It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

FACEBOOK rushes to defense of dog that mauled 4-year-old boy...

page: 6
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 01:56 PM
link   

CharlieSpeirs
reply to post by n00bUK
 



Pitt Bull again....When will people learn

These dogs are not bread to be hang bag dogs, cute little things to keep around the house for kids to play with. Their bred for violence, to protect their keeper and their selves.


Have you ever owned a PitBull???
Or is this just another massive generalisation out of this Thread???

I had a PitBull for 11 years... Died of Cancer... Never attacked or bit a single Human being in his life, Adult or Child!!!

Another PitBull Know-It-All... When will people learn!!!


Before pits it was rotties, before them dobermans and gsd's.

It's always the people in charge. Dogs just do as they've been shown.




posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by SprocketUK
 


You do have to realise German Shepherds as powerful as they are, are not so defensive as a Pit...

Secondly from experience if my Dog/s ever took/take food sneakily that they shouldn't have ie a leg of Lamb after climbing a table or something they slink off and hide to eat discreetly, when caught it doesn't always even take a command for them to know they shouldn't have it!!!

But if you've given something to a Dog specifically, again speaking for Staffs & Pits then it now belongs to them, so there is a slight difference in the two!!!

I'd say even if trained to learn their treats can be taken... This doesn't really apply to anyone from outside of the household, strangers will not be treated with the same patience & understanding as Family!


Peace Sprocket!



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by SprocketUK
 


No doubt pal, it's always the owners fault IMO...

Either the Dogs are left unsupervised which is just an accident waiting to happen, no matter how well trained!!!

Or the Dogs are so mistreated that their levels have trust have been destroyed by horrible owners, which is the saddest thing on the Planet to me, knowing how much Dogs trust us initially, to get to that stage is horrifying, and really upsetting! Breaks my Heart to know Dogs can become so disassociated with their true Nature!

I do hope the Child recovers fully I must add!!!

Peace Sprocket!



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by CharlieSpeirs
 


A mate has staffys and if anythingy, they're even dafter than my dog

I'll take your word for pits, I do think a dog is just what you make of it, whatever the breed.

That said, no one gets in our driveway without being aware of murf, no way they ever get between him and the kids or Mrs until he knows they're alright.

Wouldn't have it any other way either.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Until we put down this government for trying to steal from others, we shouldn't be putting down a dog that acted on instinct to defend what's his. I feel bad for the kid, but killing the dog isn't going to solve a thing.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 02:24 PM
link   

CharlieSpeirs
reply to post by SprocketUK
 


You do have to realise German Shepherds as powerful as they are, are not so defensive as a Pit...


Are you saying that you think GSD's are not as protective/territorial as "Pit Bulls?"


Staffs & Pits then it now belongs to them, so there is a slight difference in the two!!!



SprocketUK
A mate has staffys and if anythingy, they're even dafter than my dog

I'll take your word for pits, I do think a dog is just what you make of it, whatever the breed.


Staffordshire Terriers are one of the breeds considered a "Pit Bull." There is the APBT (American Pit Bull Terrier), but it is not a generally accepted "standard" in some of the big circles, where it is known as the American Staffordshire Terrier (amstaff). They are bred from the same lineage, with the only difference being the standard set (iirc). Its actually an interesting difference between the UKC and AKC.

The actual breeds that will fall under this blanket term will vary from individual to individual, generally based on education level/experience with dogs. For most people, it will include everything from Mastiffs, to Bulldogs, to Boxers. Most dont know the difference.
edit on 17-3-2014 by Serdgiam because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by SprocketUK
 



They are proper daft... & as Soppy as anything as well!!!

That's great to hear, a true defender, German Shepherds are very Loveable... My uncle had one for a long time!

I don't know what it is about people who do not own Dogs deciding to weigh in with generalisations while expecting proper Dog owners Lovers to agree without debate or a defensive Mindset!!!

Peace Sprocket!



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 02:29 PM
link   
I am disgusted by the people saying it is the child's fault! The child is 4 years old, and if he was never taught how to behave around how would it be his fault? A four year old is a four year old, they are going to behave like a four year old and do careless things because they don't have the mental capacity yet to understand the danger.

A well trained dog should never attack a child. I don't care what breed it is. People love to jump on the "it was a pit, all pits are bad bandwagon." I was mauled by a Shi-tzu as a kid. It did a lot of damage. People think little dogs can't do as much damage a a big dog? well I have scars to prove you wrong! The little dog wouldn't give up and pits aren't the only breed that can lock their jaws.

While it is the owners fault, the sad thing is, this dog can no longer be trusted. He would have to be re-homed with an experienced professional dog trainer.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Serdgiam
 


I was actually referring to Bones & Treats not Loved ones... German Shepherds are probably more defensive for Family!!!

I should have made that clear!!!


Peace Serdgiam



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Serdgiam
 


Sorry, from what I understood, pitbulls are a specific breed, in fact pitbulls are banned in the UK due to the hype over them.
Maybe it's a transatlantic thing?
Most folks wouldn't equate staffys and pits at all apart from the bulldog heritage.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by calstorm
 


You made an excellent point about smaller Dogs pal!!!

They do tend to be more vicious & full throttle...
Again it's only from my own experience and no way relates to every Pit/Staff but they do seem to stay in 1st Gear, they really do know their own strength and will only ever hit 5th Gear in a Life or Death situation!

Peace Calstorm!



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 02:40 PM
link   
Who the hell are you guys blaming? The dog? an animal? protecting its property?

It is EVERYONE ELSE BUT THE DOG to blame.

You dont run out in the highway then blame the car that hit you.
edit on 3/17/2014 by luciddream because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 02:41 PM
link   

CharlieSpeirs
reply to post by Serdgiam
 


I was actually referring to Bones & Treats not Loved ones... German Shepherds are probably more defensive for Family!!!

I should have made that clear!!!


Peace Serdgiam


I gotcha!

In my experience, food possessiveness is not well indicated by breed, but by individual temperament and training. Being protective/territorial however, can certainly have a strong link to breed! Where-in the GSD is definitely one of the stronger breeds, along with Malinois, and even Standard Poodles (really!).

Only issue with the GSD is that show breeding has resulted in a badly sloping back as normal posture. This used to be a "stance," but now they are bred to stand like that all of the time. This can result in a lot of issues, including pain, which can then result in some aggressive behavior. Luckily, there are some breeders that are taking it somewhere healthier.

I think improper breeding is one of the biggest contributors to the perception of a breed as well. When you have a bunch of people who have no idea what they are doing, and breeding for some terrible things, you get very, very bad results with any breed. "Pit Bulls" are just the current breed, but the people who get certain breeds for image follow these trends, and I think it only makes the problem worse.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 02:43 PM
link   
One of the biggest problems for Dogs are us breeding them into something they shouldn't be.
Many breeds shouldn't be allowed to continue because they are born with genetic defects which effect the dog either mentally or physically.

King Charles spaniels spring to mind, very different from the times of King Charles (looked different) and many have a brain too big for their skull making them prone to fits and pain most of their life.
We have done this to make the dogs look like we want and it is wrong.

Here is a good video for you.




Some pedigree dogs should not be allowed to breed.
Like the guys says in the video above...we are breeding them to death.
Get a mongrel dog much better for the dog race and better for all.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Serdgiam
 


Couldn't agree more pal!
It's definitely who breeds & raises rather than what breed!!!

The reason Pits get a bad name, well IMO, is because of percentage...
They may be in the same numbers as Daschunds, but reasoning for having the Dog varies, and if for aggression, most the time people will go for Pits, despite that you could breed a Daschunds to do exactly the same, very intimidating Dog for their size!!!

*** Was also meant to say that is sad to hear about GS breeding, a Dog in pain does usually act more aggressive, even if not intending harm, they don't like being examined to find out what the problem is!!!


Peace Serdgiam!
edit on 17-3-2014 by CharlieSpeirs because: *** Stated!!!



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 02:50 PM
link   
I have no love of dogs, this dog harmed a child so it should be put down I am not going to hind my feelings on what i think the fate of the dog should be.

But i will say this, the OPs title is interesting, "FACEBOOK rushes to defense of dog....".... "FACEBOOK..."

The implication is that FaceBook, as a organization is rushing to defend this dog when that is simply not true, its about 40,000 of FaceBooks members who are expressing their freedom of speech and right to peaceful protest to stand up and say they think that the killing of a dog is wrong.

I see nothing wrong with that.

They can protest all they want, I might disagree with them, I am sure that perhaps even some of the people who work with FaceBook disagree with them but they have as much right to argue that the dog should be saved than those who say it should be killed.

We cannot just demand that Facebook remove the page, because we disagree with the moral standing of some of their members, that would be censoring freedom of speech.

Its like when a horrible thread appears on ATS, a example i can think of would be when British former PM Thatcher died, i saw loads of posts and threads celebrating her death. That does not mean that ATS as a organization or as a community was celebrating her death only that a few members where and they have as much right to express their joy at another's death as much as those who condemn them for doing so.

Again, I say kill the dog.

A human life is always worth more than that of a beast.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 02:54 PM
link   

SprocketUK
reply to post by Serdgiam
 


Sorry, from what I understood, pitbulls are a specific breed, in fact pitbulls are banned in the UK due to the hype over them.
Maybe it's a transatlantic thing?
Most folks wouldn't equate staffys and pits at all apart from the bulldog heritage.


There is no officially recognized breed of "Pit Bull" by any of the "main" organizations, UK or US.

Actually, in looking at it, wiki has some pretty good info on the topic.

What is interesting though, is that the potential of the general standard is astounding. When you look at everything from therapy dogs to all kinds of working environments, it is a standard that can really excel and has the titles to prove it.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 02:59 PM
link   
Yeah let's blame the Dog for acting on its instincts and give a free pass to the parents for allowing a small child near a dog with a bone.

This right here just shows that we need a license program to own any kind of animal.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 03:01 PM
link   

OtherSideOfTheCoin
I have no love of dogs, this dog harmed a child so it should be put down I am not going to hind my feelings on what i think the fate of the dog should be.

But i will say this, the OPs title is interesting, "FACEBOOK rushes to defense of dog....".... "FACEBOOK..."

The implication is that FaceBook, as a organization is rushing to defend this dog when that is simply not true, its about 40,000 of FaceBooks members who are expressing their freedom of speech and right to peaceful protest to stand up and say they think that the killing of a dog is wrong.

I see nothing wrong with that.

They can protest all they want, I might disagree with them, I am sure that perhaps even some of the people who work with FaceBook disagree with them but they have as much right to argue that the dog should be saved than those who say it should be killed.

We cannot just demand that Facebook remove the page, because we disagree with the moral standing of some of their members, that would be censoring freedom of speech.

Its like when a horrible thread appears on ATS, a example i can think of would be when British former PM Thatcher died, i saw loads of posts and threads celebrating her death. That does not mean that ATS as a organization or as a community was celebrating her death only that a few members where and they have as much right to express their joy at another's death as much as those who condemn them for doing so.

Again, I say kill the dog.

A human life is always worth more than that of a beast.


Excuse me but why should they kill the dog? Because it acted on its instincts?

No one is being forced to choose between the life of the dog or the life of the child, people are out with pitchforks and torches in hand because a dog became defensive because someone went near him and his bone. A little training and owners with common sense will prevent it from happening again.



posted on Mar, 17 2014 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by calstorm
 


I've seen you statement reiterated on here, and realize I didn't clarify my statement when I blamed the child (a little).
I was thinking along the lines of being smart enough to get away from whoever was watching him, and not listening, (That was when I assumed he was actually being watched).

I don't blame the child for the actual attack on him. That was 100% the adults in this situation.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join