Dog attacks, Pit bulls, and the "one bite rule." (pitbulls, terrier) - Dogs - - City-Data Forum

STLCardsBlues1989 · 02-12-2011, 02:27 PM

I've seen many of those court cases on TV where dogs (sometimes pitbulls, but not always) have attacked smaller dogs.

Our small dog has been somewhat attacked by larger dogs, but that was during play time and she started it. My small dog is somewhat aggressive. But nobody got hurt. The play just got too out of hand.

Our dogs have been attacked by random dogs before and we've had to kick and punch and do whatever to keep that dog away from ours. One time a few years ago, while I was not home but other family was, the neighbor's dog broke loose and killed three of our kittens. My mother rescued one kitten, but the other three were ripped to shreds.

I have to be honest, I don't have much sympathy for large dogs that attack smaller dogs or small animals. Sometimes the smaller dog starts it, but it seems that so many times the large dogs get loose and attack. Oftentimes the owners are negligent as well. It's probably not always the large dog that starts it, but obviously they do a lot more damage, to cats, smaller dogs, sometimes even people.

Some states used to have what were called "One bite" rules. Some may still have them. They stated that the first time a dog bit somebody it would not be put down, but the second bite would lead to euthanization.

What do you think about this? Should dogs that attack be put down? I don't understand keeping a dog that is known as vicious. It's a matter of time before it gets loose and hurts someone. Granted, one attack does not necessarily mean that a dog is a killer, but sometimes dogs are very much dangerous and people keep them around. I don't understand it.

What should the punishment be for negligent owners? And is it okay to ban certain breeds because of their reputation?

I realize most of the time the owner is more at fault than the dog, but I still don't really support much keeping around dogs that are known to be vicious, because it is dangerous, especially if the owners are careless.

Wondering your opinions

Mopeyface · 02-12-2011, 03:36 PM

The issue about this that bothers me, is that this always seems to only apply to large dogs. If a little dog bites someone or another dog, it's just not seen as that big a deal. Now, I can see where the larger dog does have the potential to cause more damage, but it still bothers me greatly as a large dog owner. Particularly having watched smaller dogs launch themselves at my dog--I hate the idea that my dog could be put down for possibly injuring a smaller dog when it was the smaller dog that instigated any fighting. Realistically, my dog is much more likely to run that defend herself, but still.

flkingfan · 02-12-2011, 04:12 PM

I think each bite case should be looked at individually. Where was the owner, how was the dog contained if at all, did the bite victim come on their property, etc. I know a lot of dogs look at cats as prey, not saying that it's ok for them to kill them but another reason for owners to pay attention and have there dogs on leashes or behind a closed fence. I use to have a Chow that would stay on our screened back porch during the day, and one day my neighbors Akita climbed over my fence and pretty much almost killed my girl. I didn't report it to animal control as I know they were responsible owners and it was an unfortunate thing that happened. They paid our medical bill, and put up a wooden fence that couldn't be climbed. Nothing ever happened again.

I am totally against breed bans. What we need is better laws, and maybe actually enforce the ones that are already there. Better laws as in fighting dog abuse, stop dog fighting, spay/neuter programs. Too many people don't want there tax dollars going towards the county animal care & control, and just want to eliminate the problems instead of solving them.

Va-Cat · 02-12-2011, 04:20 PM

There are many types of aggression and as you pointed out, breed and size have NOTHING to do with it! The main point I want to make is that all dogs have teeth and all dogs have the ability and the capacity to bite. Its the OWNER'S responsibility to monitor their dog, to know their personality and to keep them out of situations where a person, another animal or their own dog would be at risk. I don't blame the dog. Many with bite tendencies have them because of abuse, misuse, or quite frankly idiots for owners.

I have a fear aggressive dog that can bite. The only person he has ever bitten was me and that was when I pushed him to far and to fast into a situation where he became afraid. It was MY FAULT - not his. Gator was horribly abused before I rescued him. If he is in a situation where he becomes afraid or threatened, he can lash out. For that reason, he is never around another dog, person or child where I'm not in control of the situation. I have no problem telling someone "please don't approach my dog" if I see that Gator is uncomfortable. I do however, expect other dog owners to have control over their dogs and for that matter their children as well. I also have no problem getting out of a situation where I see it could become a problem.

Should dogs that have bitten be put down? No - it would be better to put the idiot owners down instead. 99% of the time, they are the ones responsible for either creating the aggression problem or allowing their dog into a situation where an attack could happen.

Fontucky · 02-12-2011, 04:27 PM

No tolerance = no thought

STLCardsBlues1989 · 02-12-2011, 04:45 PM

I realize that a lot of bites happen because of the owner's fault. That said, if an owner is known to be irresponsible, I don't think they should be able to keep a dog, especially a potentially dangerous one. Obviously purposefully causing dogs to fight is a terrible situation and should be dealt with.

Small dogs being aggressive is a problem and owners have to keep a tight grip on them. That said, even though small dogs often are as guilty, they cannot do as much damage as the large dogs. Small dog cases are probably less likely to end in death or serious injury than large dog fights.

Obviously much of the problem is just that the owner is negligent in not having the dog leashed or they don't keep it properly pinned.

APBT_Samara · 02-12-2011, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by STLCardsBlues1989

I have to be honest, I don't have much sympathy for large dogs that attack smaller dogs or small animals. Sometimes the smaller dog starts it, but it seems that so many times the large dogs get loose and attack. Oftentimes the owners are negligent as well. It's probably not always the large dog that starts it, but obviously they do a lot more damage, to cats, smaller dogs, sometimes even people.

I don't have sympathy for them either, its not something that applies. They don't need sympathy. They are dogs doing what is natural to them often times so you can't fault them. Dogs are predators, small animals are seen as prey to some and prey drive kicks in. They are not vicious dogs.

It is the owners fault, in the vast majority of cases they were careless in their attempt to contain their dog or don't try at all. I have so called dangerous breeds without issue, my dogs are not escaping to attack people, kill cats and fight or kill other dogs.

It's also not the dogs fault if they are larger than the aggressor. Dogs can recognize size difference but at the sametime can't rationalize. They don't think I'm 40lbs, he's 15lbs, I shouldnt bite back I will really hurt him, I'm stronger, my teeth are bigger. Some of mine are not inclined to be bothered by smaller dogs but not all are this way. My male was rushed by an aggressive small dog and disbatched that dog without causing harm. My female did harm a smaller dog, but I wasn't at fault nor can I blame my dog. The small dog owner wasnt a responsible owner because they let their dog run loose.

Also just because a dog is small doesn't mean it won't do damage. I've seen it happen. Then especially with terrier breeds who tend to be tenacious, they can and have injured larger dogs or caused great damage to a dog their own size. Not to mention something like a Patterdale may definately kill a cat and they are not afraid to attack larger dogs.

Quote:

Some states used to have what were called "One bite" rules. Some may still have them. They stated that the first time a dog bit somebody it would not be put down, but the second bite would lead to euthanization.

In some places I know of while they are not PTS they have to be securely contained and wear a muzzle outdoors, ect so at least in some areas they put restrictions on dogs that bite.

Quote:

What do you think about this? Should dogs that attack be put down? I don't understand keeping a dog that is known as vicious. It's a matter of time before it gets loose and hurts someone. Granted, one attack does not necessarily mean that a dog is a killer, but sometimes dogs are very much dangerous and people keep them around. I don't understand it.

Mixed feelings. It's hard to make any law that is so general. Some dogs should be PTS before they ever even bite. It isn't at all safe to let an irresponsible owner keep an unstable dog because it can end terribly. Other cases a dog only bites in a certain situation and another bite would not happen with a responsible owner.

Just because a dog bites doesn't always mean its vicious, nor that it a matter of time before it gets loose to hurt someone. Even a truly aggressive dog kept escape to attack someone. Though my point is dogs bite for different reasons. I've seen fear aggressive dogs that did bite but went on to not bite again.

Quote:

What should the punishment be for negligent owners? And is it okay to ban certain breeds because of their reputation?

Hard to say what the punishment should be. It depends on the situation. Usually its the dog that is punished. No its not ok to ban, also bans are largely ineffective not leading in reduction of bites abd certainly won't stop irresponsible owners who can get another breed, many people also illegally own a banned breed, they don't care.

And rep certainly shouldn't matter.

Quote:

I realize most of the time the owner is more at fault than the dog, but I still don't really support much keeping around dogs that are known to be vicious, because it is dangerous, especially if the owners are careless.

Vicious and has bitten isnt the samething. Also killing a cat doesn't make a dog vicious. No more vicious than a cat who kills a rabbit or bird.

Colddiamond102 · 02-12-2011, 11:31 PM

Small dogs trigger prey drives, much like a squirrel that barks.

netwit · 02-13-2011, 01:09 AM

I don't know how to answer your question but I have a horrible big dog/little dog story that I'm really embarrassed to share for fear of being called an irresponsible dog owner (and maybe I was), not to mention that even today I find it almost too painful to tell.

My small beagle is my oldest dog and older than my next oldest dog, a female GSD, by 4 years.

This story goes back to 2004. We live in a rural area, and have a very long driveway. Since I have insomnia and since that particular night there was supposed to be a meteor shower, I went with my then 4 dogs for a walk down that driveway. It was a perfect night for star-gazing - so dark, I could not even see my hand in front of my face.

It was also not unusual for me to take these walks late at night with the dogs.

I was maybe a quarter of the way down our 500 metre driveway when I almost tripped over the beagle who I could not see. I said to the beagle, "Careful," and the next thing I knew all hell broke loose.

My female GSD attacked the beagle. There were no growls, no barks, no warning. I was rolling around with the dogs in the ditch, trying to separate them but my female GSD was in kill mode without a doubt. I finally found her head end in the darkness but she would not let go of the beagle. She had her by the throat the way a cat will kill a mouse.

I was screaming at the top of my lungs to make my female GSD let go. My husband was sound asleep in the house some distance away and there was no one that was going to hear me in the middle of nowhere. I finally stuck my hand in my GSD's mouth because stupidly or not, I was convinced she would never bite me, and that bought the beagle a second of time as the GSD spit my hand out and then went at the beagle from a new angle.

I shut up with the screaming when I realized that my GSD was taking it as encouragement, and kept struggling with her by putting my hand in her mouth. This may go against all common sense and I wouldn't recommend it to anyone but she didn't bite me.

The beagle was maybe 25 pounds. The GSD would have been about 90 pounds. Her collar came off in my hands. I had had previous arguments with my husband because he seems to think a dog collar should fit like a ladies' necklace - loose - and he had loosened the collar unknown to me.

Even after I was sure that my beagle was dead because I didn't think there was any way she could survive such a sustained attack, I kept trying to get my GSD to let her go.

Out of nowhere, vehicle lights appeared, thereby illuminating the beagle, completely limp, in my GSD's jaws. It turned out that my husband thought he had heard something through the opened bedroom window, and once he realized I was not inside, came looking for me in the van.

With the lights my GSD dropped the beagle and went bounding off to the van, ready to go for a ride.

Luba was lying completely still where she had been dropped. I called her name and her tail went up once in acknowledgement, and then down. I grabbed her and ran to house.

My vet met us at the clinic. Luba's voice box had been crushed and she was near death but not dead. She had surgery. My vet has been our friend for many years and he allows me to stay with my dogs if I want to. I stayed. I can't remember but I think two days' later she was allowed to go home - my vet later told me to die at home. He gave me syringes and painkillers etc, to keep her comfortable.

She was home 2 days, and then her head swelled up so much she had to go in for another surgery. Her blood vessels had been so crushed that the blood that was pumped normally to her head could not drain. She survived the second surgery.

When she came home again, I slept with her on the floor. And naturally, I kept the dogs separated because every time my GSD saw her, she wanted to finish the job.

And I admit I took a good long look at my GSD. She had been socialized from puppy-hood, exposed to all kinds of situations and people. Kids liked to try and ride her like a horse and she'd never shown any signs of aggression.

It is only in the last 3 or 4 years years that I've felt confident enough to leave the two of them alone together. My vet says that female dogs are far more aggressive with each other than male dogs are, or males and females are. Just like people.

I agree with the poster who said that little dogs provoke the prey drive in larger dogs. But what I also think is that because my GSD is so totally my dog, she somehow perceived a threat when I was almost tripped by Luba. And I also have seen how a little dog can deliberately provoke a larger dog. Luba does it to the GSD all the time.

I think I used to see some of Luba's behaviour as almost a joke - the little dog challenging the bigger dog, trying to steal the bigger dog's food, marching face to face with the GSD, her tail wagging straight up and obnoxiously, her entire body language just daring the GSD to make something out of it. I think that is the problem with small dogs - that what people would see as a problem if they were bigger, they see as 'cute' in a small dog when it is not cute. I have learned my lesson there.

I now put a stop to it immediately. I think I stepped out of the leader's position and the GSD thought she had to defend herself. It took time to get there, and included a period when my GSD had a muzzle as well as a leash on in the presence of Luba but now all I do is tap Luba when she goes into her attempts to provoke the GSD, and it seems to be enough for the GSD that I know what is going on and put a stop to it.

With hindsight being 20/20, there has never been a time when my GSD has provoked Luba.

That doesn't mean that trust didn't have to be rebuilt between me and my GSD - it did - not from her end but from my end as to how well I thought I knew my dog. Although we don't have children, we have many children who come here and the last thing I want is a dog I can't trust.

I trust my GSD with children and even with Luba to a certain extent, but I would never leave the two of them alone together for an extended amount of time. My GSD seems to bear no more animosity towards Luba (the reverse is not true as every now and then Luba seems determined to annoy the GSD with a kind of 'don't think I don't know what you did to me, you big bully" attitude. But they can coexist.

I can't say that I would have had my GSD euthanized if she had continued to exhibit aggression towards Luba since I do have the ability to keep them apart and safe.

I agree with Samara that dogs don't think in terms of the mismatch in size, even though, yes, big dogs can cause a lot more damage.

Luba was so close to death and her recovery so miraculous in the eyes of my vet, that every time I take Luba in for her shots, the entire office comes to a standstill while the vet regales his staff with the extent of her injuries, her two surgeries, and how he never thought she'd make it.

It was the first and only serious fight I have ever seen between dogs and it isn't an experience I would wish on anyone. As for the 3 strikes rule, I think rules depend on what happened, including who started it. One size rules can be unfair. I don't absolve little dogs for their actions.

And I do feel that I underestimated the power and the single-minded focus of a GSD.

Even though that was not the case in my case, I agree wholeheartedly with you that dog owners ought to keep their pets at home/under control and that the onus, fair or not, is more on the person who has the large dogs.

I'm so embarrassed.

subject2change · 02-13-2011, 06:03 AM

What a terrifying experience for you! Don't be embarassed. It just seems like it was a perfect storm of little things that went wrong and we can't anticipate that. It does show how things can go wrong and how it's not always so cut and dried about what was to blame.
As far as the one-bite law idea, I'm having a hard time with this. When a big dog attacks a little dog it can be hard to sort out who or what is at fault. I'd go along with muzzling it in public, I'd hate to see a little dog get hurt.