As an obvious Doberman advocate, you might be a little confused when you read my answer: That isn't necessarily true.
Showing posts with label pit bull. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pit bull. Show all posts
Monday, October 28, 2013
"It's All in How You Raise Them"
I'm sure you've heard many a breed advocate utter this phrase: It's all in how you raise them. Meaning, vicious dogs are made, not born.
As an obvious Doberman advocate, you might be a little confused when you read my answer: That isn't necessarily true.
As an obvious Doberman advocate, you might be a little confused when you read my answer: That isn't necessarily true.
Monday, October 15, 2012
When is a debt paid? What does forgiven mean?
So, I'm sure it's not a surprise to anybody at this point that Michael Vick is a dog owner again. Or a "pet owner", according to his carefully worded official statement:
He was sentenced, he spent 18 months in jail on charges related to dogfighting, and his three years of parole are up. During those three years, he had psychotherapy, and did some speaking out against dogfighting with the Humane Society CEO, Wayne Pacelle. So, do I think Michael Vick should be able to own dogs again?
Well, from what I understand from having read The Lost Dogs, he himself had a personal hand in the killing of several of the dogs that he owned. From what I've read when he was interviewed on the topic, the language he used wasn't very sorry. Or, scratch that; the language he used didn't reflect that he was sorry he had tortured and killed dogs. The language he used indicated that he was sorry he was caught and punished. During his enforced three years of no dog ownership, he has said how "unfair" it was that his daughters could not have a dog, and it was "hard for him to explain" the reason behind it. I confess to feeling a lack of empathy for him; he made a choice, many times, to do horribly cruel things for his dogs. I'm supposed to feel bad that he's suffering for his choice, and that the consequence reflects on his daughters? Sorry, but no.
I see in articles that Michael Vick and his family was encouraged to adopt from a shelter or rescue. I'm not sure if they're familiar with the fact that these organizations tend to do background checks. As the Best Friends Soceity points out, "have you owned a dog before?", among others, will be a pretty tricky question to answer. I do wonder who it was actually gave this man a dog.
The bottom line is that it really doesn't matter what I think. The crimes are not mine to forgive. There are a lot of people who think it's no big deal that he fought dogs. There are a lot of people who think he should have had a far worse sentence, including being barred from owning dogs for the rest of his life. There are people who only care whether he plays a good game of football.
I will say this for him: he didn't have to enter a partnership with the Humane Society. He didn't have to speak to Congress in support of an anti-dogfighting bill. He didn't have to go to schools and talk to kids in an effort to steer them away from dog fighting (if I'm wrong about any of this, and these things were actually part of the terms of his supervised release, please tell me and link me the sources. I do not want to spread any incorrect information).
So, do I think Michael Vick should be able to own a dog again? No. I'm not sure if I think it's too soon, or if he's entirely unforgivable, but I do not trust the safety of a dog under his care.
“I understand the strong emotions by some people about our family’s decision to care for a pet. As a father, it is important to make sure my children develop a healthy relationship with animals. I want to ensure that my children establish a loving bond and treat all of God’s creatures with kindness and respect. Our pet is well cared for and loved as a member of our family. This is an opportunity to break the cycle. To that end, I will continue to honor my commitment to animal welfare and be an instrument of positive change.”
He was sentenced, he spent 18 months in jail on charges related to dogfighting, and his three years of parole are up. During those three years, he had psychotherapy, and did some speaking out against dogfighting with the Humane Society CEO, Wayne Pacelle. So, do I think Michael Vick should be able to own dogs again?
Well, from what I understand from having read The Lost Dogs, he himself had a personal hand in the killing of several of the dogs that he owned. From what I've read when he was interviewed on the topic, the language he used wasn't very sorry. Or, scratch that; the language he used didn't reflect that he was sorry he had tortured and killed dogs. The language he used indicated that he was sorry he was caught and punished. During his enforced three years of no dog ownership, he has said how "unfair" it was that his daughters could not have a dog, and it was "hard for him to explain" the reason behind it. I confess to feeling a lack of empathy for him; he made a choice, many times, to do horribly cruel things for his dogs. I'm supposed to feel bad that he's suffering for his choice, and that the consequence reflects on his daughters? Sorry, but no.
I see in articles that Michael Vick and his family was encouraged to adopt from a shelter or rescue. I'm not sure if they're familiar with the fact that these organizations tend to do background checks. As the Best Friends Soceity points out, "have you owned a dog before?", among others, will be a pretty tricky question to answer. I do wonder who it was actually gave this man a dog.
The bottom line is that it really doesn't matter what I think. The crimes are not mine to forgive. There are a lot of people who think it's no big deal that he fought dogs. There are a lot of people who think he should have had a far worse sentence, including being barred from owning dogs for the rest of his life. There are people who only care whether he plays a good game of football.
I will say this for him: he didn't have to enter a partnership with the Humane Society. He didn't have to speak to Congress in support of an anti-dogfighting bill. He didn't have to go to schools and talk to kids in an effort to steer them away from dog fighting (if I'm wrong about any of this, and these things were actually part of the terms of his supervised release, please tell me and link me the sources. I do not want to spread any incorrect information).
So, do I think Michael Vick should be able to own a dog again? No. I'm not sure if I think it's too soon, or if he's entirely unforgivable, but I do not trust the safety of a dog under his care.
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
Dre, Pit Bull in Danger in Colorado
Remember Lennox?
Well, in Brighton, Colorado on July 31, an interesting thing happened. A run of the mill thing, really. Two dogs got loose, a pit bull and a Doberman. They were kind of freaked, and ran around for awhile, and were chased by people who were trying to catch them. They barked at people, and a lot of those people were scared and called the police. Once the dogs were finally caught, the owners were called. The Doberman went home. The pit bull is in danger of being euthanized for being "dangerous".
Not a single stranger was touched in this frightening barking spree. Nobody was jumped on. Not a paw or tooth was laid on a single person, by either dog.
I learned on Doggies and Stuff that there is a ChipIn to help Dre's family with the legal costs. Dogster has run the story as well. There is a petition to save Dre, where you can add your voice (the petition page is where the above photo of Dre and Machomotto is from). The goal is 100,000 signatures. Currently, they're at 55, 095. My understanding is that Dre's next hearing has been postponed until August 21; at that point, let's hope that the DA looks at the FACTS rather than emotional opinions. A barking dog is not a biting dog. A biting dog is a biting dog.
Well, in Brighton, Colorado on July 31, an interesting thing happened. A run of the mill thing, really. Two dogs got loose, a pit bull and a Doberman. They were kind of freaked, and ran around for awhile, and were chased by people who were trying to catch them. They barked at people, and a lot of those people were scared and called the police. Once the dogs were finally caught, the owners were called. The Doberman went home. The pit bull is in danger of being euthanized for being "dangerous".
Not a single stranger was touched in this frightening barking spree. Nobody was jumped on. Not a paw or tooth was laid on a single person, by either dog.
I learned on Doggies and Stuff that there is a ChipIn to help Dre's family with the legal costs. Dogster has run the story as well. There is a petition to save Dre, where you can add your voice (the petition page is where the above photo of Dre and Machomotto is from). The goal is 100,000 signatures. Currently, they're at 55, 095. My understanding is that Dre's next hearing has been postponed until August 21; at that point, let's hope that the DA looks at the FACTS rather than emotional opinions. A barking dog is not a biting dog. A biting dog is a biting dog.
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
Stop Breed Specific Legislation
In light of what happened to Lennox last week in Belfast, Northern Ireland, I'm following along with many of my fellow bloggers, including Sleeps With Dogs and my buddy Z on LiveJournal. I posted about Lennox before, and if you want to read somebody more versed and more experienced, this is Jim Crosby's very articulate post on how he feels the case was "handled", and his breakdown of a video of Lennox's behavioral evaluation.
Lennox was not killed because he was a dangerous or vicious dog. Lennox was killed because he looked like a "pit bull", which is a dog banned in Northern Ireland as a result of the Dangerous Dogs Act. Shit like this happens in our country as well, people. In Denver, Colorado, for instance. Maryland is making gestures towards it. At least one county in Florida has it. Ohio had it and, thankfully, dropped it.
Breed Specific Legislation does not reduce dog bite incidents. Breed Specific Legislation kills dogs.
The only way, I feel, to reduce dog bite incidents and dog attacks is to educate people about dogs. That's everybody. Educate dog owners on how to properly raise, train, and socialize their dogs. Educate the general public on the basics of dog behavior and how one should or should not behave around a dog. Start with little kids, as they're learning about the world. Include it in school, with canine guest speakers and visitors. You can't force people to learn, unfortunately, but you can try to educate. You can try to be informative, and friendly, and prove them wrong by example, with responsible dog ownership.
What happened to Lennox could happen to any dog. It could happen to a Doberman. It could happen to a German Shepherd. It could happen to a Rottweiler. It could happen to a Boxer. I am, without equivocation, against Breed Specific Legislation, and feel it needs to be stopped.
Lennox was not killed because he was a dangerous or vicious dog. Lennox was killed because he looked like a "pit bull", which is a dog banned in Northern Ireland as a result of the Dangerous Dogs Act. Shit like this happens in our country as well, people. In Denver, Colorado, for instance. Maryland is making gestures towards it. At least one county in Florida has it. Ohio had it and, thankfully, dropped it.
Breed Specific Legislation does not reduce dog bite incidents. Breed Specific Legislation kills dogs.
The only way, I feel, to reduce dog bite incidents and dog attacks is to educate people about dogs. That's everybody. Educate dog owners on how to properly raise, train, and socialize their dogs. Educate the general public on the basics of dog behavior and how one should or should not behave around a dog. Start with little kids, as they're learning about the world. Include it in school, with canine guest speakers and visitors. You can't force people to learn, unfortunately, but you can try to educate. You can try to be informative, and friendly, and prove them wrong by example, with responsible dog ownership.
What happened to Lennox could happen to any dog. It could happen to a Doberman. It could happen to a German Shepherd. It could happen to a Rottweiler. It could happen to a Boxer. I am, without equivocation, against Breed Specific Legislation, and feel it needs to be stopped.
Sunday, June 24, 2012
On Our Sunday Walk...
Today on our walk, we saw:
An Airdale Terrier on a Flexi lead.
A Rat Terrier on a Flexi lead.
A Put Bull Terrier (I think) on a Flexi lead.
I don't have pictures, because I don't want to be a weirdo who randomly takes pictures of people on the street, but do they have the corner on the market, or what?
An Airdale Terrier on a Flexi lead.
A Rat Terrier on a Flexi lead.
A Put Bull Terrier (I think) on a Flexi lead.
I don't have pictures, because I don't want to be a weirdo who randomly takes pictures of people on the street, but do they have the corner on the market, or what?
Wednesday, June 13, 2012
I'm sorry, Lennox
Lennox, the Belfast "pit bull type" dog, is to be put down. He's an American Bull Dog/Labrador Retriever cross. But, he "looks" like a "pit bull", and his measurements are like a pit bull. So, too bad. He's been impounded for two years. His family has fought for him for two years. Frankly, I wondered if he had been euthanized long before now, but the bureaucracy kept rolling. They didn't even let the family say goodbye. That may have been a blessing; a dog kept in a shelter environment for two years may not be the dog that he was when he went in.
The Lennox case perplexed me. I tried, very hard, to find another side. I wanted to find editorials about how Lennox had been a terror to the neighborhood, a menace, running about off leash taking shots at people. Granted, it's hard to find the story at all. One account says that the animal warden showed up to the family's house, unannounced, measured Lennox's muzzle and body with a measuring tape, and said he was a pit bull and must be euthanized. I mentioned in the final Heidi the Doberman post that Lennox had knocked down a dog warden, but I'm hard pressed to find articles that say that now. It's hard for me to find a dog guilty based on knocking somebody down, of course; he could have jumped up in play, to smell her face, any number of things. I'd like to say "blame the deed, not the breed", but there was no bite here.
Without witnessing an event, it's hard to say what happened, and even then, it isn't always cut and dry. A Huffington Post article does relate that two separate animal behaviorists examined Lennox and thought that he was just fine, behaviorally speaking. Not an aggressive threat.
There have been petitions and boycotts and letters written. People have petitioned that Belfast be skipped along the torch passing route for the summer olympics. The torch was scheduled to pass through on June 6; I don't doubt that it did. Lennox is only a dog, right? I'm sure any number of people outside of Northern Ireland would have been poised to adopt him, whisk him away to a theoretically safer location, where just having a big square head wasn't a death sentence. I wonder if people rethink Labrador ownership?
Lennox had been legally owned and legally registered in Belfast until then; they had even done a DNA test to prove that he was an American Bull Dog (not a banned breed) and a Labrador Retriever (another not banned breed). Since his removal, he was evidently kept in what amounts to a concrete box with sawdust on the floor, seen in photographs that his keepers released. One might assume, since he was a BigScaryMeanDog, that he had no human contact, no play, no toys. For a human, solitary confinement of that sort, for that length of time, might be considered questionable. But Lennox is only a dog, right? One whose fate was pretty much sealed from the moment he left his owner's custody.
For a dog that never bit anybody to be euthanized makes no sense. For a dog who is not suffering from a terminal disease, an irreparable injury, uncontrollable aggression, or neurological condition to be euthanized is sinful. It's a failure of humanity. It makes me sad and sick and I wonder...well, I wonder too much. And it seems that nobody gets answers.
The Lennox case perplexed me. I tried, very hard, to find another side. I wanted to find editorials about how Lennox had been a terror to the neighborhood, a menace, running about off leash taking shots at people. Granted, it's hard to find the story at all. One account says that the animal warden showed up to the family's house, unannounced, measured Lennox's muzzle and body with a measuring tape, and said he was a pit bull and must be euthanized. I mentioned in the final Heidi the Doberman post that Lennox had knocked down a dog warden, but I'm hard pressed to find articles that say that now. It's hard for me to find a dog guilty based on knocking somebody down, of course; he could have jumped up in play, to smell her face, any number of things. I'd like to say "blame the deed, not the breed", but there was no bite here.
Without witnessing an event, it's hard to say what happened, and even then, it isn't always cut and dry. A Huffington Post article does relate that two separate animal behaviorists examined Lennox and thought that he was just fine, behaviorally speaking. Not an aggressive threat.
There have been petitions and boycotts and letters written. People have petitioned that Belfast be skipped along the torch passing route for the summer olympics. The torch was scheduled to pass through on June 6; I don't doubt that it did. Lennox is only a dog, right? I'm sure any number of people outside of Northern Ireland would have been poised to adopt him, whisk him away to a theoretically safer location, where just having a big square head wasn't a death sentence. I wonder if people rethink Labrador ownership?
Lennox had been legally owned and legally registered in Belfast until then; they had even done a DNA test to prove that he was an American Bull Dog (not a banned breed) and a Labrador Retriever (another not banned breed). Since his removal, he was evidently kept in what amounts to a concrete box with sawdust on the floor, seen in photographs that his keepers released. One might assume, since he was a BigScaryMeanDog, that he had no human contact, no play, no toys. For a human, solitary confinement of that sort, for that length of time, might be considered questionable. But Lennox is only a dog, right? One whose fate was pretty much sealed from the moment he left his owner's custody.
For a dog that never bit anybody to be euthanized makes no sense. For a dog who is not suffering from a terminal disease, an irreparable injury, uncontrollable aggression, or neurological condition to be euthanized is sinful. It's a failure of humanity. It makes me sad and sick and I wonder...well, I wonder too much. And it seems that nobody gets answers.
Friday, April 27, 2012
Vicktory Dogs: 5 years later
April 25 was the five year anniversary for the rescue of 51 dogs from Bad Rap kennels, the property in Virginia owned by Michael Vick. Considering the man in question is already back playing football, I'd guess a lot of people find his debt to society paid.
About a year ago, on April 24, I reviewed Jim Gorant's book The Lost Dogs. Frankly, the case still makes me feel ill. That Vick has another multimillion dollar contract makes me ill. That he doesn't seem to be sorry for what he does, but rather sorry that he got caught...well, enough about him.
Because so many of those dogs have been successful. They're therapy dogs. They have their Canine Good Citizen titles. They're in happy homes, with families who love them. Apparently they're referred to by some as Vicktory Dogs, and I like it. It shows what can be accomplished with care and consideration.
As I've said before, I can't in good conscience speak out against breed prejudices that target the Doberman without giving pit bull prejudice the time of day. Dogs are dogs. These dogs are pit bulls, these dogs were bred for fighting, these dogs were raised in horrible isolated conditions where the people they interacted with were not kind. Today, these dogs are successful in home settings. These dogs interact with other dogs. Dogs are individuals. These dogs were individually given a chance, and I'm very glad, because it sets the precedent.
You can read more about them on http://vickdogsblog.blogspot.com/ and also on the Bad Rap web page, here: http://www.badrap.org/vick-dogs
About a year ago, on April 24, I reviewed Jim Gorant's book The Lost Dogs. Frankly, the case still makes me feel ill. That Vick has another multimillion dollar contract makes me ill. That he doesn't seem to be sorry for what he does, but rather sorry that he got caught...well, enough about him.
Because so many of those dogs have been successful. They're therapy dogs. They have their Canine Good Citizen titles. They're in happy homes, with families who love them. Apparently they're referred to by some as Vicktory Dogs, and I like it. It shows what can be accomplished with care and consideration.
As I've said before, I can't in good conscience speak out against breed prejudices that target the Doberman without giving pit bull prejudice the time of day. Dogs are dogs. These dogs are pit bulls, these dogs were bred for fighting, these dogs were raised in horrible isolated conditions where the people they interacted with were not kind. Today, these dogs are successful in home settings. These dogs interact with other dogs. Dogs are individuals. These dogs were individually given a chance, and I'm very glad, because it sets the precedent.
You can read more about them on http://vickdogsblog.blogspot.com/ and also on the Bad Rap web page, here: http://www.badrap.org/vick-dogs
Saturday, February 4, 2012
McDonald's Crosses a Line
So, yesterday, through other online doggie channels, a new McDonald's ad came to my attention.
The pictures I've seen (and as far as I know, the ad is an audio one, so I"m not sure of the origin of the picture, for those copyright hounds) are of a 6 piece chicken nuggets, and a down the nose shot of a bandanna wearing pit bull, with the headline "Which is safer? Eating this/petting this?" And excuse me, as I've been rather family friendly until now, but my thought was, "Oh hell no".
The pictures I've seen (and as far as I know, the ad is an audio one, so I"m not sure of the origin of the picture, for those copyright hounds) are of a 6 piece chicken nuggets, and a down the nose shot of a bandanna wearing pit bull, with the headline "Which is safer? Eating this/petting this?" And excuse me, as I've been rather family friendly until now, but my thought was, "Oh hell no".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)