Discussion
susanq said:
Tumbler said:
bexVN said:
Haven't seen a case of true Rage syndrome for many years now. It was mainly golden cockers when they reached 3yrs old. Luckily they worked hard on trying to reduce the occurences of it. Mostly their poor behaviour is because cockers (we're talking show types) are fairly wimpy and panic easily and are usually owned by people who spoil them.
That's very interesting to me, as mine is a Golden Show Cocker, I hope I don't spoil him! I wouldn't describe him as wimpy currently, more affectionate and gentle, hasn't shown any signs of panic yet, but will bear all this in mind.I say that as someone that keeps a brace of cockers and understood that the 'rage' golden cocker line was genetically identified via the breeding lines held by the KC and breeding bans placed on those lines quite successfully to all but eliminate the rouge.
I would also stress that cockers, or any working line of spaniel is 90% trainable and 10% free thinking if not fully occupied! so no I would never trust one, or any dog for that matter, implicitly. Cockers are also masters of stealing love and strokes and will sit at your feet all day if you stroke them....
wiliferus said:
Pig Skill said:
Plus, they are noisy barking b
ds that st everywhere. fking dogs. 
A worrying attitude from a dog owner? ds that st everywhere. fking dogs. 
Edited by Pig Skill on Thursday 11th October 10:55
Jesus, this thread is mental.
Why can't common sense prevail? If you have a dog that's physically capable, regardless of mental disposition, of tearing a child or other dog in half, then exercise some restraint in where you let him loose?
I see too many feeble owners carrying angry, powerful dogs to side with the 'my dog is not dangerous' argument. They're animals and prone to fits unpredictability, just as people sometimes are. The (worst) end result is the serious injury or the death of a child or pet... There is NO excuse for allowing this to happen, regardless of how small the chances are.
fk sake.
Why can't common sense prevail? If you have a dog that's physically capable, regardless of mental disposition, of tearing a child or other dog in half, then exercise some restraint in where you let him loose?
I see too many feeble owners carrying angry, powerful dogs to side with the 'my dog is not dangerous' argument. They're animals and prone to fits unpredictability, just as people sometimes are. The (worst) end result is the serious injury or the death of a child or pet... There is NO excuse for allowing this to happen, regardless of how small the chances are.
f
k sake. MocMocaMoc said:
Jesus, this thread is mental.
Why can't common sense prevail? If you have a dog that's physically capable, regardless of mental disposition, of tearing a child or other dog in half, then exercise some restraint in where you let him loose?
I see too many feeble owners carrying angry, powerful dogs to side with the 'my dog is not dangerous' argument. They're animals and prone to fits unpredictability, just as people sometimes are. The (worst) end result is the serious injury or the death of a child or pet... There is NO excuse for allowing this to happen, regardless of how small the chances are.
fk sake.
^^^ THIS.Why can't common sense prevail? If you have a dog that's physically capable, regardless of mental disposition, of tearing a child or other dog in half, then exercise some restraint in where you let him loose?
I see too many feeble owners carrying angry, powerful dogs to side with the 'my dog is not dangerous' argument. They're animals and prone to fits unpredictability, just as people sometimes are. The (worst) end result is the serious injury or the death of a child or pet... There is NO excuse for allowing this to happen, regardless of how small the chances are.
f
k sake. Dog owners.....it's the 95% of irresponsible ones that give the rest a bad name.
Gassing Station | All Creatures Great & Small | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff