Dangerous Dogs in Victoria

[Geez Louise]

In Victoria it is now going to be illegal to keep what is known as a "Dangerous dog" unless it is registered with the local council.

Full Story Here:

As the story reads, it is only for unregistered Pit bull terriors, the charge against owners will be similar to that of dangerous driving or culpable driving

Originally Posted by Herald Sun

THE owners of dangerous dogs that attack people could face jail terms similar to culpable driving, which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years.
Agriculture Minister Peter Walsh said legislation to jail the owners of dangerous dogs who attack people were being finalised by the Attorney General and would be presented to Parliament in a fortnight

"We will come back to Parliament in two weeks with amendments to the crimes act, where owners of restricted type breed dogs and dangerous dogs will be held accountable for the actions of their dog," he said.

"So if that dog commits an offence where it injures, or in the worst case actually kills someone, they'll have a charge against them similar to charges of dangerous driving or culpable driving."

I know it is very sad when a dog attacks someone and causes serious injury or death, but is it the dogs fault or the owners?

My concern with this new act is that ANY dog breed will now come under scrutiny....dangerous or not. And what if someone does get bitten, and the wrong dog is selected and destroyed by council?

I am very much a dog lover and something does need to be done about the spate of attacks but is this a step too far or not far enough?

Please keep to the topic at hand as I am interested in people's opinions on this subject.

Cheers
Col

[Ford_The_Win]

I personally agree with the motion 100% and I am a dog lover. Certain breeds of dog are notoriously dangerous, a lot of little kids have had their throats ripped out by these things over the years, so it's about time they do something about it, I always keep well away from pit bulls and mastiffs when I see one. They were bred specifically to kill things. It doesn't help that knucklehead owners don't train their dogs properly or keep their yard secure and that's when the trouble really starts. They should be made to pay for their carelessness and stupidity.

[TZENU]

These dog breeds are killers, plain and simple. The owners get them for one reason and one reason only... Back in the day my old man used a pitbull to protect his shop after several break-ins - never had a break-in after that!

[iCat]

the legislation is aimed directly at the 4 breeds that are prohibited imports anyway.

in relation to the pitbulls, if you have one and you declare that fact to your council and register it as such - what's the problem there? if your dog (and your training methods) are trustworthy you have nothing to worry about.

[BFZF8]

Pretty sad how the media has brain washed people into believing this stuff.

The American Pit Bull Terrier was specifically bred to be non human aggressive. They were also bred to be dog aggressive. If any of you have ever seen footage of a "professional" dog fight or old paintings that depict dog fighting you'd see that there are two dogs and three humans in the pit. There was a handler for each dog and a referee. The dogs had to be frequently handled and separated during a match. Try breaking up a dog fight with any other breed and see how many stitches you'll need...

Any dog that showed any human aggression was removed from the old timers' breeding programmes on the spot.

Ever notice that it's always a "pit bull cross" that's involved in these attacks? Ever stop and think "hmm, maybe it's the other breed mixed in that the human aggression came from" Of course you don't. It's the evil pit bull as usual.

Lets use the tragic recent fatal attack in Victoria as an example. The dog in question was a mastiff/pit bull cross. Lets assume that there was in fact pit bull blood in the dog to begin with (most people wouldn't know a real pit bull if they fell over one). One breed was bred to guard property and be human aggressive (mastiff) and the other is a fighting dog bred to be non human aggressive. Which breed do you think should be to blame? I don't see any calls for mastiffs to be banned. Maybe because it doesn't sound as sexy as "pit bull".

Sorry for the rant and I'm well aware I'll be shouted down because "my mate's cousin's boyfriend's pit bull mauled my child" but these are the facts. If every single American Pit Bull Terrier was wiped from the face of the earth in one day there wouldn't be one less dog attack on a human per year.

Pit bulls sell papers end of story.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by BFZF8

Pretty sad how the media has brain washed people into believing this stuff.

The American Pit Bull Terrier was specifically bred to be non human aggressive. They were also bred to be dog aggressive.

Either way a dog thats going to go the kill for any other dog and the hell with anything that is between(like a young kid walking the family pet) has no place on our society.

[BFZF8]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Either way a dog thats going to go the kill for any other dog and the hell with anything that is between(like a young kid walking the family pet) has no place on our society.

There are things called leashes and if people used them there wouldn't be a problem. I run my dogs every night and almost every night I get some idiot's dog/dogs running up to mine and they get very upset when I yell at them to leash them up even though what they're doing is illegal.

An interesting thing with dog aggression in the APBT is that it doesn't transfer into human aggression like it does with other breeds. Refer to what I was saying about how dog fights are conducted. BTW I'm not a dog fighter nor do I believe it has a place in today's world.

[SEZ213]

I don't believe in punishing breeds, I believe in punishing deeds, and I'm a firm believer in people being responsible for the actions of their dogs. In saying that, if a stranger enters your home and threatens you, what do you think your animal would do, regardless of the breed? Your family is your dogs 'pack' and I would bet that your dog would defend you and your family. Should you be responsible then for your dog taking a chunk out of someone in your defence?

In the 'early' days pits were the 'family dog'...little rascals, shoe shops, everywhere in America they were part of the 'family'. Now it seems they have been cast out...everywhere.

I'm not for BSL at all, I don't think it has any positive outcome in anything - there was word some time back about putting SBT's into the BSL, for what reason I don't know. The pit has been deemed a 'dangerous' breed by the powers that be and as such there are restrictions. I don't agree with them; my neighbours shitzhu is more likely to have a chop at another dog (and has done) than any pit bull or staffy I've ever encountered, and I worked in a vet clinic for four years. The ones that proved to be vicious time and time again - the small (toy) breeds, pomeranians and the like. There were a few larger breeds that had to be muzzled, cattle dogs, a couple dalmations and one big boofy boxer (he just hated the vets - the owner would perpetuate this by dragging the poor bugger through the door, adding to his already sky high anxiety).

There was a report some years back published in the Herald Sun that named the top most dangerous breeds - the pitbull and staffy weren't at the top of the list...funnily enough, the golden retriever was...I had a retriever at the time and thought, 'you've got to be kidding me'...

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

A lot of dog attacks are not even close to being pitbulls.
The media (like speeding kills etc) has focused on one breed.

Dogs attack for a number of various reasons, poor training, lack of socialising and because they are scared. I also note A LOT OF HUMANS HAVE NO CLUE how to approach a dog they are not familiar with.

Some dogs also dont understand that children are little humans and think they are small animals or even nip them when playing.

The media and a lot of the public (moslty people who have never owned a dog) become very emotional when a dog attacks someone (understandable) however it needs to be said in what context did the dog bite someone, was it being annoyed? Is it a dog with puppies? Has the dog been abused by its owners?......Humans are the real issue.... by not training their dogs, incorrect training or not knowing how to approach.

No such thing as a dangerous dog breed..

In my perspective....most of what you've said, is, unfortunately, the truth... :(

I believe it's people who perpetuate the fighting portion of SBT's and pit's (usually those that have nothing better to do than watch perfectly good animals chew each other to death...)

It's also my personal belief that all the 'cross breeding' that floats about is responsible for the problems.

In saying all this, if my staffy's attacked someone, or another animal - I'd be the first one to put them down, providing it was an uprovoked attack...if someone is stupid enough to provoke a 'domesticated wild animal', staffy, pit bull or otherwise...they probably deserve it, and I'll fight tooth and nail to make sure they're held responsible for their behaviour as they would hold me responsible for mine. I'm not suggesting that all attacks are provoked, just so we're clear.

A responsible owner makes sure their animal is contained when they aren't home, a responsible owner makes sure their animal is properly trained and socialised with people, a responsible owner, is always aware that their animal is just domesticated...and not necessarily tame.

I am an advocate of animal rights, particularly when it comes to dogs. There is a case regarding a dog named 'Lennox' (UK) and his separation from his family simply for 'looking like a banned breed' - his brother, who looks the same, has not fallen under this status though...I have also followed quite closely the story of Patrick, a red pitbull who was starved on a balcony while his owner went out of town, to return, put him in a bag and throw him down a rubbish shoot, a total of 18 stories...and Tofu (another pit bull) who was used as 'bait' in dog fighting, he now has one eye and is recovering quite well, strangely enough, living with two other dogs...'humans' (and I use the term loosely) are responsible for these things, but very rarely do they get punished for their actions...

I've rambled, I'm sorry...I get a little passionate...

[sudszy]

Why does it take someone to get killed to get these laws changed, I think everyone knew pitbulls have no place in our society.

Laws dont go far enough, whatever damage the dog does, owner should be treated as though they committed the assault/killing themselves, that's what it comes down to when one takes on owning any dog.

Not interested in all those "responsible" pitbull owners, if they were responsible they wouldnt have one in the 1st place! I couldnt care less how many doting owners tell us they are loving family pets, if they belong anywhere on the planet its in a zoo in a well secured cage.

Ooh, and dogs that look like pitbulls will be targetted too, when they are some other breed , got knews for folk, if it looks like one it is one.

[graham_h]

Originally Posted by Ford_The_Win

I personally agree with the motion 100% and I am a dog lover. Certain breeds of dog are notoriously dangerous, a lot of little kids have had their throats ripped out by these things over the years, so it's about time they do something about it, I always keep well away from pit bulls and mastiffs when I see one. They were bred specifically to kill things. It doesn't help that knucklehead owners don't train their dogs properly or keep their yard secure and that's when the trouble really starts. They should be made to pay for their carelessness and stupidity.

I agree with your statement but not the highlighted section. I see dogs very much like little kids. They're aren't any bad one's its how they are brought up. Dumb breeders looking for quick money selling to even worse owners... you're right there.

Take Cesar Millan's pitbulls...... natural born killers ? hardly.



I do think 100% that all breeders need to be properly licenced and monitored to weed out the back yarders and owners educated properly

[Ford_The_Win]

Originally Posted by graham_h

I agree with your statement but not the highlighted section. I see dogs very much like little kids. They're aren't any bad one's its how they are brought up. Dumb breeders looking for quick money selling to even worse owners... you're right there.

Take Cesar Millan's pitbulls...... natural born killers ? hardly.



I do think 100% that all breeders need to be properly licenced and monitored to weed out the back yarders and owners educated properly

There is a LOT of research that tells us that human temperament and more specifically, aggression, has a genetic component. Yes, how you are raised has a massive impact on your personality and temperament, but there is a definite genetic component. Who says dogs are any different? Especially if they are like little kids as you say.

Pit bulls and staffys were bred specifically for their game hunting abilities and aggression. Their natural aggression threshold is lower than other breeds, which is why insurance companies & many jurisdictions around the world hate them. Do you really think an insurance company would want to be caught off guard? Those money grubbers are on the ball with everything.

[GK]

A touchy issue really.

I personally do not see the need for aggressive and more dangerous breeds of dog, except for military/police/security firm type reasons.

I also have pondered why people need to have such a type of dog as a pet. Is it because they feel a need to be strong or superior or tough? Perhaps, but that certainly couldn't be the case for all such owners.

One of my best mates has a couple of Dobermans which come from a very aggressive blood line, now banned in Germany. I've wondered why he would want such animals. He really enjoys their strength and the challenge of training and keeping them.

I can understand his point (even though I would never share it) but am very quick to add that he keeps his dogs under strict care and they are securely locked out the back of their house in good dog runs.

My mate is a responsible owner, and his dogs wouldn't have the opportunity to harm another animal or person.

It's the other dog owners I'm concerned about. But how do you effectively screen dog owners? Who decides the criteria for such ownership?

I guess in the end, it's far easier to ban the breed.

My 2 cents.

GK

[Ford_The_Win]

Originally Posted by GK

A touchy issue really.

I personally do not see the need for aggressive and more dangerous breeds of dog, except for military/police/security firm type reasons.

I also have pondered why people need to have such a type of dog as a pet. Is it because they feel a need to be strong or superior or tough? Perhaps, but that certainly couldn't be the case for all such owners.

You have a valid point there. Not all owners obviously, but some of them love the idea of having a really vicious, dominant animal because it compensates for something. Pitbulls and mastiffs are completely inappropriate family pets and only belong guarding prison walls.

[b2tf]

Originally Posted by Geez Louise

In Victoria it is now going to be illegal to keep what is known as a "Dangerous dog" unless it is registered with the local council.

I fail to see how another piece of paper will stop these dogs from being a problem.

I have a German Shepherd, he is quite an imposing dog if you don't know him but I fully trust him around family and kids etc. He is well trained and if I thought for a second he would act up he would be gone. He's also desexed so less hormones etc sending him mad. I chose a GSD for their intelligence (although I question that sometimes!) and loyalty, and he is definitely a protective sort of dog but as I said if you are a friend of ours you are a friend of his. People with Pitbulls etc do make me wonder because they seem like such problem dogs that the downsides far outweigh the good.

Either way regardless of breed I am of the view that any dog that injures or kills a human should be put down on the spot. No questions asked.

[gcg2503]

Put simply, Pitbulls have no place in an intelligent and educated society

How many people must be attacked before this breed is banned? I wont pass judgement on the owners of these fine, fun loving, caring, family oriented animals.....

There are two that live close to me and i will be on the phone as soon as this law is passed to the council/police/anyone who will listen......so fast i may even tear my hamstring from the bone running to the phone

This is a topic which really gets my goat up!

Sorry for the rant Coll

[flappist]

It is amazing how closely the anti pitbull and anti pitbull owner descriptions mirror those of the anti performance car and anti performance car owner brigade.

Keep it civil and on topic please.

[BFZF8]

Originally Posted by flappist

It is amazing how closely the anti pitbull and anti pitbull owner descriptions mirror those of the anti performance car and anti performance car owner brigade.

Exactly. I'm always amazed that the people who the least about a given topic are generally the loudest.

[Geez Louise]

I remember in WA a few years back now, there was a spate of German Shephard attacks and they were going to list that breed on the list of dangerous dogs.

More recently, after an attack in NSW, Husky's were going to be listed.

Is it mainly big dogs that should be added to the list or is it because breed's have been mixed and the blood line has been crossed??

I am not meaning to start any arguements on this, and it is a touchy subject...but who decides which breeds are added to the list? Is it one attack, two attacks?? Who decides?

[Franco Cozzo]

I don't really care, because:

A) I don't own a dog
B) I hate dogs

Therefore it doesn't effect me.

I leave you with this copy and pasted quote from wikipedia which I quickly edited in an half assed effort (which contradicts my post anyways) to make myself seem wise:

First they came for the gun community, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't involved in the community.

Then they came for the P platers, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a P plater.

Then they came for the performance car community, and I didn't speak out because I didn't own a performance car.

Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Pretty much if everyone stood up for each other, regardless if the issue effects you or not, you wouldn't end up in these situations of restrictions of freedoms.

Sure, we don't need guns in our community, we don't need dangerous dogs, I guess we don't need high performance cars either, right? Its only a matter of time.

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Sure, we don't need guns in our community, we don't need dangerous dogs, I guess we don't need high performance cars either, right? Its only a matter of time.

the difference is that the gun and high performance car need a human using them to do damage. the dangerous dog has a mind of it's own

[XARATE]

Laws about dangerous dogs are alway have been and always will be a bit of a hit and miss.
I believe banning certain breeds is wrong, its a bit like racism where all are tarred with the same brush due to the actions of a few.
All dogs are capable of doing damage to a human or another animal. Its part of their instict, yes proper training can ruduce the chance of it but it will never remove all risk. Its basic animal instinct to hunt, defend or protect themselfs.

Personally i have seen more aggressive and dangerous jack russells than any other breed. I had one attack my two 9month old staffys at a dog park. Being young playfull jumpy dogs at the time i had them on leads (there were usually kids at the park i didnt want the dogs jumping on them to play)
Now when the unsecured jack russell attacked my staffys, mine secured and under my controll. For nearly 20 seconds (a long time in a fight) not once did my two bark or bite, that was untill the jack russell made a large cut on the neck of my larger pup . Basic natural instinct kicked in with both my dogs and in a few seconds the jack russell was pretty injured and was able to be removed from the fight. The whole time the owner was calling his dog and not actually taking any actions to restrain or remove it.
I recieved a court summons and vet bill days later
Because "my dogs attacked theirs"
If i lived in the city the media would of made me look like the worst person ever and i would no longer have my dogs. Luckily a local off duty police officer seen the whole the thing and cleared me of any wrong doing.

Its storys like mine that politicians and law makers dont hear, they only focus on the large "scary dogs" and as a result we have a few breed targeted for the wrong reason

If laws were made to punish owners of ALL breeds for the wrong doings of their animals it would be alot fairer. It would put pressure on people to prevent their animals getting into bad and dangerous situations, it would pressure people to train, restrain and fence their animals properly. Which would be the outcome that is needed

Right now the majority of dog owners are suffering from the irrisponsible actions of a few dog owners.

[BFZF8]

Originally Posted by XARATE

Laws about dangerous dogs are alway have been and always will be a bit of a hit and miss.
I believe banning certain breeds is wrong, its a bit like racism where all are tarred with the same brush due to the actions of a few.
All dogs are capable of doing damage to a human or another animal. Its part of their instict, yes proper training can ruduce the chance of it but it will never remove all risk. Its basic animal instinct to hunt, defend or protect themselfs.

Personally i have seen more aggressive and dangerous jack russells than any other breed. I had one attack my two 9month old staffys at a dog park. Being young playfull jumpy dogs at the time i had them on leads (there were usually kids at the park i didnt want the dogs jumping on them to play)
Now when the unsecured jack russell attacked my staffys, mine secured and under my controll. For nearly 20 seconds (a long time in a fight) not once did my two bark or bite, that was untill the jack russell made a large cut on the neck of my larger pup . Basic natural instinct kicked in with both my dogs and in a few seconds the jack russell was pretty injured and was able to be removed from the fight. The whole time the owner was calling his dog and not actually taking any actions to restrain or remove it.
I recieved a court summons and vet bill days later
Because "my dogs attacked theirs"
If i lived in the city the media would of made me look like the worst person ever and i would no longer have my dogs. Luckily a local off duty police officer seen the whole the thing and cleared me of any wrong doing.

Its storys like mine that politicians and law makers dont hear, they only focus on the large "scary dogs" and as a result we have a few breed targeted for the wrong reason

If laws were made to punish owners of ALL breeds for the wrong doings of their animals it would be alot fairer. It would put pressure on people to prevent their animals getting into bad and dangerous situations, it would pressure people to train, restrain and fence their animals properly. Which would be the outcome that is needed

Right now the majority of dog owners are suffering from the irrisponsible actions of a few dog owners.

Mate I hear what you're saying but staffords have no business being at a dog park either.You have to remember that your dogs might not start a fight but they will end it. Dog parks are a stupid idea anyway and I wouldn't take any breed of dog to one from a health point of view alone.

Fun fact about staffords: They're Australia's second most poplular dog and are genetically no different to an APBT. What does that tell you?

[Jim Goose]

A lot of dog attacks are not even close to being pitbulls.
The media (like speeding kills etc) has focused on one breed.

Dogs attack for a number of various reasons, poor training, lack of socialising and because they are scared. I also note A LOT OF HUMANS HAVE NO CLUE how to approach a dog they are not familiar with.

Some dogs also dont understand that children are little humans and think they are small animals or even nip them when playing.

The media and a lot of the public (moslty people who have never owned a dog) become very emotional when a dog attacks someone (understandable) however it needs to be said in what context did the dog bite someone, was it being annoyed? Is it a dog with puppies? Has the dog been abused by its owners?

I have had friends who had pure bred rotweillers... both dogs were the biggest babies I had seen. Yet they too are given a bad reputation.

Also have a new neighbour who has a massive boxer cross who seemed very protective of his surroundings and would charge the fence whenever i tried to get near him. He now eats out of my hand after 3 weeks.

Humans are the real issue.... by not training their dogs, incorrect training or not knowing how to approach.

No such thing as a dangerous dog breed..

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

I also note A LOT OF HUMANS HAVE NO CLUE how to approach a dog they are not familiar with.

..

Are you suggesting that dog attacks are caused by strangers going up to dogs and unknowingly annoying/provoking attacks?

Most dog attacks Ive seen, and Ive seen a few, are unwanted advances from dogs towards humans that wanted nothing to do with the dog, the problem is clearly caused by the owners of these dogs not having them under control(on a leash)

[kinksta]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Are you suggesting that dog attacks are caused by strangers going up to dogs and unknowingly annoying/provoking attacks?

Most dog attacks Ive seen, and Ive seen a few, are unwanted advances from dogs towards humans that wanted nothing to do with the dog, the problem is clearly caused by the owners of these dogs not having them under control(on a leash)

But in saying that, I have seen children climb all over peoples dogs, and the parents lets them, even if it is a strangers dog. When I walk our big GSD, the amount of people who want/need to pat it. Why do people have to pat it? You don't know the dog yet alot walk up like it is a lost child, they come down at the dog, arms out, smiling (baring teeth in dog language) and making silly voices, and to a nervous dog this can/will get a reaction.

But you are right in saying that the owner then needs to work on the dog (control), the dog is only a reflection of the owner. People must think I'm a w***er when I say please don't pat her, but I don't want to run the risk, I don't know these people, I wouldn't let them drive my G6ET.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by kinksta

But in saying that, I have seen children climb all over peoples dogs, and the parents lets them, even if it is a strangers dog. When I walk our big GSD, the amount of people who want/need to pat it. Why do people have to pat it? You don't know the dog yet alot walk up like it is a lost child, they come down at the dog, arms out, smiling (baring teeth in dog language) and making silly voices, and to a nervous dog this can/will get a reaction.
.

I appreciate your point, but the responsibility is still the owner of the dog.

Owners dont get a get out of jail free card just because their dog got nervous and decided to take a piece out of a kid that got too close to their dog, pulled a face at it, whatever, in a PUBLIC area. A responsible owner should have such a dog( that gets nervous and is capable of pulling a human to shreds) muzzled when in PUBLIC, even if on a lead.

[Geez Louise]

Originally Posted by sudszy

I appreciate your point, but the responsibility is still the owner of the dog.

Owners dont get a get out of jail free card just because their dog got nervous and decided to take a piece out of a kid that got too close to their dog, pulled a face at it, whatever, in a PUBLIC area. A responsible owner should have such a dog( that gets nervous and is capable of pulling a human to shreds) muzzled when in PUBLIC, even if on a lead.

I have to agree with you on that point sudszy. Owners need to take responsibility for their dogs.

When our dogs were walked, we muzzled them...It is no drama to put one on a dog. They can still breathe and lick etc with one on, they just can't bite anything!

[kinksta]

Originally Posted by sudszy

I appreciate your point, but the responsibility is still the owner of the dog.

Owners dont get a get out of jail free card just because their dog got nervous and decided to take a piece out of a kid that got too close to their dog, pulled a face at it, whatever, in a PUBLIC area. A responsible owner should have such a dog( that gets nervous and is capable of pulling a human to shreds) muzzled when in PUBLIC, even if on a lead.

Sorry you misunderstood what I meant or I didn't explain it properly. In my opinion it is never the dog, it is the owners first and the other person second.

If you have a nervous dog (which plenty do) you gotta take extra precautions or work the nervousness out. I never blame the dog.

[atec77]

Originally Posted by sudszy

I appreciate your point, but the responsibility is still the owner of the dog.

Owners dont get a get out of jail free card just because their dog got nervous and decided to take a piece out of a kid that got too close to their dog, pulled a face at it, whatever, in a PUBLIC area. A responsible owner should have such a dog( that gets nervous and is capable of pulling a human to shreds) muzzled when in PUBLIC, even if on a lead.

In 40 years of dog ownership none of mine have biten anything unless instruced to do so , my rotties are papered grand champions , worth thousand of dollars with soft complient temprement and fully obedience trained being the result of a dozen generations of breeding ,.Very different from the image so many media outlets and politcally expedient persons promote in selfserving displays .There are a few bad owners and too many people fail to realise you take a risk and some times get hurt , patting / touching a strange animal without permission often will be a problem , very few dog problems happen without a tiggering cause and mixed breeds tend to be in the high incident area as frankly I see them running the streets all to often . The claims of "name a brand" what ever is being seen to be politically expedient when in truth a result is a second consideration and is mostly about self serving image . Personally I feel all owners and dogs should be involved and required to pass an obedience course and when in public required to use a suitable lead at all times , that would stop some incidences but the public needs to be very much more animal aware and be more hands off because the "puppy" is a stranger .

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Are you suggesting that dog attacks are caused by strangers going up to dogs and unknowingly annoying/provoking attacks?

Most dog attacks Ive seen, and Ive seen a few, are unwanted advances from dogs towards humans that wanted nothing to do with the dog, the problem is clearly caused by the owners of these dogs not having them under control(on a leash)

A few yrs ago there was a case of a child being mauled by a pitbull cross female.... IN THE DOGS OWN YARD.

The kid was sitting on the fence and throwing rocks at the dog, who had pups.
The dog then pulled the kid by the leg and made him fall off into the yard when she attacked him. The media then reported the puppies (one month old) then attacked the boy as well (I mean seriously how stupid can the reporter be?).

ERGON energy reported that its meter readers were getting bitten more and more (a few weeks ago). Well I watched the meter reader enter the premises and he was busy talking to his wife/partner and just simply opened the gate and walked in despite my dog barking at him. And yes I have a sign at the gate warning people I have a dog in the yard.

I have also seen children go up to dogs which are tied up outside the shop here and walk up behind it and scare it. A great way to get bitten. Or they pull the dogs tail etc.... thinking its funny.

So yes... HUMANS again are the main factors when it comes to doing stupid things.

My last previous dog also had a tumour and would fit, it would then be very aggressive to my other dog as it didnt recognise it. It would take 20 to 30mins of sitting with her until she settled down.

How many times do you see bogans in FWDs with some poorly socialised dog in a small cage left out in the sun all day having its brain fried?
Gee its the dogs fault, we should kill it because it has a brain and free will and should be able to tell its owner im dieing out here... oh wait.. no it cant.