Or the opposite. I have had 2 rescues that have been amazing. The second has been a ton of work but it’s well worth it because he is one of the most loving and affectionate dogs I have ever met. I also believe that not just anyone should own a bully breed (or many other breeds of dogs for that matter).
In my neighborhood, it’s 2 Golden’s that are always running free and wreaking havoc on other dogs and people. Meanwhile we have the ‘dangerous one’ because he is a pit. Our dog is not permitted outside the house without supervision and a lead if we’re outside the fence (still supervised in the fenced in area). The one time he got out I yelled ‘heel’ and he came right back. Meanwhile, the goldens chase us (and most other residents) into our own yard while the own stands still from his garage just yelling at them but the goldens don’t care. They just bark and snarl and encroach in our (and others) yard.
I argue it’s the opposite of selfish. Giving time, money, and resources to care and save an animal that was abandoned doesn’t exactly seem selfish.
I’m all for rescuing as many dogs as we can as a society (regardless of breed), but serious thought and planning needs to be in place as there are a lot of incapable people out there.
It’s a statistics thing. Sure training has a lot to do with it, but these were dogs bred to be aggressive and thus are more likely to be aggressive, with equal training. On top of that, they were bred to be big and strong. So when they do attack, they can do a lot more damage.
It’s a dangerous combo. Yes I’ve known some super sweet ones. But there are so many other god breeds out there that score high on human compatibility and sociability with other dogs…the question is why even get higher risk dogs?
Or the opposite. I have had 2 rescues that have been amazing. The second has been a ton of work but it’s well worth it because he is one of the most loving and affectionate dogs I have ever met. I also believe that not just anyone should own a bully breed (or many other breeds of dogs for that matter).
In my neighborhood, it’s 2 Golden’s that are always running free and wreaking havoc on other dogs and people. Meanwhile we have the ‘dangerous one’ because he is a pit. Our dog is not permitted outside the house without supervision and a lead if we’re outside the fence (still supervised in the fenced in area). The one time he got out I yelled ‘heel’ and he came right back. Meanwhile, the goldens chase us (and most other residents) into our own yard while the own stands still from his garage just yelling at them but the goldens don’t care. They just bark and snarl and encroach in our (and others) yard.
I argue it’s the opposite of selfish. Giving time, money, and resources to care and save an animal that was abandoned doesn’t exactly seem selfish.
I’m all for rescuing as many dogs as we can as a society (regardless of breed), but serious thought and planning needs to be in place as there are a lot of incapable people out there.
It’s a statistics thing. Sure training has a lot to do with it, but these were dogs bred to be aggressive and thus are more likely to be aggressive, with equal training. On top of that, they were bred to be big and strong. So when they do attack, they can do a lot more damage.
It’s a dangerous combo. Yes I’ve known some super sweet ones. But there are so many other god breeds out there that score high on human compatibility and sociability with other dogs…the question is why even get higher risk dogs?
Has those Goldens’ havoc ever involved spilled blood?