The plot thickens. I found out this guys Akita attacked another dog at this dog park. Now things start to make more sense. In his mind, hes not a bad owner, its the breed of dog he has. Theyre known for dog aggression, so therefore, thats why his dog attacked another dog. He doesnt like science that proves hes a bad owner, therefore, lets pass the blame onto breed. While were at it, lets attack pit bulls in the process because DBO says theyre all born ready for dog fighting. Heres his latest attempt at proving me wrong. The piece he is referencing is from the National Canine Research Council. Of *course* theyre biased! Ok so I am reading the reports of on of the down loaded reports you posted the one about the akita. They say the owner just got the dog 3 weeks ago. No established relationships with the kids. Left alone with a child. The ones before that it blames the owner also. This report sets out to smear any owner of a dog that bits and kills. I know for a fact that it is in the text books about akita. That if you leash it in a back yard and dont have contact it will get mean. Its a known fact about akita. I do realize that yes it was the owners fault. He should have known what kind of dog he had. But where I disagree is that the report seems to suggest that breed had nothing to do with it. I beg to differ. Had that same owner chosen a collie and the circumstances were exactly the same that child would not have been hurt. So this study is fairly clearly trying to take the blame off of the breed and place it directly on the owner. Fact is. If that owner had chosen a Labrador type dog this would not have happened.
Posted on: Sun, 03 Aug 2014 23:37:58 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015