# Looking for a new, reliable guard dog.



## EightLeggedFrea (Jul 7, 2008)

Our chow/sharpei (spelling?) is slowly dying on us, and we're looking for something that will grow into a reliable guard dog. Something that bond to humans as it grows (we plan to buy a puppy and raise it) and WON'T dig holes in the yard (my mom was very specific about that). Any thoughts/input?


----------



## Mushroom Spore (Jul 7, 2008)

In all honesty, if you want your house protected, you should just have an alarm installed.


----------



## EightLeggedFrea (Jul 7, 2008)

Mushroom Spore said:


> In all honesty, if you want your house protected, you should just have an alarm installed.


Actually, we DO have one of those.


----------



## vbrooke (Jul 7, 2008)

We have a 1 year old German shepherd. So is 100% loyal, and very protective. If anyone or thing for that matter, she is on alert. She is also 100% sugar. Rhiannan watches over the kids if they are in the yard, until she decides it's time to play (she's still a puppy). I highly recommend them as a wonderful pet and guard dog. You figure the Police and Border Patrol use them for a reason. Very smart too. Also...1 last thing, she doesn't dig, but she is mostly an indoor dog.


----------



## Mushroom Spore (Jul 7, 2008)

EightLeggedFrea said:


> Actually, we DO have one of those.


In that case, you're probably in the clear no matter what you get.


----------



## xchondrox (Jul 8, 2008)

I was thinking about getting a Cane Corso a year ago. They are big, black, and not to be messed with. They use to be castle/estate gaurds in Italy, make sure to check the parents out. They are rather expensive 1000-1500 and have a bad reputation. If you get this breed you make sure you have liability insurance, no children, non frequent visitors, and you've done your research!


----------



## sassysmama (Jul 8, 2008)

I really don't have any breed suggestions, but I used to assist a dog trainer and I now work as a vet tech so I have some insight into dog behavior.  
The biggest thing is that many, many dogs (of many breeds) will dig when they are bored.  If you get a high energy breed, and you are not home with it or walk it for at least an hour a day, there is a pretty good chance it will be very bored sitting in your yard waiting for something to bark at.  That is also when they start barking all day long, out of boredom.  
The police department may use german shepherds, but those dogs also have a job ALL day long.  I love german shepherds and I have one too, but many of them end up in shelters because they drive people crazy.  If you are willing to properly exercise a high energy dog, you shouldn't have a problem.  I think you just need to honestly look at what kind of dog you want, one that will need a lot of time with you, or one that can be left alone and needs minimal exercise.  Chows and Sharpeis are both known for being rather aloof.  That actually makes a good dog to guard property, because they tend to be ok sitting by themselves for the day and they don't seem to develop neurotic habits.  In my experience, every breed is going to be good for someone, it's just that you have to find a dog that fits your life, not try to fit your life around a dog.  Good luck in your search for the right breed.  It might be good to talk to a breed rescue for some of the breeds you are considering, because they often do have puppies, and they can usually tell you the good, bad, and the ugly of that breed.
-Ally


----------



## hairmetalspider (Jul 8, 2008)

Mushroom Spore said:


> In all honesty, if you want your house protected, you should just have an alarm installed.


I agree. If you already have an alarm system installed, then logically, I'm not sure why you would want a dog solely for the purposes of guarding.

Keep in mind that despite the possible threatening physical appearance of a dog, it won't really do that much to protect you. In the 1800's, when all you had was an intruder, unarmed and with little to protect themselves, then yes. A dog would probably work.

In today's era...with firearms, toxins, medicines, etc... I'd say someone who wanted to break into a house is going to, and they're going to end up killing your dog in the process.


----------



## ballpython2 (Jul 8, 2008)

hairmetalspider said:


> I agree. If you already have an alarm system installed, then logically, I'm not sure why you would want a dog solely for the purposes of guarding.
> 
> Keep in mind that despite the possible threatening physical appearance of a dog, it won't really do that much to protect you. In the 1800's, when all you had was an intruder, unarmed and with little to protect themselves, then yes. A dog would probably work.
> 
> In today's era...with firearms, toxins, medicines, etc... I'd say someone who wanted to break into a house is going to, and they're going to end up killing your dog in the process.


Not only this, some people who break into houses know dogs really well so even if it is a guard dog, people who know dogs wel can easily find a  way to get the dog to leave them alone without harming the dog in anyway.


----------



## crpy (Jul 8, 2008)

Australian shepherds= loyal to the max and they will let you know when anything is coming around, they are the best alarm systems.


----------



## crpy (Jul 8, 2008)

hairmetalspider said:


> I agree. If you already have an alarm system installed, then logically, I'm not sure why you would want a dog solely for the purposes of guarding.
> 
> Keep in mind that despite the possible threatening physical appearance of a dog, it won't really do that much to protect you. In the 1800's, when all you had was an intruder, unarmed and with little to protect themselves, then yes. A dog would probably work.
> 
> In today's era...with firearms, toxins, medicines, etc... I'd say someone who wanted to break into a house is going to, and they're going to end up killing your dog in the process.


A dog is an awesome deterrent to have ,proven time and time again.

On several occasions in my life I would probably be dead without my pooch waken me up to a threat. One being an intruder punk coming through my porch and other situations.

It is different than somebody training a dog to just be mean and therefore dangerous


----------



## arachyd (Jul 8, 2008)

"many dogs (of many breeds) will dig when they are bored. If you get a high energy breed, and you are not home with it or walk it for at least an hour a day, there is a pretty good chance it will be very bored sitting in your yard waiting for something to bark at."

I agree completely with that statement. I have bluetick coonhounds. If you want an alarm system that can be heard 1/2 mile away they are your dog but they are super high energy dogs. If you jog or hunt or are out a lot they make an excellent companion and are usually very friendly to other dogs and people when they are not on their own territory. At home they are more protective and their voices are extremely LOUD. They also are very affectionate and nothing is cuter than a hound pup tripping over its ears.


----------



## DMTWI (Jul 8, 2008)

I think people are getting hung-up so to speak on the 'guard dog' term. If you want a true guard dog you'd be talking about a highly trained animal (expensive), that maybe wouldn't be the best pet. Lots of breeds are naturally protective of thier homes and owners: bullmastiff, cane corso, presa, standard poodle, etc...but they all need lots of attention and basic training from you the owner so you don't end up with a 100+ pound run-away train. Please don't get a pit bull and try to make it a guard type dog, they are great dogs, I have one, but they are people based dogs, not guard dogs. Hope this helps a little....      Oh, sorry to hear about your current dog. That's not a fun thing.....


----------



## Veneficus (Jul 8, 2008)

If you liked your chow/sharpei mix, why don't you try and get another one?


----------



## halfwaynowhere (Jul 8, 2008)

You might want to look into breeds with their ears up- not cropped, but naturally up. They have a better sense of hearing, and are more alert to dangers. A nice big shepherd would be good.

We've got a chihuahua and an english mastiff. Either one is useless on their own, but as a team, they work wonderfully. The chihuahua listens for people outside, and barks, which alerts the mastiff. And you don't want to mess with a 175 pound dog (he's on the small side). But if the chihuahua isn't home, the mastiff doesn't really listen for things. And of course, a 4 pound dog doesn't work so well for guarding.


----------



## Tcollector (Jul 8, 2008)

I would go for a rot and have it trained.


----------



## vbrooke (Jul 8, 2008)

poisoness17 said:


> I would go for a rot and have it trained.


Or, if you want a breed that is very protective, loyal and will scare people from entering your house, Get a Pitbull. They have a bad reputation, but a well bred, well trained pit could be the best pet/guard dog ever!


----------



## Tcollector (Jul 8, 2008)

vbrooke said:


> Or, if you want a breed that is very protective, loyal and will scare people from entering your house, Get a Pitbull. They have a bad reputation, but a well bred, well trained pit could be the best pet/guard dog ever!


That would do it


----------



## vbrooke (Jul 9, 2008)

poisoness17 said:


> That would do it


I tell you what, I worked in the vet field a long time, love all dogs. I will never walk into a yard with a Pitbull or Rotti in it that I don't know!!! Sounds like a good alarm system to me.:evil:


----------



## dovii88 (Jul 9, 2008)

husky all the way..smart, alert, all around good dogs..but can be stubborn lol..but my female..watches the outside all the time..


----------



## halfwaynowhere (Jul 9, 2008)

make sure your home insurance policy doesn't have anything against certain dog breeds, a lot of policies don't allow you to have pitbulls. 

If your dog will be just a working dog, guarding the property, you might consider training it in a different language- not english. That way if someone breaks in, it won't respond to them if they try to give it commands.


----------



## vbrooke (Jul 9, 2008)

halfwaynowhere said:


> make sure your home insurance policy doesn't have anything against certain dog breeds, a lot of policies don't allow you to have pitbulls.
> 
> If your dog will be just a working dog, guarding the property, you might consider training it in a different language- not english. That way if someone breaks in, it won't respond to them if they try to give it commands.


That is a great point. Well both points. We had to have our dog certified as a service dog so that the insurance would allow her. In CA, no Pits, Rotties, Chows, Akita, German shep., Dalmatians, or any mix of any breed listed. Some insurance Co. will make exceptions, others will not. Renters beware...they are even more strict with those. 

The non English training would be great!! I intended to train my Shep. in German. Schutzhund training is highly recommended.


----------



## Necrobyheart (Jul 9, 2008)

well heck, the two of my favorite breeds of dogs are out than (akita, and chow)


----------



## Diggy415 (Jul 9, 2008)

have you looked at your local shelter, humane society, there is another puppy source that been through it all and loyal. Good luck on the non digging breed,  maybe you can find a non barking one as well, dogs are dogs. I have been a rotty fan myself and own my own home. Anyway that's my 2 cents worth.


----------



## hairmetalspider (Jul 9, 2008)

crpy said:


> A dog is an awesome deterrent to have ,proven time and time again.
> 
> On several occasions in my life I would probably be dead without my pooch waken me up to a threat. One being an intruder punk coming through my porch and other situations.
> 
> It is different than somebody training a dog to just be mean and therefore dangerous



Right. That's why I threw in the physical appearance threat.

What I'm saying is that if it comes down to a match between a human being a dog, the human is probably going to win.

I'd rather have a dog as a companion than an alarm system... They have technology for that.


----------



## hairmetalspider (Jul 9, 2008)

poisoness17 said:


> I would go for a rot and have it trained.


While Rots and other bully breeds have the*ability* to be trained as defense/attack dogs...why do it? Why purposely train an animal to be mean?

It's simply backing and supporting the unfounded beliefs of society that all bully breeds are dangerous, thus resulting in the thousands of  deaths and euthanization of a defenseless animal.


----------



## crpy (Jul 9, 2008)

hairmetalspider said:


> Right. That's why I threw in the physical appearance threat.
> 
> What I'm saying is that if it comes down to a match between a human being a dog, the human is probably going to win.
> 
> I'd rather have a dog as a companion than an alarm system... They have technology for that.


I know what you are saying...but

Here is an example of the two ......With an alarm system,the perp has to trigger it,  and it usually requires something to be broken, i.e. window, door etc.
With a dog ,you get an advanced warning most of the time before some perp breaks in and that could mean the difference of life...or death.


----------



## hairmetalspider (Jul 9, 2008)

crpy said:


> I know what you are saying...but
> 
> Here is an example of the two ......With an alarm system,the perp has to trigger it,  and it usually requires something to be broken, i.e. window, door etc.
> With a dog ,you get an advanced warning most of the time before some perp breaks in and that could mean the difference of life...or death.


I disagree. There are thousands of different alarm systems and you can adjust the sensitivity on them to whatever your desire is...This in situations can be set up to be activated far before someone makes it to even touching your house.

Let's just get right to the point because I think there's a matter of personal opinion here... I view animals  of equal quality as humans (If not more.) I don't think getting a dog purely to protect you or as an alarm system is right, as that is objectifying them. 

There's also a matter of this: Either the dog could die in the process, or you're going to get your butt sued by an intruder (Yes, this happens, in our wonderful country.) due to the law of force.


----------



## crpy (Jul 9, 2008)

hairmetalspider said:


> I disagree. There are thousands of different alarm systems and you can adjust the sensitivity on them to whatever your desire is...This in situations can be set up to be activated far before someone makes it to even touching your house.
> 
> Let's just get right to the point because I think there's a matter of personal opinion here... I view animals  of equal quality as humans (If not more.) I don't think getting a dog purely to protect you or as an alarm system is right, as that is objectifying them.
> 
> There's also a matter of this: Either the dog could die in the process, or you're going to get your butt sued by an intruder (Yes, this happens, in our wonderful country.) due to the law of force.


I respect your opinion, mine just differs alittle.


----------



## hairmetalspider (Jul 9, 2008)

crpy said:


> I respect your opinion, mine just differs alittle.


Cool. We'll just leave it at that then.


----------



## pitbulllady (Jul 9, 2008)

vbrooke said:


> Or, if you want a breed that is very protective, loyal and will scare people from entering your house, Get a Pitbull. They have a bad reputation, but a well bred, well trained pit could be the best pet/guard dog ever!



You're absolutely WRONG about that, vbrooke!  A well-bred, well-trained American Pit Bull Terrier is the absolute WORST, LOUSIEST guard dog EVER!  I've had, and bred, some of the most well-bred APBT's anyone would ever see, and believe me, I KNOW APBT's!  This breed was originally bred to have ZERO human aggression, since handlers in dog fights actually got into the ring with the dogs, as did the referee, and they had to be able to pick up and handle these dogs in the heat of battle without risk of being bitten.  Any dog that so much as growled or snapped at a human, for any reason, got removed from the gene pool, usually by means of a .22 bullet between its eyes.  The main ancestors of this breed were the "Old Family" Irish bull-and-terriers that were brought over here to the US by poor Irish immigrants, and those dogs were often the only thing of value that those people had, which they could barter for things they needed in their new country, like food, clothing or furniture, so the dogs had to be willing to go away with a total stranger and accept that stranger as their new master immediately.  Even the AKC standard for the show version of the APBT, the American Staffordshire Terrier, specifically mentions that willingness to accept any person as their master right away.  That's not a trait that a good guard dog would have, needless to say!  A well-bred, well-trained American Pit Bull does not understand the meaning of "stranger"; to such a dog, everyone is a long-lost friend!  This is probably the most frequent victim of dog thieves, too-they can literally just drive up in a yard full of Pit Bulls and load them up and take them away.  I had it happen to me.  I lost four generations of dogs in one afternoon, most likely to someone the dogs had never met.  They're just happy to see everybody and it does not occur to them that some people are up to no good.  While an APBT would probably defend its owner in the case of an immediate violent personal attack on the owner, they will not protect property and do not have the natural suspicious nature and high territoriality of a guarding breed.  So-called "Pit Bulls" that ARE naturally protective are in all likelihood cross-breeds, since there is a lot of cross-breeding with larger Mastiff breeds to produce these heavy, bulky and aggressive giant "Pit Bulls", but of course, the results are still mixed-bred dogs, NOT real APBT's, and do not have proper APBT temperament!  Any "Pit Bull" that acts aggressive towards people entering or nearing their owner's property, whether or not that person is behaving in a threatening manner, is either a mutt, or it's been specifically trained, usually through abusive methods, to make it that way, and is most definitely NOT a "well-bred" example of the breed.

I keep Catahoula Leopard Dogs for guard dogs.  They ARE, unlike Pit Bulls, naturally suspicious of and defensive against strangers, and are every bit as "game".  However, I believe that the original poster stated that he wanted a dog with naturally-erect ears, even though contrary to popular belief, erect-eared dogs do not necessarily hear better than dogs with dropped or cropped ears.  I can assure you my Catahoulas have no hearing difficulty at all, even though they do have drop ears, like a Rottweiler's.  IF you can find a well-bred German Shepherd, or Belgian Malinois, those would be my next choices, followed by Dutch Shepherds.  The latter two are medium-sized breeds, now the preferred breeds used by police and military, and do not have as much coat as a GSD, so if size and shedding is a big issue, those would be two to look into.  But a Pit Bull, no-unless you want a dog to lick a burglar's face and help him carry out your tv and furniture!

pitbulllady


----------



## ThomasH (Jul 9, 2008)

I am 100% against dogs. They are stupid, eat a ton, bark constantly and require a lot of care. I think our domestication of dogs over thousands of years IS morally wrong. From being inbred some many times we have engineered them to be pretty and helpful. But we have also engineered them to become much, much weaker. They now have shorter lives, they suffer from issues that a full blooded wolf would never face and lets face it they are a heck of a lot more obnoxious than a wolf! Dogs bark and bark and bark until you feel like you have a helpless crying good for nothing baby. The only difference between a dog and a helpless baby is the dog is stronger, the baby will grow up to independance, and of course the dog didn't come out of a [human] uterus. Not to mention you'll probably need an alarm system *FROM* the dog. They have more human body parts rotting in their stomachs than any other animal and kill an estimated thirty five people a year in the states alone! They go after the weak, mostly killing children and the elderly. Thats more than all the other captive animals combined. Why dogs are loved, not regulated and called man's best friend is beyond me. More like man's baby killer.


----------



## DMTWI (Jul 9, 2008)

pitbulllady said:


> A well-bred, well-trained American Pit Bull Terrier is the absolute WORST, LOUSIEST guard dog EVER!
> pitbulllady



:clap:    Thank you!


----------



## crpy (Jul 9, 2008)

BoaConstrictor said:


> I am 100% against dogs. They are stupid, eat a ton, bark constantly and require a lot of care. I think our domestication of dogs over thousands of years IS morally wrong. From being inbred some many times we have engineered them to be pretty and helpful. But we have also engineered them to become much, much weaker. They now have shorter lives, they suffer from issues that a full blooded wolf would never face and lets face it they are a heck of a lot more obnoxious than a wolf! Dogs bark and bark and bark until you feel like you have a helpless crying good for nothing baby. The only difference between a dog and a helpless baby is the dog is stronger, the baby will grow up to independance, and of course the dog didn't come out of a [human] uterus. Not to mention you'll probably need an alarm system *FROM* the dog. They have more human body parts rotting in their stomachs than any other animal and kill an estimated thirty five people a year in the states alone! They go after the weak, mostly killing children and the elderly. Thats more than all the other captive animals combined. Why dogs are loved, not regulated and called man's best friend is beyond me. More like man's baby killer.



You obviously failed to do any research to back up your dribble dude.

but its your opinion and your welcomed to it.


----------



## Veneficus (Jul 9, 2008)

BoaConstrictor said:


> I am 100% against dogs. They are stupid, eat a ton, bark constantly and require a lot of care. I think our domestication of dogs over thousands of years IS morally wrong. From being inbred some many times we have engineered them to be pretty and helpful. But we have also engineered them to become much, much weaker. They now have shorter lives, they suffer from issues that a full blooded wolf would never face and lets face it they are a heck of a lot more obnoxious than a wolf! Dogs bark and bark and bark until you feel like you have a helpless crying good for nothing baby. The only difference between a dog and a helpless baby is the dog is stronger, the baby will grow up to independance, and of course the dog didn't come out of a [human] uterus. Not to mention you'll probably need an alarm system *FROM* the dog. They have more human body parts rotting in their stomachs than any other animal and kill an estimated thirty five people a year in the states alone! They go after the weak, mostly killing children and the elderly. Thats more than all the other captive animals combined. Why dogs are loved, not regulated and called man's best friend is beyond me. More like man's baby killer.


You definitely over-generalized and didn't do any research before going on your petty tirade.


----------



## ThomasH (Jul 9, 2008)

Veneficus said:


> You definitely over-generalized and didn't do any research before going on your petty tirade.


Oh really? Explain why the domestication of an animal should be ethical. Why should WE chose an animal's looks, life style and service we want from it? We aren't Jesus, we shouldn't make his decisions. The only thing I said that wasn't a fact is that I mistook 100s of years for 1,000.


----------



## Scott C. (Jul 9, 2008)

Can you answer the question of why _shouldn't_ we without a religious tirade that only applies to a select few?.... 

Seriously dude, the righteous man in a world of immoral heathens thing can't be doing you any good.


----------



## ThomasH (Jul 9, 2008)

Scott C. said:


> Can you answer the question of why _shouldn't_ we without a religious tirade that only applies to a select few?....
> 
> Seriously dude, the righteous man in a world of immoral heathens thing can't be doing you any good.


We USED the wolf. We screwed its rightful gene pool to our personal benifit. Dogs live shorter lives now. Some dogs have been so inbred that they can't even function any more. Look at the Chinese Crested. Most can't even CHEW their own food. Could you image being that weak, helpless and dependant.


----------



## ThomasH (Jul 9, 2008)

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/ffximage/elwood_wideweb__470x348,2.jpg
Does this look like a dog that could function on its own? It can't even close its mouth. Its sick that this dog has to suffer because some D-bag thought it would be funny to breed an ugly dog. All dogs [especially purebreds] suffer their own issues. Some deformaties are just more visible than others.


----------



## Mushroom Spore (Jul 9, 2008)

Boa's just trolling, guys, let's just leave it.


----------



## ThomasH (Jul 9, 2008)

Mushroom Spore said:


> Boa's just trolling, guys, let's just leave it.


Oh yeah, because any body who questions dogs is just sick, good-for-nothing and messed up.


----------



## Mushroom Spore (Jul 9, 2008)

BoaConstrictor said:


> Oh yeah, because any body who questions dogs is just sick, good-for-nothing and messed up.


You don't seem to know the definition of trolling. "Sick, good-for-nothing, and messed up" are not actually what I said - but bringing that into the thread and thus accusing me of saying it are also pretty good trolling tactics. They're not going to *work*, but they were pretty good. 

Yes, I do think you're trolling. You come into a thread about dog breed personalities with a huge rant in which you claim that dogs are worthless and wrong, that they're like a "helpless crying good for nothing baby" (man I don't like kids and even I don't say that), and accuse dogs of being horrible human-eating babykillers who should all be regulated and/or shot. Then you veer wildly off-topic onto how domesticating ANYTHING is evil in the eyes of Jesus, then veer off *again*. 

If you're not trolling, the alternative is that you can't even keep your own rants on-topic.

EDIT: Just for clarity in case anyone's unfamiliar with the term:

_"Messages intended solely to annoy and/or offend other users by going against the clear nature of a board, topic or chat room."

"deliberately provoking arguments on newsgroups or bulletin boards, with no other intent than to gain attention for the sake of attention."_


----------



## ThomasH (Jul 9, 2008)

I never accused you of saying that. It takes at least two to argue. If you pay attention my rant is on topic. What ever, I ain't even going to waste any more time on you. Talk to a wall willya?


----------



## Tim Benzedrine (Jul 10, 2008)

I have to ask. Just what sort of animal meets YOUR requirements of being worthy of bring companions for us? Do you hate cats? Lemurs? Naked mole rats? Actually, I'm not crazy about naked mole rats myself. Interesting critters, but kinda disgusting looking. Someone really ought to start a "Clothe the naked mole rats" campaign, have a telethon or perhaps get Bono to champion the cause with an all-star music video or something. Get some pants on those things. Maybe provide dental care if there is any cash left over, have you seen the incisors on those things? There is clearly an market for naked mole rat braces.  But I digress.

Do you have problems with other animals, say boa constrictors for example, that have been selectively bred? You know, for different colour morphs and things like that?

Just to show that I'm nothing if not fair, I gotta agree with you on the whole crested Chinese dog thing. Now THAT is a case of genetic cruelty if I ever saw one. They look like someone took a chihuahua and crossed it with one of those naked mole rats I mentioned earlier. But don't get me started on those atrocities of nature again!
 Anyway, back to the matter at hand, you seem to be a bit out to lunch in regards to the domestication of wolves into dogs. 
Just a quit googling of "wolf life span" brought up many results like _"In the wild Wolves rarely live beyond 10 years. However, they can live for up to 20 years in captivity. _"

Now, every dog I've had, with the exception of one, have lived to at least 12 years, with a couple hitting the 16 year mark, so that's a pretty decent trade off, if you ask me. I'm not gonna look it up, but I imagine the average life-span of a domestic dog is about 12 years, depending on the breed. Someone more savvy about dogs can confirm or dispute that guess, if they care to.
I think one of the mistakes that animal rights nuts make, (and I'm not saying you are an AR nut any more than I'm saying you are a troll, you just _sound_ a little like one or the other, or maybe both) is that they see the domestication of animals for pets as some sort of slavery, when in a lot of cases it is more like symbiosis. Both parties benefit from the exploitation of the other. I'm not talking about the use of animals for food or sport, that's a whole different debate.
But in the case of dogs or cats, they  supply us with  companionship, security, entertainment, protection from  naked mole rats, and various other services. In return, they get medical care, shelter, regular feedings, belly rubs, the latest in squeaky toy technology, and other assorted comforts. Again, not a bad trade-off, if you ask me

Anyway, this is what sets of my troll alarm:
 "_Not to mention you'll probably need an alarm system FROM the dog. They have more human body parts rotting in their stomachs than any other animal and kill an estimated thirty five people a year in the states alone! They go after the weak, mostly killing children and the elderly. Thats more than all the other captive animals combined. Why dogs are loved, not regulated and called man's best friend is beyond me. More like man's baby killer._"

Wow, an entire 35 people! Truly dogs are the scourge of the earth second only to telemarketers and naked mole rats! How many dogs do you suppose are out there? That's a pretty small number of dog related deaths considering the dog population. Needless to say, any dog related fatality is a tragedy, but 35 fatalities isn't exactly an epidemic. Of course I'm sure that if you figured in non-fatal attacks, the number would jump considerably, but you did say "kill" not "injure".
I noodled around a bit and learned that from 1990 to 2003, 756 people were struck and killed by lightning. If I calculated correctly, that's *58* people killed a year. Do you worry a lot about lightning? 

 If your post is on the level, and like some others in the thread, I'm not entirely convinced it is, you sound like you have a serious dog phobia. Or maybe  baby issues. Either way, it would probably be in your best interest to concentrate those fears on something that can be an actual menace. Like naked mole rats.


----------



## ThomasH (Jul 10, 2008)

I have problems with any domesticated/selectively bred animal. Including "morphs" more like mutants. Wolves *DO* live longer than dogs would in the wild and we already know they live longer in captivity. 20 years is a considerable bit more than 12, eh? So you basicly proved my point. I kind of believe animal rights. I believe we shouldn't use animals to our benifit or change what they are. But I also believe that some pests need to be killed for our safety but they should always be respected and killed humanely. We'll never know if the domesticated wanted to be domesticated so we shouldn't have forced it. You could spend a million dollars on toys for your dog but they still don't _nearly_ mimic the simulation of wilderness. Don't bring cats into this we're already debating over enough. Think what you want. I don't care about lightning. It doesn't go after the weak and helpless, its natural and I'm safe cause it only kills idiots. BTW my dog number was about ONLY the U.S, I don't know what yours was about. I don't have dog phobia. It just completely pisses me off that now no matter where I go I have to listen to the damn barking every night and day. I just don't get why people love dogs.


----------



## pitbulllady (Jul 10, 2008)

BoaConstrictor said:


> I am 100% against dogs. They are stupid, eat a ton, bark constantly and require a lot of care. I think our domestication of dogs over thousands of years IS morally wrong. From being inbred some many times we have engineered them to be pretty and helpful. But we have also engineered them to become much, much weaker. They now have shorter lives, they suffer from issues that a full blooded wolf would never face and lets face it they are a heck of a lot more obnoxious than a wolf! Dogs bark and bark and bark until you feel like you have a helpless crying good for nothing baby. The only difference between a dog and a helpless baby is the dog is stronger, the baby will grow up to independance, and of course the dog didn't come out of a [human] uterus. Not to mention you'll probably need an alarm system *FROM* the dog. They have more human body parts rotting in their stomachs than any other animal and kill an estimated thirty five people a year in the states alone! They go after the weak, mostly killing children and the elderly. Thats more than all the other captive animals combined. Why dogs are loved, not regulated and called man's best friend is beyond me. More like man's baby killer.


It's very, very obvious you've never actually kept real wolves.  I HAVE, and guess what?  THEY ARE JUST LIKE DOGS, because they ARE the same species!  With the exception of behaviors that we have selectively bred for in some dog breeds, or rather, selectively enhanced, as those behaviors were there all along, wolf behavior is identical to dog behavior.  Everything you find obnoxious and unpleasant about dogs, you'll see the same thing in wolves.  Plus, they shed a TON of hair, unlike short-coated dogs.  And, no, actually HORSES kill more people per year than any other domesticated animal in the US, and I'm not even including people falling from or being thrown by horses, but I have never, ever heard such hate directed towards horses.  It's rather stupid, if I must say so myself, to come on an animal forum and spew hate towards ANY animal, especially when every single one of us, regardless of what animal we CHOOSE to keep, is under attack by the Animal Rights people, who want nothing more than to take away OUR rights to choose what sort of animals we keep, by eliminating animal ownership, period!  While they're busy with their propaganda to convince you and others of your ilk to hate dogs, and make it illegal to keep dogs, they're equally busy convincing old Mrs. Foo-Foo Dog Owner that your spiders, snakes, scorpions, etc., are a major threat to her and her beloved grandchildren, either through escapes/releases, followed by attacks, or from spreading Salmonella that will kill all the little babies.  I'm surprised they haven't linked the outbreak in tomatoes and other veggies to some "exotic" animal keeper, yet.  Every time someone starts up with their "I hate(insert animal type here) and wish we'd just get rid of all of 'em" rhetoric, it hurts all of us, because it gives more power and more credence to the people who want to achieve an animal-free society, by any means.

pitbulllady


----------



## crpy (Jul 10, 2008)

Dogs help so many people in so many ways from guide dogs to bomb dogs, they are to be revered.
 Wise up Boa.


----------



## Mushroom Spore (Jul 10, 2008)

BoaConstrictor said:


> Talk to a wall willya?


It seems I already am.


----------



## ThomasH (Jul 10, 2008)

PB Lady: Dogs will *NEVER* become illegal. The government's number one concern is the economy. Dogs are ABSOLUTELY perfect for the economy. They draw in money by the 100's of millions a year. Look at tobacco and alcohol, there are groups and commercials against it every where. Alcohol and tobbaco draw in enough money to be ignored by the government. Other exotics not so much money so the government is free to hate those and use scare tactics against them. I've been around wolves, they are nothing like dogs. You're probably talking about dog and wolf mixes. Why should hair shedding be an issue? There is no reason to keep them indoors anyway, the obvious exception being vet visits.
crpy: There is nothing that a dog can do that technology can't. The only reason some still rely on dogs is that dogs are cheaper than the technology and more fun to use.


----------



## Tim Benzedrine (Jul 10, 2008)

BoaConstrictor said:


> I have problems with any domesticated/selectively bred animal. Including "morphs" more like mutants.


Okay, just a quick hypocrisy check, there.





> Wolves *DO* live longer than dogs would in the wild and we already know they live longer in captivity. 20 years is a considerable bit more than 12, eh? So you basicly proved my point.


Maybe. But if they need to be in captivity to gain that 8 year benefit, what difference does it make if they are domesticated>
Also, if you take into consideration that animals are blessed with lacking the knowledge that their time is limited, I'm not so sure that having a comfortable, safe life at the cost of having 8 years or so shaved off their life-span is a bad thing.
 Naturally, we've kept these longevity facts hidden from dogs. Or at least have tried to, but you always have ARAs going around trumpeting that the dogs have been short-changed. Once the dogs catch on, we'll end up with a lot of clinically depressed pooches who have decided that life should be something out of a Jack London novel.
 Probably the ones that bother you by barking are the ones that found out they got screwed and are just bitchin' about it.



> I kind of believe animal rights. I believe we shouldn't use animals to our benifit or change what they are.


So you refuse virtually all medical aid? That's commendable. A tad dangerous, but noble nonetheless. Medicines and surgical procedures are for wimps, anyway.



> But I also believe that some pests need to be killed for our safety


 Wait. That is kinda for our benefit too, right? Now I'm all confused!



> We'll never know if the domesticated wanted to be domesticated so we shouldn't have forced it.


Well, when asked if they wished to be domesticated, 8 out of ten wolves said nothing. One said  "Growl-rawrrr-bark-rowf!" The tenth ate the pollster. In most countries this is considered implied consent, and would stand up in court so the wolves were rounded up at gunpoint and forced to subjugate to us. And that's how we got domestic dogs.
Don't believe those commie pinko stories of how they hung around humans and slowly built up a mutual trust, that's just propaganda.






> Don't bring cats into this we're already debating over enough.


I'm not setting up a debate of cats vs dogs. I merely wondered whether you thought the world was better off without them, a creature whose background lies along parallel lines as far as domestication goes. it isn't about which one is better. Call it another hypocrisy check if you like.



> Think what you want. I don't care about lightning. It doesn't go after the weak and helpless, its natural


Hey, what's more natural than going after the sick and the helpless. I really hope you don't think that the wolf, in all of his Wilderness Nobility(tm) only goes for prey that has a sporting chance. Hmmmm....

_Pack Leader: Okay youse guys, here's how it's going down. You see that group of weak fawns over there? Well, ignore 'em! We got bigger fish to fry. We are going after that bull elk over there. Yeah, that one, the one that is sharpening it's antlers with that wolf skull.

Fang: Gee, I dunno boss, that thing looks like it weighs in at 2000 pounds. What do we weigh as a group? 600 pounds? Can't we at least go after that old blind cow elk with the broken leg?

Pack Leader: Aw, shaddup! We are noble savages. Those fawns would be easy pickings and the cow wouldn't be any kind of challenge at all. Nope, that bull will take a few of us with it, but those of you that don't make it won't have died in vain!

Fang: Dammit, I KNEW I shooda took that pollster up on his domestication offer instead of eating him!_



> BTW my dog number was about ONLY the U.S, I don't know what yours was about.


Whoops! My bad! I meant to state that those numbers were a compilation of lightning fatalities in the U.S.



> I don't have dog phobia. It just completely pisses me off that now no matter where I go I have to listen to the damn barking every night and day. I just don't get why people love dogs.


So now it begins to sound more like a personal issue rather than moral outrage.
And I don't get why so many people love sports, olives, and that one chick from "Sex and the City", but there ya go.....


----------



## dtknow (Jul 10, 2008)

Tim Benzedrine said:


> Well, when asked if they wished to be domesticated, 8 out of ten wolves said nothing. One said  "Growl-rawrrr-bark-rowf!" The tenth ate the pollster. In most countries this is considered implied consent, and would stand up in court so the wolves were rounded up at gunpoint and forced to subjugate to us. And that's how we got domestic dogs.
> Don't believe those commie pinko stories of how they hung around humans and slowly built up a mutual trust, that's just propaganda.


Haha this is a gem! Its funny how flame wars bring out the best and the worst in people.

Oh, may I end with the question. What do you keep, Boa constrictor?


----------



## ThomasH (Jul 10, 2008)

Whatever. One side isn't going to make the other's mind change, lets call it over already. You can have dogs just shut 'em up at night.



Tim Benzedrine said:


> and that one chick from "Sex and the City", but there ya go.....


Sarah Jessica Parker? Yeah I know, me neither. Her face looks like a foot for god's sake. What does that have to do with sex?


----------



## ThomasH (Jul 10, 2008)

dtknow said:


> Oh, may I end with the question. What do you keep, Boa constrictor?


Sure. Herps and Inverts.


----------



## arachyd (Jul 10, 2008)

"There is nothing that a dog can do that technology can't."

How do you come up with a statement like that? What technology will love you more than it loves other people (which by the way can't be measured since technology does not love)? What technology will sacrifice its "life" for someone the way a dog will? What technology actually will enjoy your company and the sound of your voice? 

As far as the 35 people killed by dogs per year...dogs have continually saved many more people than they've killed and a large number of those that have killed people are dogs that have been trained to attack or have been mistreated. This hardly proves that dogs are murderous fiends. 

The relationships between people and dogs are not entirely unnatural. Dogs (and wolves) are highly social creatures. Even when there are other members of their own kind around they have frequently been known to adopt or develop friendships with other species both while pets and while in the wild.

If you have neighbors who let their dogs bark all the time guess what? It isn't the dogs' fault, it is the neighbors' fault. That is why most towns have noise and nuisance barking laws. Call the police and file a complaint if it bugs you but don't go making generalized hate statements about an animal that millions of people in the US and worldwide have been welcoming into their homes for hundreds of years with no report of millions of dog-mauling deaths.


----------



## crpy (Jul 10, 2008)

Heres another thing boa,
my great dane was abused by his former owner, he was beaten on the head by a weird control freak that had no clue about canine psychology. when I came into his life he would violently shy away if I went to touch his head. I worked with him for along time and now I can do anything to him, he is practically glued to me. You see ,he trusts me completely, and you can bet he will never trust the former again, they dont forget.

This is the thing, I made the difference and he knows it and I LOVE THAT BOND.


----------



## Veneficus (Jul 11, 2008)

BoaConstrictor said:


> Oh really? Explain why the domestication of an animal should be ethical. Why should WE chose an animal's looks, life style and service we want from it? We aren't Jesus, we shouldn't make his decisions. The only thing I said that wasn't a fact is that I mistook 100s of years for 1,000.


If you paid attention to your rant, you'd see where you made the generalizations: 



> Dogs bark and bark and bark until you feel like you have a helpless crying good for nothing baby.


Not all dogs bark and bark and bark.   There are several breeds which actually do not bark.  And if the dog does bark non-stop, it is not the dog's fault but the owner's fault for not training them properly.

I agree with Spore, you're just trolling which is why I will not respond to you anymore--I have more important things to do with my time.


----------



## pitbulllady (Jul 11, 2008)

Here's something else that some of you will find interesting.  According to current research, especially that conducted by canine biologist Dr. I. Lehr Brisbin, a personal acquaintance of mine, the old notion of cavemen going out and killing adult wolves and kidnapping helpless pups to bring home to the cave and "enslave", thus beginning the domestication of the dog, is simply untrue.  It's a MYTH.  In reality, the WOLVES chose US-THEY made the choice to start hanging around human encampments, because there was a mutual, symbiotic relationship between the two species.  The wolves benefited because they got free meals of meat and bone scraps and human waste to eat, and the humans benefited because of the wolves' superior senses, and their tendency to alert the humans to the presence of intruders, and their ability to follow wounded game much better than any human trackers could.  Human camps that had resident wolf packs were more likely to survive than those that didn't.  In turn, the humans protected the wolves that did the best job of alerting against danger, which began the selective process of choosing barkers over non-barkers, and also selectively fed/protected wolves that were the best trackers.  No one forced those wolves to live with early humans; they CHOSE to.  Ditto for cats-they began living among humans because that's where rodents were most likely to be found.  It was a mutual agreement among two species of carnivore.

I DO find it ironic that someone would go on such a diatribe against the process of domesticating animals, yet clearly has no problem with taking reptiles and inverts from the wild to bring into our homes.  Once you start captive breeding of ANY species, and once changes to either inate behavior or appearance start to crop up, that is now a domesticated animal.  It doesn't take many generations, either, as the now-famous Russian fur farm fox experiment proved.  I would certainly consider many strains of Boa Constrictors, Corn Snakes, Ball Pythons and many other reptiles to be domesticated in the sense that they no longer look like their wild counterparts, anymore than a Whippet looks like the wolf it came from.  With inverts, being less-complex, those changes probably will not be as noticeable, if at all, but I would be willing to bet that if someone did a detailed genetic study of captive _Brachypelmas_ vs. those still found in the wild, some notable differences at the genetic level would show up, which would mean that our _B. smithis_ and _B. vagans_ are, for all practical intent and purposes, domesticated animals.

pitbulllady


----------



## JColt (Jul 11, 2008)

My Boxer has been the best! He is a big clown and sweet and friendly - Unless you grab one of the family and he makes Cujo look like a puppy! Loves kids and is very gentle with the smallest kids. Brings injured animals to me and gently drops them into my hand. If someones lurking outside he scares the hell out of them with one "woof" Potty trained quickly and loves kitties too! My little springer was attacked by a rottweiler a few yrs back and Boxer tore into it like a demon. I couldnt believe it was same dog. When it was over he ran to the springer and started licking her and wouldnt leave her side. Poor guy is 13 now and going deaf


----------



## dtknow (Jul 11, 2008)

BoaConstrictor said:


> Sure. Herps and Inverts.


Ok, inverts we can leave out. But what herps? Their are many domesticated herps around as well.  And unlike dogs, domesticated herps are really no better than their wild counterparts.


----------



## pitbulllady (Jul 11, 2008)

BoaConstrictor said:


> PB Lady: Dogs will *NEVER* become illegal. The government's number one concern is the economy. Dogs are ABSOLUTELY perfect for the economy. They draw in money by the 100's of millions a year. Look at tobacco and alcohol, there are groups and commercials against it every where. Alcohol and tobbaco draw in enough money to be ignored by the government. Other exotics not so much money so the government is free to hate those and use scare tactics against them. I've been around wolves, they are nothing like dogs. You're probably talking about dog and wolf mixes. Why should hair shedding be an issue? There is no reason to keep them indoors anyway, the obvious exception being vet visits.
> crpy: There is nothing that a dog can do that technology can't. The only reason some still rely on dogs is that dogs are cheaper than the technology and more fun to use.


I'm not talking about wolf-dog mixes, kid.  I kept and maintained a pack of pure wolves, along with Carolina Dogs, New Guinea Singing Dogs and real Akita Inu as part of a comparitive canine behavioral study in completing my Masters in Biology.  I KNOW DOGS, and I KNOW WOLVES!  My experiences are not based on some stupid romanticized notion of the noble wolf as some etherial, god-like being, far superior to man and man's creations, since they're not based on any hatred of _Homo sapiens_ or of domesticated animals, as your views obviously are.  

Technology can't love you.  Technology cannot give comfort to a lonely old person or sick child.  Technology pales in comparison to millions of years of evolution that went into the dog before it was known as a dog, that cannot be erased.  Nobody asked, in starting this thread, whether or not a sterile, cold machine would be better than a dog.  The original poster wanted to know what kind of DOG, as in D-O-G, NOT a freaking MACHINE, would be best suited for his purpose.  For a person who admittedly hates dogs, and all domesticated animals, and probably from what I can read between those transparent lines, hates humans as well, to answer with their worthless opinion of the matter is like a PETA vegan trying to tell someone which cut of steak to choose from a restaurant menu, after all.  Of what use would be the recommendations made by someone who finds the whole notion of eating meat to be abhorant, for someone who obviously wants to eat a steak and wants to know which one tastes the best?  NONE, obviously.

pitbulllady


----------



## equuskat (Jul 11, 2008)

Wow, somebody here really likes to stir up controversy.

Blatant trolling.  You don't say stuff like that unless you're lookin' for an e-argument.

Most people on this site are animal lovers IN GENERAL, even if we have our favorites.  Starting such controversy is irrational.


----------



## Tim Benzedrine (Jul 11, 2008)

pitbulllady said:


> Here's something else that some of you will find interesting.  According to current research, especially that conducted by canine biologist Dr. I. Lehr Brisbin, a personal acquaintance of mine, the old notion of cavemen going out and killing adult wolves and kidnapping helpless pups to bring home to the cave and "enslave", thus beginning the domestication of the dog, is simply untrue.  It's a MYTH.
> pitbulllady


Huh. I never even knew that theory existed. I thought the mutual benefit explanation was pretty much accepted as canon.


----------



## mikeythefireman (Jul 12, 2008)

I like puppies.  They're cute. 

I vote for Rotties, too.  In case anyone is still here for the original post.  We bred them growing up and I couldn't get enough of them.


----------



## Tleilaxu (Jul 12, 2008)

Get a lab! Ours will bark and growl at a stranger like she wants to kill him/her but when she gets too come in contact with the said stranger she will just lick them to death and possibly pee on them due to the excitment of a new person giving her a belly rub. gotta love lab pups and adults!


----------



## Veneficus (Jul 12, 2008)

pitbulllady said:


> I kept and maintained a pack of pure wolves, along with Carolina Dogs, New Guinea Singing Dogs and real Akita Inu as part of a comparitive canine behavioral study in completing my Masters in Biology.  I KNOW DOGS, and I KNOW WOLVES!  My experiences are not based on some stupid romanticized notion of the noble wolf as some etherial, god-like being, far superior to man and man's creations, since they're not based on any hatred of _Homo sapiens_ or of domesticated animals, as your views obviously are.
> 
> pitbulllady


I *LOVED* reading your posts.  It makes the thread worthwhile.  Thanks.

I'm sure you're familiar with the new research recently published in National Geographic about dog's intelligence?  I think there have been a few shows  about how due to dog's domestication, they show intelligence superior to apes in how they think, and can understand and communicate with us.  Heck for all I know you might have been involved in the research.


----------



## 357wheelgunner (Jul 12, 2008)

> I agree. If you already have an alarm system installed, then logically, I'm not sure why you would want a dog solely for the purposes of guarding.


In an interview with real professional criminals, the crooks were asked what people should do if they want to be safe at night.  The answer was consistent - more than one dog.  One dog can be pistol whipped, knifed, etc. but two dogs are almost impossible to deal with.

Most alarm companies, if asked, will recommend a _ trained _ guard dog in addition to the alarm system.  An alarm system can be disabled, as can a dog.  Hopefully the dog and alarm will give you ample time to get the shotgun out and get your family in one room to wait for the police to come and clear the house.



> Keep in mind that despite the possible threatening physical appearance of a dog, it won't really do that much to protect you. In the 1800's, when all you had was an intruder, unarmed and with little to protect themselves, then yes. A dog would probably work.


I don't know what kind of dogs you are used to.  I was mauled by one when I was younger, I will never forget how strong that dog was, how sharp the teeth, and how hard it fought.  Dogs can be killed, but a good one will tear the intruder apart before going down.

In the 1800s everyone had guns, swords, axes, hatchets, and they weren't brainwashed cowards like the majority of overcivilized people around today.  They were used to strife, hardship, and fighting, and if they didn't know how to deal with it they wouldn't have lasted long.  They had dogs for the same reasons we do - to alert them to a threat.



> In today's era...with firearms, toxins, medicines, etc... I'd say someone who wanted to break into a house is going to, and they're going to end up killing your dog in the process.


Most people who break into houses are drug addicts, not professional criminals in a suit and tie or ninjasuit (depending on what kind of movie you watch too much of) with cans of spray to find lasers and whatnot.

Also, to those who said that if the crook was good with dogs the dog is useless...only if it's a weak nonaggressive dog.  My german shepherd wouldn't let anyone but myself, my wife, or my daughter into our house without alerting us.  If someone threw a steak or something at her she'd still keep barking until I came to see what was going on.

Not many people know how to train good strong guard dogs, hence the ignorance.  Don't confuse worthless lap dogs with a strong alert guard dog with a purpose.

An alarm system is not going to keep you safe.  It will notifiy the authorities to help, but until they get there you are on your own.  Guard dogs are the best thing for alerting you to danger.  An alarm system, backed up by a guard dog, backed up by a homeowner with a shotgun who knows how to use it under stress will ensure a safe home.


----------



## 357wheelgunner (Jul 12, 2008)

pitbulllady said:


> Technology can't love you.  Technology cannot give comfort to a lonely old person or sick child.  Technology pales in comparison to millions of years of evolution that went into the dog before it was known as a dog, that cannot be erased.  Nobody asked, in starting this thread, whether or not a sterile, cold machine would be better than a dog.  The original poster wanted to know what kind of DOG, as in D-O-G, NOT a freaking MACHINE, would be best suited for his purpose.  For a person who admittedly hates dogs, and all domesticated animals, and probably from what I can read between those transparent lines, hates humans as well, to answer with their worthless opinion of the matter is like a PETA vegan trying to tell someone which cut of steak to choose from a restaurant menu, after all.  Of what use would be the recommendations made by someone who finds the whole notion of eating meat to be abhorant, for someone who obviously wants to eat a steak and wants to know which one tastes the best?  NONE, obviously.



Fantastic post in so many ways :clap:


----------



## crpy (Jul 12, 2008)

357wheelgunner said:


> In an interview with real professional criminals, the crooks were asked what people should do if they want to be safe at night.  The answer was consistent - more than one dog.  One dog can be pistol whipped, knifed, etc. but two dogs are almost impossible to deal with.
> 
> Most alarm companies, if asked, will recommend a _ trained _ guard dog in addition to the alarm system.  An alarm system can be disabled, as can a dog.  Hopefully the dog and alarm will give you ample time to get the shotgun out and get your family in one room to wait for the police to come and clear the house.
> 
> ...


Good post:clap:


----------



## hairmetalspider (Jul 12, 2008)

357wheelgunner said:


> In an interview with real professional criminals, the crooks were asked what people should do if they want to be safe at night.  The answer was consistent - more than one dog.  One dog can be pistol whipped, knifed, etc. but two dogs are almost impossible to deal with.


I'd like to see this article. Please site certified, proven information for this and then I'll buy it.
There is also, as many crimes, different factors contributing. (i.e. If such article exists, the 'criminals' it was done on could have been a single spectrum. "Professional criminals" covers a broad range...more than could possible or logically be compared in a single data gathering.)



> Most alarm companies, if asked, will recommend a _ trained _ guard dog in addition to the alarm system.  An alarm system can be disabled, as can a dog.  Hopefully the dog and alarm will give you ample time to get the shotgun out and get your family in one room to wait for the police to come and clear the house.


I assume you have a system then?
And actually, an 'alarm company' will not recommend that, as it would decrease sales on their end or possibly stop a sale all together. I'm sure at some point you'll get an employees opinion, but it's not protocol. The point you're trying to make does little to justify your response, as you yourself pointed out they both can be disabled. Therefore, if someone is that well equipped and ready for an attack, one is not going to last longer than the other necessarily.




> I don't know what kind of dogs you are used to.  I was mauled by one when I was younger, I will never forget how strong that dog was, how sharp the teeth, and how hard it fought.  Dogs can be killed, but a good one will tear the intruder apart before going down.


Using an argument from you were younger isn't going to be a reinforcing one. Children are obviously going to be hurt more by any said physical element than most adults would be. And no dog is going to tear an intruder apart if it has a bullet in it's head. Man has far worse mechanisms than the natural defenses of a dog. I also highly dislike your definition of a 'good guard dog' being one who can 'tear someone apart.' This is the reason certain breeds are  being euthanized and abandoned at shelters by the thousands. you do not train an animal to kill. Period.



> In the 1800s everyone had guns, swords, axes, hatchets, and they weren't brainwashed cowards like the majority of overcivilized people around today.  They were used to strife, hardship, and fighting, and if they didn't know how to deal with it they wouldn't have lasted long.  They had dogs for the same reasons we do - to alert them to a threat.


Said weapons weren't as readily available as they are in today's society, and many weren't nearly as dangerous. Houses were also small and far easier to break into. electric alarm systems were also not available at this time.





> Most people who break into houses are drug addicts, not professional criminals in a suit and tie or ninjasuit (depending on what kind of movie you watch too much of) with cans of spray to find lasers and whatnot.


That's a BS comment and sounds like you've been watching far too much CSI.
I suggest you read more into sociology before making tv spawned assumptions.
Even if said comment was true, you're suggesting that a drug dealer would not have the intellect to entail such a crime or carry weapons, both of which is untrue.



> Also, to those who said that if the crook was good with dogs the dog is useless...only if it's a weak nonaggressive dog.  My german shepherd wouldn't let anyone but myself, my wife, or my daughter into our house without alerting us.  If someone threw a steak or something at her she'd still keep barking until I came to see what was going on.
> 
> Not many people know how to train good strong guard dogs, hence the ignorance.  Don't confuse worthless lap dogs with a strong alert guard dog with a purpose.


Hate to break it to you bucko, but not everyone wants a killer guard dog. Some people enjoy the life our their animals and perceive them as companions, not a mechanism you train to your liking. This paragraph alone makes me think of a large farm house, a few shot guns, and some moon shine.[/QUOTE]



> An alarm system is not going to keep you safe.  It will notifiy the authorities to help, but until they get there you are on your own.  Guard dogs are the best thing for alerting you to danger.  An alarm system, backed up by a guard dog, backed up by a homeowner with a shotgun who knows how to use it under stress will ensure a safe home.


I spoke too soon...there IS mention of a shot gun in there too.
This is your opinion, and you have a right to it. I would never expect a living thing to have guard my life. You should be able to do that with your common sense. An alarm system alone is more than enough protect your household, particularly with the state of the art systems that are available now.

I feel as though this reply was probably brought on because I told you what a ridiculous idea it was to put a bird in a five gallon tank, as you inquired. You and I obviously have very different opinions, and I suggest we simply accept that and move on.


----------



## crpy (Jul 12, 2008)

hairmetalspider said:


> Said weapons weren't as readily available as they are in today's society, and many weren't nearly as dangerous. Houses were also small and far easier to break into. electric alarm systems were also not available at this time.
> 
> 
> What????? you needed these items to survive i those days hrmtl, come on use some common sense.
> ...


----------



## hairmetalspider (Jul 12, 2008)

crpy said:


> hairmetalspider said:
> 
> 
> > Said weapons weren't as readily available as they are in today's society, and many weren't nearly as dangerous. Houses were also small and far easier to break into. electric alarm systems were also not available at this time.
> ...


----------



## crpy (Jul 12, 2008)

hairmetalspider said:


> crpy said:
> 
> 
> > Many people couldn't even AFFORD guns in the 1800s. Particularly farmers and peasants.
> ...


----------



## sylverbullit (Jul 12, 2008)

Having both an alarm system and guard dog is something that I will always have.

My friend has an alarm and a rotti. 

His house was broken into a couple months ago. The robber had disabled the alarm system, but the dog heard someone outside and started freaking out. This gave my friend time to run up to his room for his 22.
By the time he got his cabinet unlocked the robber was already in the house and the dog had him pinned on the floor. My friend just had to use his rifle to hold the robber in place till the cops got there.


----------



## crpy (Jul 12, 2008)

True the farmers and peasants had no money, but they didn't need much, they used their head to figure things out. They didn't have things handed to them by the Gov. Here is a paragraph from the book "Life in Emmitsburg in the 1800s" written by nathaniel Rowe,

"I was apprenticed to a gunsmith named John Armstrong. We used to buy the barrels and make the stocks and other Parts. The first barrels were made by welding two bars of iron around a solid core. Later old horseshoe nails were made into gun barrels. Some of the barrels we bought in Lancaster, Pa., and some were made around here. We bored out the barrels ourselves testing the accuracy of the work by squinting through the bore at a bright light; any inequality would cast a shadow on the opposite side of the barrel. When I first apprenticed, the old flint-lock muskets were quite common but they were rapidly being replaced by the percussion-cap guns The choke barrel was unknown in those days. We had lots of game to shoot. Partridges and pheasants were plentiful and the wild pigeons came in clouds. There were deer and wild turkey on the mountains, too."

They loved their dogs too.


----------



## Xaranx (Jul 12, 2008)

hairmetalspider said:


> Hate to break it to you bucko, but not everyone wants a killer guard dog. Some people enjoy the life our their animals and perceive them as companions, not a mechanism you train to your liking. This paragraph alone makes me think of a large farm house, a few shot guns, and some moon shine.


And some people have no clue how to care for their animals, so their dog will become a neurotic, stressed, angry, people biter who can't even be restrained with a simple command, like a dog trained in family and home defense would do.


----------



## dtknow (Jul 12, 2008)

hairmetalspider: Don't really understand what you are arguing. You trying to say a dog is ineffective as house protection?

"I assume you have a system then?
And actually, an 'alarm company' will not recommend that, as it would decrease sales on their end or possibly stop a sale all together. I'm sure at some point you'll get an employees opinion, but it's not protocol. The point you're trying to make does little to justify your response, as you yourself pointed out they both can be disabled. Therefore, if someone is that well equipped and ready for an attack, one is not going to last longer than the other necessarily."

Just proved the point you were arguing against. One thing is for sure...an alarm system is easier to get around than an alarm system and a dog.


----------



## vbrooke (Jul 12, 2008)

pitbulllady said:


> You're absolutely WRONG about that, vbrooke!  A well-bred, well-trained American Pit Bull Terrier is the absolute WORST, LOUSIEST guard dog EVER!  I've had, and bred, some of the most well-bred APBT's anyone would ever see, and believe me, I KNOW APBT's!  This breed was originally bred to have ZERO human aggression, since handlers in dog fights actually got into the ring with the dogs, as did the referee, and they had to be able to pick up and handle these dogs in the heat of battle without risk of being bitten.  Any dog that so much as growled or snapped at a human, for any reason, got removed from the gene pool, usually by means of a .22 bullet between its eyes.  The main ancestors of this breed were the "Old Family" Irish bull-and-terriers that were brought over here to the US by poor Irish immigrants, and those dogs were often the only thing of value that those people had, which they could barter for things they needed in their new country, like food, clothing or furniture, so the dogs had to be willing to go away with a total stranger and accept that stranger as their new master immediately.  Even the AKC standard for the show version of the APBT, the American Staffordshire Terrier, specifically mentions that willingness to accept any person as their master right away.  That's not a trait that a good guard dog would have, needless to say!  A well-bred, well-trained American Pit Bull does not understand the meaning of "stranger"; to such a dog, everyone is a long-lost friend!  This is probably the most frequent victim of dog thieves, too-they can literally just drive up in a yard full of Pit Bulls and load them up and take them away.  I had it happen to me.  I lost four generations of dogs in one afternoon, most likely to someone the dogs had never met.  They're just happy to see everybody and it does not occur to them that some people are up to no good.  While an APBT would probably defend its owner in the case of an immediate violent personal attack on the owner, they will not protect property and do not have the natural suspicious nature and high territoriality of a guarding breed.  So-called "Pit Bulls" that ARE naturally protective are in all likelihood cross-breeds, since there is a lot of cross-breeding with larger Mastiff breeds to produce these heavy, bulky and aggressive giant "Pit Bulls", but of course, the results are still mixed-bred dogs, NOT real APBT's, and do not have proper APBT temperament!  Any "Pit Bull" that acts aggressive towards people entering or nearing their owner's property, whether or not that person is behaving in a threatening manner, is either a mutt, or it's been specifically trained, usually through abusive methods, to make it that way, and is most definitely NOT a "well-bred" example of the breed.
> 
> I keep Catahoula Leopard Dogs for guard dogs.  They ARE, unlike Pit Bulls, naturally suspicious of and defensive against strangers, and are every bit as "game".  However, I believe that the original poster stated that he wanted a dog with naturally-erect ears, even though contrary to popular belief, erect-eared dogs do not necessarily hear better than dogs with dropped or cropped ears.  I can assure you my Catahoulas have no hearing difficulty at all, even though they do have drop ears, like a Rottweiler's.  IF you can find a well-bred German Shepherd, or Belgian Malinois, those would be my next choices, followed by Dutch Shepherds.  The latter two are medium-sized breeds, now the preferred breeds used by police and military, and do not have as much coat as a GSD, so if size and shedding is a big issue, those would be two to look into.  But a Pit Bull, no-unless you want a dog to lick a burglar's face and help him carry out your tv and furniture!
> 
> pitbulllady


I want to apologize for upsetting you. I understand people are very passionate about somethings. I did not intend to give Pit's a bad name. In all honesty, your right. You are very well educated and experienced with dogs. Thank you for setting me straight. I'll educate myself more thoroughly before I post a random thought again.


----------



## Laceface (Jul 13, 2008)

I grew up with a pit bull/ lab mix, and he was the most amazing dog in the world. He was our babysitter on more than one occasion, and he did amazing. Any child, could do anything to him, and he was okay with it. Pull his tail, climb on him, anything, and he's happy. But adults, if he didn't know them, he was very territorial of his home and family. When my dad had to do quick errands, he would take us with the dog, and leave us with him in the truck...and no one dared get within ten feet of our truck. Shadow knew his job 
I know part of why he was the way he was was because he wasn't properly socialized and such, but he was the way we wanted him to be. You try and enter our door, and shadow wasn't first introduced to you, you WOULD get bit.
I know it's more then possible to have a super friendly pit, that doesn't do such things, but Shadow wasn't one of them, lol.


----------



## ThomasH (Jul 13, 2008)

arachyd said:


> "There is nothing that a dog can do that technology can't."
> 
> How do you come up with a statement like that? What technology will love you more than it loves other people (which by the way can't be measured since technology does not love)?


 Dude, thats what chicks are for. There is absolutely no point in having an animal "love you" or technology for that matter.
Like I said this argument is over.


----------



## 357wheelgunner (Jul 13, 2008)

experience > booklearning



hairmetalspider said:


> I'd like to see this article. Please site certified, proven information for this and then I'll buy it.
> There is also, as many crimes, different factors contributing. (i.e. If such article exists, the 'criminals' it was done on could have been a single spectrum. "Professional criminals" covers a broad range...more than could possible or logically be compared in a single data gathering.)


It was a special on the Discovery Channel on "professional" criminals.  No article can be cited.  



hairmetalspider said:


> I assume you have a system then?
> And actually, an 'alarm company' will not recommend that, as it would decrease sales on their end or possibly stop a sale all together. I'm sure at some point you'll get an employees opinion, but it's not protocol. The point you're trying to make does little to justify your response, as you yourself pointed out they both can be disabled. Therefore, if someone is that well equipped and ready for an attack, one is not going to last longer than the other necessarily.


Just because some salesman are dishonest, doesn't mean that some are educated capable men who care about others' security.  An alarm should supplement awareness, preparedness, and a good dog.  

All you can do is prepare for the worst and try your best.  Overlapping security is doing that, getting only an alarm and then recommend that others do only that to make yourself feel better for a poor decision is not the right thing to do.

I've had 3 home invasion attempts.  After the third one we started dog shopping.  Alarms can be disabled, and most people sleep heavily.  As long as my dog draws breath, I know that I won't wake up to a criminal in the bedroom.  I'll wake up as soon as he steps into the house, then I know exactly what to do.



hairmetalspider said:


> Using an argument from you were younger isn't going to be a reinforcing one. Children are obviously going to be hurt more by any said physical element than most adults would be.


I was a young man when I was attacked, as big as many adult men.  Dogs are powerful when motivated.

I spoke from experience, you can't say the same about anything that you typed.



hairmetalspider said:


> And no dog is going to tear an intruder apart if it has a bullet in it's head. Man has far worse mechanisms than the natural defenses of a dog. I also highly dislike your definition of a 'good guard dog' being one who can 'tear someone apart.' This is the reason certain breeds are  being euthanized and abandoned at shelters by the thousands. you do not train an animal to kill. Period.


Have you ever shot a moving dog?  I have, and it is NOT easy (rabid animals are common in rural areas, theres nothing to do but shoot them sadly).  I used to shoot hundreds of rounds every week, and I still have trouble shooting moving objects that are much larger than a dog.  Most crackheads who rob houses stuff a stolen gun in their crotch that they've never fired, they're not marksman.

A good dog, like a good person, has the judgement and training needed to know when to use teeth and when not to.  My dog is a pefect example.  No one in our family has ever been bitten, but she is very protective of us.



hairmetalspider said:


> Said weapons weren't as readily available as they are in today's society, and many weren't nearly as dangerous. Houses were also small and far easier to break into. electric alarm systems were also not available at this time..


You must be reading something else, I said that people had :



> guns, swords, axes, hatchets


I can chip an axe or hatchet out of a rock and lash it to a piece of wood.  How is that any less dangerous than its modern day counterpart?  Every house had knives, if you don't think that a person can kill to defend their home with a knife, do a search.  Not everyone had guns, but most houses had at least one rifle available and ready.

What makes you think that homes in the 1800s didn't have basic tools like knives, guns, axes, etc.?



hairmetalspider said:


> That's a BS comment and sounds like you've been watching far too much CSI.
> I suggest you read more into sociology before making tv spawned assumptions.


I suggest you stop "reading more into sociology" and talk to your local police.  Ask them who commits most robberies and home invasions.  They'll most likely tell you that it's either a drug addict looking for stuff to pawn, or a rapist neighbor after the woman of the house.



hairmetalspider said:


> Hate to break it to you bucko, but not everyone wants a killer guard dog. Some people enjoy the life our their animals and perceive them as companions, not a mechanism you train to your liking. This paragraph alone makes me think of a large farm house, a few shot guns, and some moon shine.


Few people want a killer dog, but many people want a dog to serve a purpose.  I hate to break it to you bucko, but not everyone wants a yippy little lapdog that does whatever it wants and contributes nothing practical to the family (though some do and that's fine, I just don't get it).

Great job generalizing all rural people into drunken moonshiners, and all dogs that are worth something into "killer guard dogs".



hairmetalspider said:


> I spoke too soon...there IS mention of a shot gun in there too.
> This is your opinion, and you have a right to it. I would never expect a living thing to have guard my life. You should be able to do that with your common sense. An alarm system alone is more than enough protect your household, particularly with the state of the art systems that are available now.


The shotgun is more common in american households than any other firearm, save the .22 rifle.  You can hunt birds with it with a 26" barrel, then replace that barrel in 2 minutes with a 20" barrel with rifle sights and shoot deer with solid slugs, then replace that with an 18" barrel and load up with buckshot or #4 for home defense.  The shotgun is also the best weapon for short range confrontations at night, because a load of buckshot fires 8-12 9mm balls at once, almost ensuring the end of the fight.  That's why I brought it up talking about home security.  

I don't expect a "living thing to have guard my life".  I love my dog, she allows me to sleep deeply at night thanks to her sensetive ears and desire to protect our family.  My dog is revered for her contribution to the safety of our family.

After numerous breakins where we used to live, we learned through experience that security requires more than setting an alarm at night.



hairmetalspider said:


> I feel as though this reply was probably brought on because I told you what a ridiculous idea it was to put a bird in a five gallon tank, as you inquired. You and I obviously have very different opinions, and I suggest we simply accept that and move on.


Then let it die.  I personally would not bring up threads where I viciously attacked a n00b for asking a question (no matter how stupid) about something he declared that he knew nothing about, instead of educating him.    If you want to "simply accept that and move on", don't bring it up 

http://www.arachnoboards.com/ab/showthread.php?t=125199

If you notice, I even took your name out of my reply hoping you wouldn't take it as a personal attack.  The stuff that you wrote was a common theme throughout the thread, not limited to your post.  Your post simply had more ignorant, inexperienced security BS all in one place than any of the other posts to quote and pick apart, so I used that.


----------



## 357wheelgunner (Jul 13, 2008)

vbrooke said:


> I want to apologize for upsetting you. I understand people are very passionate about somethings. I did not intend to give Pit's a bad name. In all honesty, your right. You are very well educated and experienced with dogs. Thank you for setting me straight. I'll educate myself more thoroughly before I post a random thought again.


Wow, it's always impressive when someone realizes that they were wrong and learns from it.

:clap:    :clap:    :clap:


----------



## 357wheelgunner (Jul 13, 2008)

crpy said:


> Good post:clap:


Thanks, great sig


----------



## arachyd (Jul 13, 2008)

"Dude, thats what chicks are for. There is absolutely no point in having an animal "love you" or technology for that matter."

That would be "dudette".
If you're going to quote me at least quote me in context. My comment was a response to a comment on dogs vs technology not dogs vs things that love you. 

As far as your comment, it is one of the stupidest things I've seen written. Can we get a poll on how many here have been ripped off, divorced, financially ruined, cheated on and figuratively stabbed in the back by their beloved human significant other? A dog that loves you is loyal and would never do something intentionally knowing it will harm the ones it loves for some stupid, selfish reason.


----------



## mikeythefireman (Jul 13, 2008)

I think I'm in love.:clap: 



arachyd said:


> "Dude, thats what chicks are for. There is absolutely no point in having an animal "love you" or technology for that matter."
> 
> That would be "dudette".
> If you're going to quote me at least quote me in context. My comment was a response to a comment on dogs vs technology not dogs vs things that love you.
> ...


----------



## sassysmama (Jul 14, 2008)

It's pretty much a given that dogs are effective protection.  Think police dogs.  People that carry a gun at all times still like the benefit of a dog's instincts and protection.  And yes, I have seen tv shows that say that criminals are more afraid of dogs than guns.  In some ways, it doesn't make much sense, but in others, it really does.  Basically, even the best trained marksmen can miss, especially in the heat of the moment.  A dog can run faster and farther than a human.  They can smell and hear people even when they are hiding.  Once a police dog knows where the person is, there is very little that is going to stop them from biting.  And yes, a bullet will stop a dog.  But it will kill a person just as easily.
Dogs and alarm systems are both just deterrents.  If someone really wants to get in and kill you, there may be nothing that can stop them.  
I have no problem with guard dogs in theory.  The way some people execute it is another story.  It sounds like some people are opposed to the keeping of dogs for protection.  That's fine, but it does not mean that they are not good protection for others.  Many people are against the ownership of large snakes.  Doesn't mean I won't have one, or that they make lousy pets for me.  In a nutshell, there are some human beings that suck at keeping pets.  This should not be taken as the fault of the animal.  If a guard dog is vicious and attacks people at random, that is the fault of the owner, not the dog.  Police dogs can interact perfectly well with children one minute, and "get the bad guys" the next.  If you want a guard dog, find the right breed for you, train it properly, and treat it humanely.  If you don't want one, well, no one is saying you have to have one.


----------



## inneshealy (Jul 14, 2008)

BoaConstrictor said:


> Wolves *DO* live longer than dogs would in the wild and we already know they live longer in captivity. 20 years is a considerable bit more than 12, eh?


20 years is the record for wolves not the average. The average in the wild is about 8 years. The average for a domestic dog in a human environment is between 10 and 12.



BoaConstrictor said:


> We'll never know if the domesticated wanted to be domesticated so we shouldn't have forced it.


Just to throw a quick spanner in the works but you could relate this back to your religion. You never know if the people you try to convert want to be converted so you shouldn't force it. Sounds to me like you haven't thought things through and are a tad hypocritical.



BoaConstrictor said:


> Think what you want. I don't care about lightning. It doesn't go after the weak and helpless, its natural and I'm safe cause it only kills idiots.


Lightning only goes after idiots? Uh huh... sure....


----------



## inneshealy (Jul 14, 2008)

A Boerboel is nice dog to go for. Not sure if you can get them where you live but they are fantastic with kids and very good guard dogs as well. And very nice lovable pets


----------



## inneshealy (Jul 14, 2008)

BoaConstrictor said:


> Sure. Herps and Inverts.


Just out of curiosity what herps do you keep?


----------



## ThomasH (Jul 14, 2008)

inneshealy said:


> Lightning only goes after idiots? Uh huh... sure....


Yes. We have great quality shelter to keep us safe but some tard always goes outside in lightning. It ain't like lightning comes out of no where with no warning.


----------



## ThomasH (Jul 14, 2008)

inneshealy said:


> Just out of curiosity what herps do you keep?


Texas Rat
Emory's Rat
3 Black Rats
2 Crested Gecko
All unmutated.


----------



## ThomasH (Jul 14, 2008)

inneshealy said:


> Just to throw a quick spanner in the works but you could relate this back to your religion. You never know if the people you try to convert want to be converted so you shouldn't force it. Sounds to me like you haven't thought things through and are a tad hypocritical.


In reality everyone is at least a little hypocritical. 
I feed my snakes and T's domesticated animals because I have no other option.


----------



## Mister Internet (Jul 14, 2008)

hairmetalspider said:


> I'd like to see this article. Please site certified, proven information for this and then I'll buy it.
> There is also, as many crimes, different factors contributing. (i.e. If such article exists, the 'criminals' it was done on could have been a single spectrum. "Professional criminals" covers a broad range...more than could possible or logically be compared in a single data gathering.)


Just so we're clear... you're allowed to blast off at any time with whatever thought pops into your head about whatever subject people are discussing, but any dissenters must have "certified" information to back them up?  I don't recall you including YOUR Information Certification number in what you posted... perhaps some "certified" information from you would go a long way towards people not viewing you as a bored girl who misguidedly thinks more highly of animals than people and pretends to be an expert in every subject she engages.

Personal Experience > Research > Experiences of Acquaintances > Google


----------



## vbrooke (Jul 14, 2008)

Mister Internet said:


> Just so we're clear... you're allowed to blast off at any time with whatever thought pops into your head about whatever subject people are discussing, but any dissenters must have "certified" information to back them up?  I don't recall you including YOUR Information Certification number in what you posted... perhaps some "certified" information from you would go a long way towards people not viewing you as a bored girl who misguidedly thinks more highly of animals than people and pretends to be an expert in every subject she engages.
> 
> Personal Experience > Research > Experiences of Acquaintances > Google


:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:


----------



## 357wheelgunner (Jul 14, 2008)

Mister Internet said:


> \
> Personal Experience > Research > Experiences of Acquaintances > Google


:clap: :clap: :clap:


----------



## inneshealy (Jul 14, 2008)

BoaConstrictor said:


> In reality everyone is at least a little hypocritical.
> I feed my snakes and T's domesticated animals because I have no other option.


By keeping and breeding herps and T's in captivity are you yourself not instrumental in the process of domesticating these creatures? Technically the animals in your care are already dependant on you for food etc. Yes if you released those animals back into their native habitat they could survive but then the same can be said for cats and they are considered domesticated... Just a thought...


----------



## ThomasH (Jul 15, 2008)

inneshealy said:


> By keeping and breeding herps and T's in captivity are you yourself not instrumental in the process of domesticating these creatures? Technically the animals in your care are already dependant on you for food etc. Yes if you released those animals back into their native habitat they could survive but then the same can be said for cats and they are considered domesticated... Just a thought...


No, they aren't being domesticated. Look at an Asian wild cat and compare it to a house cat. there is a huge difference. If you compare an unmutated reptile to one in the wild there is no difference.


----------



## CURARE (Jul 15, 2008)

my favorite ones.. 
Malinois,Kuvasz,Kangal,Cao d laboreira, Dogo argentino all are good guards .no way to enter your farm without you.


----------



## inneshealy (Jul 16, 2008)

BoaConstrictor said:


> No, they aren't being domesticated. Look at an Asian wild cat and compare it to a house cat. there is a huge difference. If you compare an unmutated reptile to one in the wild there is no difference.


The key there being unmutated. Are your snakes wild caught or captive bred? If they're captive bred how do you know that they are not mutated? They could have various hets that you don't know about unless you test breed them... I could be wrong but in my opinion captive bred animals especially selectively bred animals (breeding for various traits) are the start of domestication. Unless you have a wild caught animal or you know the history of the animal you bought you don't know if somewhere alone the line its ancestors were selectively bred. It might look normal but there could be hets in there that you don't know about?


----------



## ThomasH (Jul 16, 2008)

Actually you can tell hets from normals by sight. Hets have strage abnormal features. Besides new blood is brought from the wild by breeders all the time. If they want a cheap adult snake to breed soon its hard to find cheap cb adults or take 3-5 years raising a reptile. No captive breeding isn't the first step in domestication if you keep bloodlines clear of relatives. That is what would happen in the wild and yes snakes slowly evolve over time along with every animal but we keep bringing in new blood so guess what? *It doesn't matter!*
This argument is over, I keep trying to end it but it seems like I'm just throwing gasoline on a fire every time.
TBH


----------



## crpy (Jul 16, 2008)

Boa, how you END it is by not replying, take your licks/victories and move on


----------



## dtknow (Jul 16, 2008)

Why end it? As long as people are offending each other, it is an interesting debate.

I will argue that any organism being bred in captivity is on its way to domestication.

You might not want that...but that fact is that a few generations down the line I guarantee that the offspring of your babies will be a bit different than WC?

Why? Artificial selection. Before you say you are not selecting for cool ones, it is not just that. If you have 100% survival rate of babies, then some(the more desirable ones or the more prolific) will produce more offspring. Thus CB animals tend to grow faster, mature earlier, and put more energy into reproduction than wild animals, unless all breeders are careful to keep this from happening. Take a look at hatchery bred fish, and poison dart frogs(some lay large clutches frequently and do not transport tadpoles anymore)

But in truth you probably do not raise all the babies successfully, and if you do some are undoubtly doing better than others. In captivity, those who do better are not going to be the same ones that do better in the wild. 

As for new blood. Not all WC survive either. Those who do and adapt to different conditions and eating warm motionless rats, for example, likely represent a biased sampling of the wild populations genetics.


----------



## ThomasH (Jul 16, 2008)

Domestication is inevitable with me being an extremely small minority against it. Almost every other person is all for morphs and domestication. I always try to get the traditional looking one, like what you would find in the wild. Hopefully in my life time only Balls, Boa Constrictors, Corns and Burms will be domesticated.
TBH


----------



## dtknow (Jul 16, 2008)

Agreed. Its amazing how much the herp hobby has embraced morphs(maybe not...it all started in collecting those really cool abnormalities that occur in nature). But I can bet that a wildtype leopard gecko from when the pettrade is going to be much different than one fresh out of the middle east. It will a lot of "stabilizing selection" on a hobbyists part to keep them looking close enough. 

Also, many hobbyists like to help along runts or otherwise unfit animals.


----------



## ThomasH (Jul 16, 2008)

dtknow said:


> Agreed. Its amazing how much the herp hobby has embraced morphs(maybe not...it all started in collecting those really cool abnormalities that occur in nature). But I can bet that a wildtype leopard gecko from when the pettrade is going to be much different than one fresh out of the middle east. It will a lot of "stabilizing selection" on a hobbyists part to keep them looking close enough.
> 
> Also, many hobbyists like to help along runts or otherwise unfit animals.


Oh yeah, I agree. Guess that's just how the herp world and captive breeding works, nothing I can change.
TBH


----------



## dtknow (Jul 16, 2008)

haha, we found one thing we agree on.

Have anyone ever wondered what would have happened if different animals were domesticated as early as some of our mainstay farm animals?

Think of the possibilities if guinea fowl, california quail, or antelope were domesticated and the same amount of work put into them as chickens or cattle/horses?


----------



## kyrga (Jul 16, 2008)

357wheelgunner said:


> Wow, it's always impressive when someone realizes that they were wrong and learns from it.
> 
> :clap:    :clap:    :clap:


I agree. If everyone followed vbrooke's example we would have soooo much less drama. 

As for keeping dogs... of all the animals I've kept, there is nothing that compares to a dog. The companionship and loyalty in canines is unrivaled; even most humans can't match it. I see nothing wrong in domesticating dogs; my dogs may not have chosen to be domesticated, but they are more than capable of escaping back to the wild if they choose, and they've never tried. 

As for being guards, I don't know if I personally would use one in a high risk situation (not that there aren't breeds that are perfectly capable) but I've always had a dog in the house my entire life, and I just wouldn't feel safe without one. It's less of a guard thing to me, more of an "everything's OK meter"... one that also can sense that you're nervous or afraid and provide comfort. 

And for the OP's question regarding which breed... I personally like mutts and cross-breeds. My grandfather has always kept a German Shepard/Husky mix in the house, and they make fantastic dogs. They have a great personality that allows them to make a good guard, yet also great family pet. And I don't think I've ever seen one dig.


----------



## 357wheelgunner (Jul 17, 2008)

kyrga said:


> I agree. If everyone followed vbrooke's example we would have soooo much less drama.


 



kyrga said:


> As for being guards, I don't know if I personally would use one in a high risk situation


I agree completely.  In our house, we would never risk the life of our dog.  Her job, in a bad situation, is to wake my wife and I up.  We can then deal with the threat.  If the owner is strong and armed, the dog's job isn't to bite - it's to wake the owner up.

One of my biggest fears is that she'd get in the way and possibly get hurt  




kyrga said:


> And for the OP's question regarding which breed... I personally like mutts and cross-breeds. My grandfather has always kept a German Shepard/Husky mix in the house, and they make fantastic dogs. They have a great personality that allows them to make a good guard, yet also great family pet. And I don't think I've ever seen one dig.


Our current "guard dog" is a german shepherd mutt.  She looks like a pure bread shepherd, just at half the size.  She never bites, but knows how to play rough without hurting everyone.  She'll even do that clamp on your arm and shake it while growling police dog thing, only she doesn't bite down and hurt, it's all an act.  She's very well trained, and loves her family.

Oh, and she's never dug up the yard, but she does "bury" bones and stuff under our covers and in my daughters toy closet.


----------



## crpy (Jul 17, 2008)

357wheelgunner said:


> Oh, and she's never dug up the yard, but she does "bury" bones and stuff under our covers and in my daughters toy closet.


lol, my dogs do the same thing, I'll move my legs and feel this wet chew bone , and i'm like yuck thanks.


----------



## arachyd (Jul 17, 2008)

I can definitely sympathize. My son's dog (now deceased) looked upon "their" bed as a place that was safe to hide her treasures and felt secure that my son would protect them for her. He found many odd things in his bed like chewed socks, bones and dog toys as well as an occasional dead mole she'd killed-eeeeew! We still can't figure out where she got the dead largemouth bass he found under his pillow one night when he went to bed.


----------



## kyrga (Jul 18, 2008)

arachyd said:


> We still can't figure out where she got the dead largemouth bass he found under his pillow one night when he went to bed.


A couple summers ago, I kept coming home to dead fish in the driveway. It was extremely perplexing for a while, until I saw my cat running down the street with one in his mouth. Turns out he was stealing koi fish out of a neighbor's pond. It was one of those little man-made ponds though, and I can't imagine bass living in one of those...


----------



## Veneficus (Jul 18, 2008)

kyrga said:


> A couple summers ago, I kept coming home to dead fish in the driveway. It was extremely perplexing for a while, until I saw my cat running down the street with one in his mouth. Turns out he was stealing koi fish out of a neighbor's pond. It was one of those little man-made ponds though, and I can't imagine bass living in one of those...


Cats are good like that.  In the past, our cats have brought into the house: possums, rabbits, squirrels, chipmunks and birds.


----------



## crpy (Jul 18, 2008)

And we thought the feral cats were bad, whew


----------



## Shannen (Oct 14, 2018)

357wheelgunner said:


> In an interview with real professional criminals, the crooks were asked what people should do if they want to be safe at night.  The answer was consistent - more than one dog.  One dog can be pistol whipped, knifed, etc. but two dogs are almost impossible to deal with.
> 
> Most alarm companies, if asked, will recommend a _ trained _ guard dog in addition to the alarm system.  An alarm system can be disabled, as can a dog.  Hopefully the dog and alarm will give you ample time to get the shotgun out and get your family in one room to wait for the police to come and clear the house.
> 
> ...


We have an Akita and an alarm alarm does nothing to make me feel safe-Akita 100% safe. I know he takes his job serious.


----------



## Shannen (Oct 14, 2018)

Shannen said:


> We have an Akita and an alarm alarm does nothing to make me feel safe-Akita 100% safe. I know he takes his job serious.


You are spot on in my opinion!!! My dog would not be swayed with a steak, he is so intune with surrounding when in guard dog mode nothing interferes with him protecting his home and yard. I watch him hunt ground hogs in our back yard, now these creatures stay right above their hole to immediately get away from danger. He (130 pound American Akita) is able to stealthy creep up and obliterate anything that is in his yard. 2 akitas would be a foolproof security system but he’s not open to siblings. But I feel safe with my Akita protecting me.


----------



## Shannen (Oct 14, 2018)

vbrooke said:


> That is a great point. Well both points. We had to have our dog certified as a service dog so that the insurance would allow her. In CA, no Pits, Rotties, Chows, Akita, German shep., Dalmatians, or any mix of any breed listed. Some insurance Co. will make exceptions, others will not. Renters beware...they are even more strict with those.
> 
> The non English training would be great!! I intended to train my Shep. in German. Schutzhund training is highly recommended.


We have rental properties that will not allow any dogs on the band breed list. But for our homeowners insurance we have State Farm who does not discriminate every state has a band breed list so you have to be really careful when choosing homeowners insurance if your dog has a known bite history You won’t find insurance


----------

