Cheesecat wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Proper training, and more importantly socializing, is the key. While they are no more likely to be nasty than other breeds, once they go they're gone.

Isn't that the case with most dogs though? Once they get a taste for human blood they'll attack us.

nectarprime wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Just keep it on a leash when walking and such. If a rottweiler came running at me I'd shoot it without hesitating.

Now I remember why I blocked this guy..... not the sharpest tool in the shed.

OP, some of the nicest most gentle dogs I have ever met were rotts. They are great dogs.

 Ouze wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Mind you also, a 120lb animal running at you with teeth is a potentially lethal threat under the law.

Are you sure it's "the law"? Are you sure it's not just a thing you made up, right now, on the spot?

 Vulcan wrote:
Let me tell you about the last Rottweiler I met.

My dad found him wandering down the alley with no collar and a broken leg (which the vet would later determine was likely broken when the dog tried to climb back into a car after he had been kicked out of it... and someone closed the door on his leg! ). Since my dad's a nice guy and very civic-minded, he carefully herded the injured dog into our detached garage, put out a bowl of water, and called animal control.

Animal control arrives, they go to the gararge, and the dog meets them at the door... with a tennis ball he'd found somewhere in the garage. Even with a leg that had been deliberately broken, the only thing he wanted was to play!

Well, that sealed my dad's fate; seeing that he had to adopt the dog, and the only possible name for a dog that playful was 'Buddy'. They had him for over a decade; he had just reached full size when they found him. And the entire time he was the sweetest overgrown puppy I've ever known. The wire-haired terrier they'd had when I was growing up was much more vicious than Buudy.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. There are no bad breeds; there are no bad dogs; there are only bad owners.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Mind you also, a 120lb animal running at you with teeth is a potentially lethal threat under the law.

Are you sure it's "the law"? Are you sure it's not just a thing you made up, right now, on the spot?

In Texas dogs are property. You can shoot a loose dog on sight, especially after a spate of attacks by Rottweilers and Pit Bulls occurred and people started shooting them. Further if I have a rottweiler charging me, I am in imminent fear for my person (this has been adjudicated).

Control your fething dog.

3) Shooting “stray” Dogs and Cats (Penal Code 42.09 Animal Cruelty). Any person who shoots a non-livestock animal, which includes any stray or feral cat or dog, and a wild living creature previously captured, can be charged with a felony offense. Penal Code 42.092 of the State of Texas law states that a person must have the owner’s consent to kill the animal (exceptions to prosecution are provided in Section 42.092(e)(1)). It is clear that a “stray” dog or cat either has no owner or that the person who shoots the animal did not get the owner’s consent.

 sebster wrote:
Any dog has the potential to attack. Even dogs raised in the most loving homes, because dogs are just like people, and some just have more instinct to attack, and just might perceive an otherwise mundane situation entirely incorrectly.

I mean, I love dogs, I've had them all my life. But the dog I have right now, well for some reason something geared in his brain meant he just really hates human babies and very small kids. Seriously, just goes off his nut, growling and slobbering if he sees someone who's a couple of years old or young. First time we learned about this was when a friend of my sister brought her newborn around, and my dog went straight at him. Fortunately, he's a Cavalier King Charles and those things are tiny and lack working jaws, so I was able to grab him before he got to the baby, and he was unlikely to have done serious damage if I hadn't grabbed him in time.

And that's really the point. Any dog can do something stupid, and while raising well them can reduce that risk immensely, it cannot remove the risk entirely. So the question then becomes 'if it does happen, do I really want it to be with a dog that I can't overpower, and who's jaw can inflict life threatening injuries in a few seconds?'

Or, you know, just get a little dog. You also don't have to walk them anywhere near as long.

 Ouze wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Mind you also, a 120lb animal running at you with teeth is a potentially lethal threat under the law.

Are you sure it's "the law"? Are you sure it's not just a thing you made up, right now, on the spot?

In Texas dogs are property. You can shoot a loose dog on sight, especially after a spate of attacks by Rottweilers and Pit Bulls occurred and people started shooting them. Further if I have a rottweiler charging me, I am in imminent fear for my person (this has been adjudicated).

Control your fething dog.

Be that as it may, still waiting for that law you cited previously, the one that explicitly indicated 120lbs (not 119 or less) were a lethal threat under the law. Maybe you can add the law that says you're allowed to shoot loose dogs on sight in Texas? Because, to be honest, I'm pretty sure you're making this up.

I DID find this section of Texas law, though:

3) Shooting “stray” Dogs and Cats (Penal Code 42.09 Animal Cruelty). Any person who shoots a non-livestock animal, which includes any stray or feral cat or dog, and a wild living creature previously captured, can be charged with a felony offense. Penal Code 42.092 of the State of Texas law states that a person must have the owner’s consent to kill the animal (exceptions to prosecution are provided in Section 42.092(e)(1)). It is clear that a “stray” dog or cat either has no owner or that the person who shoots the animal did not get the owner’s consent.

I mean, I understand that if you're at imminent threat of grievous bodily harm you can defend yourself, no question. But, like, why just make gak up like you do, about the 120 pound thing? And claiming you can just shoot random stray dogs because you feel like it? I mean, does no one you know IRL call you out on this kind of stuff?

 Grey Templar wrote:
I believe it stems from laws regarding the protection of livestock. Feral dog packs can cause tons of damage to livestock, so if there are loose dogs on your property you can shoot them because of the threat they pose.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Love rotties, dobies, GSDs, met a lot of sweet pit bulls too. While you need to be careful with pits, in my experience it's most definitely nurture, not nature that makes a dog dangerous or violent. I've seen a few rare examples but those dogs are usually bred specifically for aggression.

Working animal control in Arizona really exposed me to the down side of what Frazzled calls the Gangsta Ego Extension though, saw a lot of fethed up animals and got charged by a pit on a chain twice. Thankfully I just had to step back there instead of kill or disable the animal but damn that was scary. That's a lot of angry animal with a serious set of teeth coming at you and it's most certainly not going to be giving you kisses and ask for belly rubs.

In a charge situation I heartily encourage any one to employ lethal force to protect themselves and others.

 Frazzled wrote:
Rodney the Shanker hates boys, especially boys on bicycles and skateboards. He's actually only mildly anxious around teenagers. However, considering he was a stray as a puppy and has scars on his chest, we think its PTSD.
On the positive I too hate boys and skateboards. . .

 Frazzled wrote:
I have a scar on the knee where a puppy sank a tooth while we were playing. They have needle teeth when they are young. I have a scar on the nose where my bird dog nipped me too.

 Tri wrote:
... Dogs that have bitten/attacked me for no reason .... poodle, corgi, and sausage (you know the one of toy story)
... Dogs that have been perfectly fine ... Pit bull, Doberman and Alsatian


...whats the difference? The owner. Dogs are pack animals, as the owner you must be the alpha and they must follow you. If you are in control and bring up the dog well, it will look to you. Rottweilers have a reputation because so many owners train them as attack/guard dogs or worse let the dog be in control.

 Soladrin wrote:
This is probably the single must BS thread I've seen in a while.

Rottweilers are some of the sweetest dog's on this planet, known for being extremely good with young children.