Quote:
Originally Posted by silverdoctor
I'm still surprised at how many people treat aggression as a condition that can be fixed.
Aggression itself is generally a symptom of an underlying issue. Think about this...
i've seen older dogs get aggressive due to a mouthful of rotten teeth, do the dental and the dog comes around. I've had toothaches that drove me to near insanity - imagine having a mouthful of them for years, yeah, I'd be grumpy too.
When the ex's dog became aggressive with people and dogs, that was the last symptom I needed to prove he was hypothyroid - and aggression can be a side effect of untreated hypothyroidism. Hypothyroidism can be a side effect of spaying and neutering too young - and the dog can't help it. It's medical, and considering we are a pro spay and neuter society...
Aggression can be a side effect of a fearful dog, frustrated dog, bored dogs, dogs with no leadership that feel the human is theirs and they need to protect the property. Lack of socialization, they don't know how to act and correct wrong behaviors. Deeply insecure dogs are some of the most dangerous. The list goes on and on. Fix the underlying issue, and the aggression will go away.
So for people to say that a dog is just aggressive for no reason, I believe there's always a reason.
|
I do agree that aggressiveness is often due to some exogenous factor (like you said, tooth pain, hyperthyroidism, boredom), but denying that aggression can be sudden and without any known reason is foolish. Humans in society will decide to snap and kill/attack people with no prevailing reason beyond psychological issues (Vince Li, anyone?). Why are dogs any different? As well, even if there is an underlying reason, if the dog has never shown aggressive behavior before but one day snaps due to something related to pain (or otherwise), an owner can only be so proactive. Dog will naturally hide their pain to mask weakness, and short of regular vet check ups, can be difficult for owners to realize.
Anyway, I just want to say my point is that I don't believe dogs are bad animals, I love dogs, and I strongly dislike government involving itself in anything it does not absolutely have to, but I choose to see the issue objectively. In cases of morons putting the security of person and safety of others at risk due to their negligent ownership of potentially dangerous animals, there needs to be formal intervention. Whether that comes in the form of stricter punishment for those who have their dog attack others, or in the form of breed specific legislation, something needs to change if dog attacks are continuing to rise. That is what a society can do to be proactive against dog attacks.
Once again, owning a breed of dog that has potential to be dangerous should not be treated all that differently from firearm ownership. Similarly to how you do not aim a gun at someone, regardless if it is unloaded or not, allowing a dog that is part of a breed that is statistically shown to be dangerous, to run around off leash or without regard of what it could do if it decides to snap, is blatant disregard for others' safety. I don't care if your dog is a "little angel" and would "never hurt a fly". It needs to be treated with respect of what it is potentially capable of.