all the time i find myself reading about one breed or another being
unfit needing special ordinances, laws, insurance. as far as i'm
concerned like drunken driving, guns left accessable in homes with
children, it's the owners fault in all but a few cases. my brittish
staffordshire bull terrier is not chained outside, never struck, and
yes i understand the nature of aggressive breeds. i am top dog and
the dog understands this and is happier with this. 1. establish top
dog, after all it isn't a fuzzy bunny. 2. keep it clean as when they
develope a strong odor they become more belligerent. 3. never strike,
any dog, harsh tone when misbehaving and praise when obedient will
make the dog *want* to please you.
if you've read and understand all of the above and still disagree let
me suggest adding labradors to the banned breeds. i've a relative who owns
a lab with children in the house, he has been struck, i wouldn't trust
that animal. i was house sitting at the aforementioned house and a
friend came over, dog went for friends throat. i took it to the pool
and gave it a ride to the bottom, dog came up and went for my throat,
second trip to the bottom. the dog came to the surface and waited in the
shallow end until i gave it permission to get out, no further problems.
not my prefered method of handleing such, but i didn't hit it as the
owners did bringing it up. point being if you descend to violence sooner
or later that dog is going to realise it can dish it out as well as
get and do something about it. now my pit bull, all i had to do to
establish top dog was give it a bath and this dog never shows aggression
even to people who shrink back from it because they recognise the breed.
ps. the lab also attacked the pit bull and the pit scarcely noticed as
i was able to intercede before it got really bad, eventually my dog
would have returned fire... i think. think about it. regards.
---
 þ SLMR 2.1a þ Best of all possible worlds... said Dr. Pangloss
--- FLAME v1.1
---------------