were still fresh from what happened when you posted yesterday, and sometimes things come out differently than they are intended. I know I've posted a wonky thing or two when I was still adrenalized. I'm actually happy you posted the thread, for it's purpose, even though some things in it may have caused disagreement. It does shed light on some important things all dog owners should know, regarding training in general, training for high-level sports, how training can fail, and the liabilities we have as dog owners. Every experience we have does build awareness in our dogs and what their strengths and limitations are.

Kim_MacMillan

It does shed light on some important things all dog owners should know, regarding training in general, training for high-level sports, how training can fail, and the liabilities we have as dog owners. 

But the training doesn't change how the dogs act/react in a situation like this, the training just teaches the handler about their dog so they can more accurately predict how their dog would act.  If the training "fails" it's because there is something incompatible about the temperament of the dog and what it is being trained to do.  That is why the majority of dogs doing SchH are GSDs and besides them the rest are other traditional working breeds like Mals and Dobes.  If it were only about training the dog to do or not do one thing or another, you'd see Paps doing SchH.  In Schutzhund training you are not training a dog to bite or guard or protect, you are developing the dog's ability to channel drive and switch drives, and put behaviors that are inherent to the dog to a verbal cue.  The actual behaviors, threshold of the dog, balance of drives, etc are controlled by genetics.

Every experience we have does build awareness in our dogs and what their strengths and limitations are.

Exactly.

There was a lawsuit a while back where a VET sued because a dog bit him during an exam. I think the lawsuit eventually failed, but there was a very real fear that the dog was going to be euthanized. (I think it was something small and "non-dangerous" like a chihuahua, too.) We owe it to our dogs to keep them safe, and that includes *not* encouraging aggression towards strangers. Sometimes it's inevitable, but that doesn't mean we should encourage it.

FWIW, I think 2 large dogs running up to and growling at the trespassers, WITHOUT biting, would have been an equally strong but less dangerous deterrent to their return. I also suspect that the story was embellished a bit for dramatic effect - who knows what actually happened? Again, I'm very glad that the story had a more or less happy ending. It's a good cautionary tale for those of us with territorial dogs, as well as those of us who might consider trespassing into someone's yard!