[natty]

[quote=nocommonsense][quote=natty]gentlemen, think big picture. empathy for a canine bite victim is answer to nothing.

Generalized example, as you asked of me:
a 5 1/2′ tall man, 165lbs, trained in military tactical security, could be forced in to room with an armed military soldier, 6’5″, 220lbs. The 5 1/2′ tall man is clearly undersized and outmatched, yet, could kill with bare hands and proper training.

to insist a poodle is no more dangerous than the next dog, simply because of comparative jaw width, is absurd.

i generally shy away from these types of discussion because people in general are so impassioned by years of ingrained garbage. an infant mauled to death by an animal is no more desirable, than a baby born to a misfit, uneducated child.

appreciate the responses, but they both strike me as people who have little to no experience with dogs.[/quote]

“i generally shy away from these types of discussion because people in general are so impassioned by years of ingrained garbage.”

I wonder who you were referring to other than yourself. Are you out of your mind?? Is a pitbull NOT more dangerous than a poodle?[/quote]

To respond:
No & No.

Point being, a large number person have at one time in life touched or have seen a dog, this creates an avenue for a higher percentage of people to ‘feel’ qualified to comment on any given canine situation, with or with any credible knowledge or experience on the subject.

Take for instance the oil rig/pipe incident with BP. newsworthy yes, and we all can have a general opinion, but the percentage of people with underwater engineering or commercial diving experience are less than those with, so if posted, there would be less criticism and/or specific suggestion of how to fix.

that said, resorting to questioning my affinity for animals, humans, or the type of dog i may or may not own, are all irrelevant.

[natty]

[quote=nocommonsense][quote=natty]gentlemen, think big picture. empathy for a canine bite victim is answer to nothing.

Generalized example, as you asked of me:
a 5 1/2′ tall man, 165lbs, trained in military tactical security, could be forced in to room with an armed military soldier, 6’5″, 220lbs. The 5 1/2′ tall man is clearly undersized and outmatched, yet, could kill with bare hands and proper training.

to insist a poodle is no more dangerous than the next dog, simply because of comparative jaw width, is absurd.

i generally shy away from these types of discussion because people in general are so impassioned by years of ingrained garbage. an infant mauled to death by an animal is no more desirable, than a baby born to a misfit, uneducated child.

appreciate the responses, but they both strike me as people who have little to no experience with dogs.[/quote]

“i generally shy away from these types of discussion because people in general are so impassioned by years of ingrained garbage.”

I wonder who you were referring to other than yourself. Are you out of your mind?? Is a pitbull NOT more dangerous than a poodle?[/quote]

To respond:
No & No.

Point being, a large number person have at one time in life touched or have seen a dog, this creates an avenue for a higher percentage of people to ‘feel’ qualified to comment on any given canine situation, with or with any credible knowledge or experience on the subject.

Take for instance the oil rig/pipe incident with BP. newsworthy yes, and we all can have a general opinion, but the percentage of people with underwater engineering or commercial diving experience are less than those with, so if posted, there would be less criticism and/or specific suggestion of how to fix.

that said, resorting to questioning my affinity for animals, humans, or the type of dog i may or may not own, are all irrelevant.

[natty]

[quote=nocommonsense][quote=natty]gentlemen, think big picture. empathy for a canine bite victim is answer to nothing.

Generalized example, as you asked of me:
a 5 1/2′ tall man, 165lbs, trained in military tactical security, could be forced in to room with an armed military soldier, 6’5″, 220lbs. The 5 1/2′ tall man is clearly undersized and outmatched, yet, could kill with bare hands and proper training.

to insist a poodle is no more dangerous than the next dog, simply because of comparative jaw width, is absurd.

i generally shy away from these types of discussion because people in general are so impassioned by years of ingrained garbage. an infant mauled to death by an animal is no more desirable, than a baby born to a misfit, uneducated child.

appreciate the responses, but they both strike me as people who have little to no experience with dogs.[/quote]

“i generally shy away from these types of discussion because people in general are so impassioned by years of ingrained garbage.”

I wonder who you were referring to other than yourself. Are you out of your mind?? Is a pitbull NOT more dangerous than a poodle?[/quote]

To respond:
No & No.

Point being, a large number person have at one time in life touched or have seen a dog, this creates an avenue for a higher percentage of people to ‘feel’ qualified to comment on any given canine situation, with or with any credible knowledge or experience on the subject.

Take for instance the oil rig/pipe incident with BP. newsworthy yes, and we all can have a general opinion, but the percentage of people with underwater engineering or commercial diving experience are less than those with, so if posted, there would be less criticism and/or specific suggestion of how to fix.

that said, resorting to questioning my affinity for animals, humans, or the type of dog i may or may not own, are all irrelevant.

[natty]

[quote=nocommonsense][quote=natty]gentlemen, think big picture. empathy for a canine bite victim is answer to nothing.

Generalized example, as you asked of me:
a 5 1/2′ tall man, 165lbs, trained in military tactical security, could be forced in to room with an armed military soldier, 6’5″, 220lbs. The 5 1/2′ tall man is clearly undersized and outmatched, yet, could kill with bare hands and proper training.

to insist a poodle is no more dangerous than the next dog, simply because of comparative jaw width, is absurd.

i generally shy away from these types of discussion because people in general are so impassioned by years of ingrained garbage. an infant mauled to death by an animal is no more desirable, than a baby born to a misfit, uneducated child.

appreciate the responses, but they both strike me as people who have little to no experience with dogs.[/quote]

“i generally shy away from these types of discussion because people in general are so impassioned by years of ingrained garbage.”

I wonder who you were referring to other than yourself. Are you out of your mind?? Is a pitbull NOT more dangerous than a poodle?[/quote]

To respond:
No & No.

Point being, a large number person have at one time in life touched or have seen a dog, this creates an avenue for a higher percentage of people to ‘feel’ qualified to comment on any given canine situation, with or with any credible knowledge or experience on the subject.

Take for instance the oil rig/pipe incident with BP. newsworthy yes, and we all can have a general opinion, but the percentage of people with underwater engineering or commercial diving experience are less than those with, so if posted, there would be less criticism and/or specific suggestion of how to fix.

that said, resorting to questioning my affinity for animals, humans, or the type of dog i may or may not own, are all irrelevant.

[natty]

[quote=nocommonsense][quote=natty]gentlemen, think big picture. empathy for a canine bite victim is answer to nothing.

Generalized example, as you asked of me:
a 5 1/2′ tall man, 165lbs, trained in military tactical security, could be forced in to room with an armed military soldier, 6’5″, 220lbs. The 5 1/2′ tall man is clearly undersized and outmatched, yet, could kill with bare hands and proper training.

to insist a poodle is no more dangerous than the next dog, simply because of comparative jaw width, is absurd.

i generally shy away from these types of discussion because people in general are so impassioned by years of ingrained garbage. an infant mauled to death by an animal is no more desirable, than a baby born to a misfit, uneducated child.

appreciate the responses, but they both strike me as people who have little to no experience with dogs.[/quote]

“i generally shy away from these types of discussion because people in general are so impassioned by years of ingrained garbage.”

I wonder who you were referring to other than yourself. Are you out of your mind?? Is a pitbull NOT more dangerous than a poodle?[/quote]

To respond:
No & No.

Point being, a large number person have at one time in life touched or have seen a dog, this creates an avenue for a higher percentage of people to ‘feel’ qualified to comment on any given canine situation, with or with any credible knowledge or experience on the subject.

Take for instance the oil rig/pipe incident with BP. newsworthy yes, and we all can have a general opinion, but the percentage of people with underwater engineering or commercial diving experience are less than those with, so if posted, there would be less criticism and/or specific suggestion of how to fix.

that said, resorting to questioning my affinity for animals, humans, or the type of dog i may or may not own, are all irrelevant.

[natty]

[quote=SK in CV]

But here’s a few things that I do know about dogs and pit bulls more specifically.

Dog behavior is controlled both by what they’ve learned and what they were born with. Instincts are strong in some breeds, less in others. Pointers point. Retrievers retrieve. My dog (an Akita, which, by the way is probably a breed you do not want) will not retrieve. He will chase a ball and sniff it. And never bring it back. Dachshunds will dig (and probably be the alpha dog in any multi-dog household). Aussies will herd. In some breeds those instincts are quite noticeable in their behavior, in others not so much.

At up to 50 generations a century, undesirable instincts can be bred out pretty quickly with conscientious breeding. They can also be bred in. Most, though not all, pit bill breeders have been conscientious. Specially when compared to, for example, beagle breeders.

The breeding history of pit bulls is diverse. It is not an AKC recognized breed. It’s history includes bull dogs, bull terriers, staffordshire terriers, and probably a handful of others. The Am Staff is the closest there is to a pure bred. And many, if not most, Am Staff owners would never call their dogs pit bulls.

When it comes to most objectionable behavior, like biting, temperment is more important than obedience training. Temperment is individual to each dog, but breeding does have a strong influence. Dogs bite for two reasons. Fear and agression. Pit bulls breed (and i use that term loosely), based on their source stock, is one of no fear. They are almost always fearless dogs. Agression, however is not so common. (Not never. But anecdotal evidence does not prove much of anything about rate of occurence. Nobody publishes or tells stories of dogs NOT biting.)

The only published comprehensive breed temperment testing that’s been done in this country is done by the American Temperment Test Society. As of the most recent test data available, pit bulls test at above average, with over 85% pass rate compared to around 82% based on the testing of almost 30,000 dogs. (As compared with Shetland Sheepdogs which have a pass rate below 70%) They test slightly better (though probably insignificantly so) than American Staffordshire Terriers.[/quote]

flaw(s) of testing criteria:
18 + months old a dog can be taught to handle the stimuli faced within the test. There are no restrictions on group, hence I pay and bring dog, test is performed. Dog can range from mixed to an intentionally bred dog. Therefore its safe to assume, as you point out, a ‘pit bull’ is any dog labeled such by owner and ‘maybe’ agreed to by test provider. The largest kennel clubs, UKC & AKC, both operate toeing–very loosely–the line of respectability. A dog registered with, could provide no more an insight into genetic past, as a dog picked up from an area shelter. Thus the aforementioned temperament test does not prove much, because we know a ‘temperament’ test is not a full pathway of genetic makeup. What it does provide, for those who enter is, a good indication of behaviors an owner of a particular dog must either work to change or understand and avoid such situations.

I dont discredit the organization completely, but largely anti pit bull groups will not back down from the stance that this group is funded by breeders and the AKC, among others. This point is difficult to argue.

Your experience and insight are welcomed though.
If you would, please post information regarding “…breeding of up to 50 generations a century…”
Would enjoy a more thorough read.

[natty]

[quote=SK in CV]

But here’s a few things that I do know about dogs and pit bulls more specifically.

Dog behavior is controlled both by what they’ve learned and what they were born with. Instincts are strong in some breeds, less in others. Pointers point. Retrievers retrieve. My dog (an Akita, which, by the way is probably a breed you do not want) will not retrieve. He will chase a ball and sniff it. And never bring it back. Dachshunds will dig (and probably be the alpha dog in any multi-dog household). Aussies will herd. In some breeds those instincts are quite noticeable in their behavior, in others not so much.

At up to 50 generations a century, undesirable instincts can be bred out pretty quickly with conscientious breeding. They can also be bred in. Most, though not all, pit bill breeders have been conscientious. Specially when compared to, for example, beagle breeders.

The breeding history of pit bulls is diverse. It is not an AKC recognized breed. It’s history includes bull dogs, bull terriers, staffordshire terriers, and probably a handful of others. The Am Staff is the closest there is to a pure bred. And many, if not most, Am Staff owners would never call their dogs pit bulls.

When it comes to most objectionable behavior, like biting, temperment is more important than obedience training. Temperment is individual to each dog, but breeding does have a strong influence. Dogs bite for two reasons. Fear and agression. Pit bulls breed (and i use that term loosely), based on their source stock, is one of no fear. They are almost always fearless dogs. Agression, however is not so common. (Not never. But anecdotal evidence does not prove much of anything about rate of occurence. Nobody publishes or tells stories of dogs NOT biting.)

The only published comprehensive breed temperment testing that’s been done in this country is done by the American Temperment Test Society. As of the most recent test data available, pit bulls test at above average, with over 85% pass rate compared to around 82% based on the testing of almost 30,000 dogs. (As compared with Shetland Sheepdogs which have a pass rate below 70%) They test slightly better (though probably insignificantly so) than American Staffordshire Terriers.[/quote]

flaw(s) of testing criteria:
18 + months old a dog can be taught to handle the stimuli faced within the test. There are no restrictions on group, hence I pay and bring dog, test is performed. Dog can range from mixed to an intentionally bred dog. Therefore its safe to assume, as you point out, a ‘pit bull’ is any dog labeled such by owner and ‘maybe’ agreed to by test provider. The largest kennel clubs, UKC & AKC, both operate toeing–very loosely–the line of respectability. A dog registered with, could provide no more an insight into genetic past, as a dog picked up from an area shelter. Thus the aforementioned temperament test does not prove much, because we know a ‘temperament’ test is not a full pathway of genetic makeup. What it does provide, for those who enter is, a good indication of behaviors an owner of a particular dog must either work to change or understand and avoid such situations.

I dont discredit the organization completely, but largely anti pit bull groups will not back down from the stance that this group is funded by breeders and the AKC, among others. This point is difficult to argue.

Your experience and insight are welcomed though.
If you would, please post information regarding “…breeding of up to 50 generations a century…”
Would enjoy a more thorough read.

[natty]

[quote=SK in CV]

But here’s a few things that I do know about dogs and pit bulls more specifically.

Dog behavior is controlled both by what they’ve learned and what they were born with. Instincts are strong in some breeds, less in others. Pointers point. Retrievers retrieve. My dog (an Akita, which, by the way is probably a breed you do not want) will not retrieve. He will chase a ball and sniff it. And never bring it back. Dachshunds will dig (and probably be the alpha dog in any multi-dog household). Aussies will herd. In some breeds those instincts are quite noticeable in their behavior, in others not so much.

At up to 50 generations a century, undesirable instincts can be bred out pretty quickly with conscientious breeding. They can also be bred in. Most, though not all, pit bill breeders have been conscientious. Specially when compared to, for example, beagle breeders.

The breeding history of pit bulls is diverse. It is not an AKC recognized breed. It’s history includes bull dogs, bull terriers, staffordshire terriers, and probably a handful of others. The Am Staff is the closest there is to a pure bred. And many, if not most, Am Staff owners would never call their dogs pit bulls.

When it comes to most objectionable behavior, like biting, temperment is more important than obedience training. Temperment is individual to each dog, but breeding does have a strong influence. Dogs bite for two reasons. Fear and agression. Pit bulls breed (and i use that term loosely), based on their source stock, is one of no fear. They are almost always fearless dogs. Agression, however is not so common. (Not never. But anecdotal evidence does not prove much of anything about rate of occurence. Nobody publishes or tells stories of dogs NOT biting.)

The only published comprehensive breed temperment testing that’s been done in this country is done by the American Temperment Test Society. As of the most recent test data available, pit bulls test at above average, with over 85% pass rate compared to around 82% based on the testing of almost 30,000 dogs. (As compared with Shetland Sheepdogs which have a pass rate below 70%) They test slightly better (though probably insignificantly so) than American Staffordshire Terriers.[/quote]

flaw(s) of testing criteria:
18 + months old a dog can be taught to handle the stimuli faced within the test. There are no restrictions on group, hence I pay and bring dog, test is performed. Dog can range from mixed to an intentionally bred dog. Therefore its safe to assume, as you point out, a ‘pit bull’ is any dog labeled such by owner and ‘maybe’ agreed to by test provider. The largest kennel clubs, UKC & AKC, both operate toeing–very loosely–the line of respectability. A dog registered with, could provide no more an insight into genetic past, as a dog picked up from an area shelter. Thus the aforementioned temperament test does not prove much, because we know a ‘temperament’ test is not a full pathway of genetic makeup. What it does provide, for those who enter is, a good indication of behaviors an owner of a particular dog must either work to change or understand and avoid such situations.

I dont discredit the organization completely, but largely anti pit bull groups will not back down from the stance that this group is funded by breeders and the AKC, among others. This point is difficult to argue.

Your experience and insight are welcomed though.
If you would, please post information regarding “…breeding of up to 50 generations a century…”
Would enjoy a more thorough read.

[natty]

[quote=SK in CV]

But here’s a few things that I do know about dogs and pit bulls more specifically.

Dog behavior is controlled both by what they’ve learned and what they were born with. Instincts are strong in some breeds, less in others. Pointers point. Retrievers retrieve. My dog (an Akita, which, by the way is probably a breed you do not want) will not retrieve. He will chase a ball and sniff it. And never bring it back. Dachshunds will dig (and probably be the alpha dog in any multi-dog household). Aussies will herd. In some breeds those instincts are quite noticeable in their behavior, in others not so much.

At up to 50 generations a century, undesirable instincts can be bred out pretty quickly with conscientious breeding. They can also be bred in. Most, though not all, pit bill breeders have been conscientious. Specially when compared to, for example, beagle breeders.

The breeding history of pit bulls is diverse. It is not an AKC recognized breed. It’s history includes bull dogs, bull terriers, staffordshire terriers, and probably a handful of others. The Am Staff is the closest there is to a pure bred. And many, if not most, Am Staff owners would never call their dogs pit bulls.

When it comes to most objectionable behavior, like biting, temperment is more important than obedience training. Temperment is individual to each dog, but breeding does have a strong influence. Dogs bite for two reasons. Fear and agression. Pit bulls breed (and i use that term loosely), based on their source stock, is one of no fear. They are almost always fearless dogs. Agression, however is not so common. (Not never. But anecdotal evidence does not prove much of anything about rate of occurence. Nobody publishes or tells stories of dogs NOT biting.)

The only published comprehensive breed temperment testing that’s been done in this country is done by the American Temperment Test Society. As of the most recent test data available, pit bulls test at above average, with over 85% pass rate compared to around 82% based on the testing of almost 30,000 dogs. (As compared with Shetland Sheepdogs which have a pass rate below 70%) They test slightly better (though probably insignificantly so) than American Staffordshire Terriers.[/quote]

flaw(s) of testing criteria:
18 + months old a dog can be taught to handle the stimuli faced within the test. There are no restrictions on group, hence I pay and bring dog, test is performed. Dog can range from mixed to an intentionally bred dog. Therefore its safe to assume, as you point out, a ‘pit bull’ is any dog labeled such by owner and ‘maybe’ agreed to by test provider. The largest kennel clubs, UKC & AKC, both operate toeing–very loosely–the line of respectability. A dog registered with, could provide no more an insight into genetic past, as a dog picked up from an area shelter. Thus the aforementioned temperament test does not prove much, because we know a ‘temperament’ test is not a full pathway of genetic makeup. What it does provide, for those who enter is, a good indication of behaviors an owner of a particular dog must either work to change or understand and avoid such situations.

I dont discredit the organization completely, but largely anti pit bull groups will not back down from the stance that this group is funded by breeders and the AKC, among others. This point is difficult to argue.

Your experience and insight are welcomed though.
If you would, please post information regarding “…breeding of up to 50 generations a century…”
Would enjoy a more thorough read.

[natty]

[quote=SK in CV]

But here’s a few things that I do know about dogs and pit bulls more specifically.

Dog behavior is controlled both by what they’ve learned and what they were born with. Instincts are strong in some breeds, less in others. Pointers point. Retrievers retrieve. My dog (an Akita, which, by the way is probably a breed you do not want) will not retrieve. He will chase a ball and sniff it. And never bring it back. Dachshunds will dig (and probably be the alpha dog in any multi-dog household). Aussies will herd. In some breeds those instincts are quite noticeable in their behavior, in others not so much.

At up to 50 generations a century, undesirable instincts can be bred out pretty quickly with conscientious breeding. They can also be bred in. Most, though not all, pit bill breeders have been conscientious. Specially when compared to, for example, beagle breeders.

The breeding history of pit bulls is diverse. It is not an AKC recognized breed. It’s history includes bull dogs, bull terriers, staffordshire terriers, and probably a handful of others. The Am Staff is the closest there is to a pure bred. And many, if not most, Am Staff owners would never call their dogs pit bulls.

When it comes to most objectionable behavior, like biting, temperment is more important than obedience training. Temperment is individual to each dog, but breeding does have a strong influence. Dogs bite for two reasons. Fear and agression. Pit bulls breed (and i use that term loosely), based on their source stock, is one of no fear. They are almost always fearless dogs. Agression, however is not so common. (Not never. But anecdotal evidence does not prove much of anything about rate of occurence. Nobody publishes or tells stories of dogs NOT biting.)

The only published comprehensive breed temperment testing that’s been done in this country is done by the American Temperment Test Society. As of the most recent test data available, pit bulls test at above average, with over 85% pass rate compared to around 82% based on the testing of almost 30,000 dogs. (As compared with Shetland Sheepdogs which have a pass rate below 70%) They test slightly better (though probably insignificantly so) than American Staffordshire Terriers.[/quote]

flaw(s) of testing criteria:
18 + months old a dog can be taught to handle the stimuli faced within the test. There are no restrictions on group, hence I pay and bring dog, test is performed. Dog can range from mixed to an intentionally bred dog. Therefore its safe to assume, as you point out, a ‘pit bull’ is any dog labeled such by owner and ‘maybe’ agreed to by test provider. The largest kennel clubs, UKC & AKC, both operate toeing–very loosely–the line of respectability. A dog registered with, could provide no more an insight into genetic past, as a dog picked up from an area shelter. Thus the aforementioned temperament test does not prove much, because we know a ‘temperament’ test is not a full pathway of genetic makeup. What it does provide, for those who enter is, a good indication of behaviors an owner of a particular dog must either work to change or understand and avoid such situations.

I dont discredit the organization completely, but largely anti pit bull groups will not back down from the stance that this group is funded by breeders and the AKC, among others. This point is difficult to argue.

Your experience and insight are welcomed though.
If you would, please post information regarding “…breeding of up to 50 generations a century…”
Would enjoy a more thorough read.

[natty]

gentlemen, think big picture. empathy for a canine bite victim is answer to nothing.

Generalized example, as you asked of me:
a 5 1/2′ tall man, 165lbs, trained in military tactical security, could be forced in to room with an armed military soldier, 6’5″, 220lbs. The 5 1/2′ tall man is clearly undersized and outmatched, yet, could kill with bare hands and proper training.

to insist a poodle is no more dangerous than the next dog, simply because of comparative jaw width, is absurd.

i generally shy away from these types of discussion because people in general are so impassioned by years of ingrained garbage. an infant mauled to death by an animal is no more desirable, than a baby born to a misfit, uneducated child.

appreciate the responses, but they both strike me as people who have little to no experience with dogs.

[natty]

gentlemen, think big picture. empathy for a canine bite victim is answer to nothing.

Generalized example, as you asked of me:
a 5 1/2′ tall man, 165lbs, trained in military tactical security, could be forced in to room with an armed military soldier, 6’5″, 220lbs. The 5 1/2′ tall man is clearly undersized and outmatched, yet, could kill with bare hands and proper training.

to insist a poodle is no more dangerous than the next dog, simply because of comparative jaw width, is absurd.

i generally shy away from these types of discussion because people in general are so impassioned by years of ingrained garbage. an infant mauled to death by an animal is no more desirable, than a baby born to a misfit, uneducated child.

appreciate the responses, but they both strike me as people who have little to no experience with dogs.

[natty]

gentlemen, think big picture. empathy for a canine bite victim is answer to nothing.

Generalized example, as you asked of me:
a 5 1/2′ tall man, 165lbs, trained in military tactical security, could be forced in to room with an armed military soldier, 6’5″, 220lbs. The 5 1/2′ tall man is clearly undersized and outmatched, yet, could kill with bare hands and proper training.

to insist a poodle is no more dangerous than the next dog, simply because of comparative jaw width, is absurd.

i generally shy away from these types of discussion because people in general are so impassioned by years of ingrained garbage. an infant mauled to death by an animal is no more desirable, than a baby born to a misfit, uneducated child.

appreciate the responses, but they both strike me as people who have little to no experience with dogs.

[natty]

gentlemen, think big picture. empathy for a canine bite victim is answer to nothing.

Generalized example, as you asked of me:
a 5 1/2′ tall man, 165lbs, trained in military tactical security, could be forced in to room with an armed military soldier, 6’5″, 220lbs. The 5 1/2′ tall man is clearly undersized and outmatched, yet, could kill with bare hands and proper training.

to insist a poodle is no more dangerous than the next dog, simply because of comparative jaw width, is absurd.

i generally shy away from these types of discussion because people in general are so impassioned by years of ingrained garbage. an infant mauled to death by an animal is no more desirable, than a baby born to a misfit, uneducated child.

appreciate the responses, but they both strike me as people who have little to no experience with dogs.

[natty]

gentlemen, think big picture. empathy for a canine bite victim is answer to nothing.

Generalized example, as you asked of me:
a 5 1/2′ tall man, 165lbs, trained in military tactical security, could be forced in to room with an armed military soldier, 6’5″, 220lbs. The 5 1/2′ tall man is clearly undersized and outmatched, yet, could kill with bare hands and proper training.

to insist a poodle is no more dangerous than the next dog, simply because of comparative jaw width, is absurd.

i generally shy away from these types of discussion because people in general are so impassioned by years of ingrained garbage. an infant mauled to death by an animal is no more desirable, than a baby born to a misfit, uneducated child.

appreciate the responses, but they both strike me as people who have little to no experience with dogs.

[Author]

Posts