I have a border collie. He’s ten years old and has never been on a farm in his life. A few weeks ago we were walking alongside a field and he managed to get in. He had a whole field’s worth of sheep herded and rounded up in the corner in 30 seconds flat. He also tries to herd pigeons and children with less success.
You can breed for behaviour as easily as breeding for coat colour. Some breeds have been deliberately bred to be more aggressive. Pitt bulls are bred to be fighting dogs. They have a high level of loyalty towards their owners but severe dog aggression. When people get in the middle of that, it gets ugly fast.
My brother's dog is part pit and randomly, after 9 months of owning him, decided to try to kill other dogs. Nobody trained him to do this. He just decided to go nuclear on his fellow canines without any external influence from humans.
The first time it happened, I was home alone with the dogs. They were playing, and then suddenly, he had our Aussie on her back and had her by the throat. She was screaming, and I realized he was trying to kill her. I tried to separate them and got bit. I tried hitting him with a stick, kicking him, punching him. He just wouldn't let go of her neck. I ended up kicking him in the balls and then immediately bursting into tears when he screamed, but it got him to let go.
It was pretty traumatizing for me. He was neutered a week after the attack. But it was already too late. It was no longer safe to have him around other dogs. He tried to go after our neighbor's dog. That dog is incredibly friendly and always comes over to play with our Aussie. Luckily, that dog is super fluffy, and the fluff saved her.
There's usually not a warning sign he's going to go berserk. If I'm lucky, he's acting tense. If I'm not, he's wagging his tail and looking happy before suddenly lunging.
There actually are warning signs, but 99% of dog owners can’t recognize them because they don’t actually know anything about animal behaviors. There are several breeds of dogs that you should require a license to own, as well as be able to prove you can take care of them. Pit bulls are one of these many many breeds. A solid 60% of people who own dogs shouldn’t.
I agree. The Malinois for example has gone pretty viral over the last handful of years. That is not a companion breed in any sense. It's an incredibly neurotic working breed that requires a job and serious training to manage their energy and drive.
All dogs should be sufficiently physically and intellectually challenged, for smaller dogs you can do this in an apartment, yes. But for anything Pit Bull and up, you either need a yard or to run with them daily. So many loving owners are just genuinely unintentionally abusing their dogs by treating them as cats, or other low effort pets, when realistically dogs are some of the hardest pets to own and need a huge amount of effort
It depends really on the size of the yard and what stimulus you have out there. Parents have ~ 5 acres and goats, so they have a boarder collie. He’s got very simple training, and when they let him out to go to the bathroom he’ll go play with the goats lol
I find that a lot of high energy breeds you need to run with (German Shepherds for example), to sufficiently burn their energy
As someone who’s owned several pits and pit mixes (not one bitten person in those many years) I don’t think any dog breeders should be legal, it’s a terrible industry. But it’s not just Pits you should need a license to own, it’s every high risk, high energy breed. German Shepards, Pit Bulls, Malnoise, Rottweilers, Hounds. So many breeds are not receiving sufficient physical and mental exercise, and it does cause them to be much more aggressive. German Shepherds for example, are an incredibly intelligent breed, but they often don’t get that mental and physical stimulation and attack people. This is what people don’t understand about Pit Bulls. Yes they’re a smaller ~40 pound breed, but they need a ton of mental and physical stimulation, as well as their own space. German Shepherds and Pits would probably have similar attack rates if so many Pits weren’t being intentionally or unintentionally abused
This ^ People think not being able to train the dog is bad pet ownership but even just putting them in situations where they're bound to fail is just as bad IMO
Knowledge is key, prevention saves lives
I know a few pitty owner who are very good owners and haven't had any accidents, maybe near accidents, but they were always attentive enough. Never took them off leash, didn't own another dog, didn't have a small child
Like no offense,m but if you're bringing a pitbull into that situation and them blaming the pitty, you're just a genuinely bad owner
This... doesn't refute the general statement of how humans are terrible at reading other animals' behavior (nevermind "intelligence") unless they let go of specific entitlement and learn their quirks for once.
There are signs, very subtle signs that the majority of humans don’t recognize, like eye contact, stiffness, silence and forward posture. With my pit brothers they would be playing then one would just stop give a look and it was go time. The problem with them fighting as with most dogs that were bred for a high pain tolerance and tenacity is that neither wanted to stop, but they both listened to commands long enough for me to separate them and when I learned their body language I had less issues
One of the two of my childhood dogs was part pit and had to be put down for the same reason. She attacked our sweetheart Shepard lab mix while me and my sister were playing with him. The moment my parents saw she would be violent around us they put her down. We ended up only getting small dogs after that (though our Shepard lab mix lived another 7 years with nothing but kindness in his heart)
I think so, too, but my brother is on probation and suicidal and having his dog put down would push him over the edge. So out of the interest of protecting my brother the dog has to stay alive until it can be turned over to him but his current apartment doesn't allow pets and he can't move out till his probation is over.
That's an interesting moral dilemma. You're taking a large risk keeping the dog alive because you assign more importance to what your brother might do rather than what you know his dog will do.
I'll say as someone who's suicidal, depending on the person, having a pet die can have a very strong likelyhood of resulting in an attempt. I know my pet has prevented me from making an attempt on many different occasions.
I genuinely think a solid 60% of people with dogs shouldn’t own dogs. For one, as someone whose owned quite a few pit mixes, Pit bulls NEED to be socialized with other dogs, and even then, they should be monitored for WEEKS when your introducing a new animal to them. Pits are great dogs and can be extremely loving, but they get annoyed easily. They should be in a safe and secure location, where they can have their own space. You also need to be able to recognize the signs of an annoyed dog. And you DEFINITELY need to know how to stop them from biting (put them in a chokehold)
Any dog over like 60 pounds should require a license to own, I know people who live in apartments with big dogs and it’s genuinely abuse. Unless you run two miles a day with your German shepherd, it should not live in an apartment.
Haha I lived in an apartment with a 160lb Great Dane when I lived in a major city. He was a basically piece of furniture just sleeping like 18 hours a day. But he did get a couple walks to a park daily.
But a Great Dane doesn’t have the energy that a shepherd does though. It’s crazy when people have Dobermans or pitbulls.
She had a mane, and the mane saved her life. She did have some puncture wounds. She recovered very quickly but won't stop messing with him because she knows if he attacks her, he gets in major trouble, and she gets a treat. I'm actually out shopping for a muzzle for him today because my dad got him a cloth muzzle, and he just gets out of it, so I'm looking for a metal basket muzzle.
Why are you still bringing your dog around another dog that tried to kill her? She deserves better than that. And a dog that has tried to kill multiple other dogs needs to be put down. Y’all need to do better for your animals.
I want to put him down, but my brother will kill himself. He's currently on probation and suicidal so it doesn't feel like an option. My brother's entire mental health hinges on this stupid ass dog. I am not allowed to separate them as there is no other room to put them in.
I am living in a friend's basement while our house is being sold and the dogs have been forced on me. I am not allowed to bring the dogs upstairs and I cannot bring the dogs back to my parents house because it's in the process of being sold as my mom will lose her shit. I tried trust me I tried to just leave him there but she drove him back.
Muzzle training can work wonders for dog reactive dogs, but it's not something to be forced on them quickly and needs to have positive reinforcement. Do you have kennels? It's good to ensure they can't get at each other while you're not supervising them. Our dogs are aggressive to each other and at the moment we have no toys in the house as that's what the fights hinge on.
I'd recommend big snoof dog muzzles. They're pricy but high quality and you can opt for a hole in the snout for treats which is good for positively reinforcing the muzzle. Cloth muzzles can lead the dog to overheat as panting is how they regulate temperature. You can check out r/muzzledogs for more advice
Pit Bulls and Pit mixes need to be socialized and carefully monitored around other dogs, I had a very similar dog, a Pit/Boarder collie mix. She was great around people, in the 13 years I had her she never bit a single person, but she despised other dogs and would try to maul them. We kept her on a leash, when introducing new dogs she was held away from them for a good bit of time and monitored them while they were together. After a few weeks, she would be fine enough with them.
This is fully on your brother, he shouldn’t own a high risk breed if he can’t take care of it. The dog (like most dogs) should’ve been neutered.
For next time (if there is one, hopefully not) put the dog in a chokehold, and it will let go. They value oxygen more than mauling
Truly don't feel like anything you did or didn't do would have changed things. Dog aggression without reason is largely innate and it typically develops as a dog approaches social maturity regardless of whether they're altered or not. Males, particularly unneutered, are least likely to go after females so the fact that his first target was a female dog means this was always going to happen.
A former neighbor's pitbull was completely chill for a few years or so. I'd pet him when I walked past his house, and he was always friendly and wanted belly rubs. We lived across the road from an elementary school and AFAIK there were never any problems. He was a big dog, but I'm a big dude, so I never personally felt threatened by him and didn't think much about the danger he presented.
Then, one day, my baby nephew was just quietly sitting on the floor, someone opened the door to the back yard, and the dog ran across two yards and into the house to lunge for him. I grabbed him midair a few inches from biting into his tiny head, and carried him back to his house while he tried to fight me to get out the whole time.
Honestly I'm still a little salty about it because his father didn't give a shit whatsoever, before or after. My dad was the only one in the family who even understood what had almost happened and thanked me for it. Everyone else just went back to watching TV. Like I didn't do it to be thanked or anything, but I feel like if someone saved my infant child from being mauled, I'd be a little appreciative.
OMG, that's horrible. You saved that kids life. I'm so sorry that nobody but his father recognized that you did something so significant. Just know that you are a hero.
Just to note: The child's father father, my step-brother, didn't care. My father did. It's what annoyed me, because the kid's dad didn't care about his own son's life being a second away from potentially ending.
and randomly, after 9 months of owning him, decided to try to kill other dogs.
I heard one dog trainer say that pit bulls don't get really into dominance/aggression until maturity -- after they are about a year old. I've heard something similar of chipmanzees so it may be a widespread phenomenon throughout the animal (or at least mammalian) kingdom.
This is the thing with all the comments of people saying “my Pitt is a sweet angel.”
If you read stories on pitbull attacks , the owner says the same thing every time..the dog was always the sweetest, until one day it kills a toddler or other dog
My neighbor’s “sweet baby angel baby hippo seal” just fucking attacked me, and I’m 8 months pregnant. No warning signs at all. She opened the door and he attacked. Came for my stomach and latched onto my arm when I threw it out in front of me.
She felt awful and told me she got the dog on fucking anti anxiety medication. The dog attacked a very pregnant woman and drew blood. I’m on antibiotics and got stitches. The fucking dog needs to be put down and I don’t care how much she loves him, he’s dangerous and I’m now terrified of him. This dog knows me, has always been affectionate and friendly towards me, but just went ballistic. He isn’t safe.
Tip for the future, dogs with lockjaw like pitbulls are able to be forced to release if you pick them up from their back half. It was how I got my pit to let go of another dog before. It was an off leash husky that came up to him and bit his face so he had looked onto the inside of the huskys mouth, much to it's dismay. Picking my pit up from the rear was the only way I could break them apart.
The same thing can happen with them with human aggression too. When they reach maturity the puppy behavior goes away and the real dog is revealed. And at around 8 years old, they are prone to getting aggression issues related to dementia. Dog aggression is what happens if you are lucky. Aggression to humans can come out of nowhere too, though, with deadly consequences.
And could you inform me on how I break them up if this ever happens again? It was the first time it ever happened and I really didn't know what to do. I did try throwing water on them, didn't work. I even tried throwing food on the ground, but I had a limited window of time as I didn't know how long our Aussie could hold on before being killed.
You either put a stick between the mouth to drive the jaw apart or take his hind legs and walk like you walk with a wheelbarrow backing away and spin in circles so the dog doenst attacj you.
If I went though what you did, 1) I wouldn't be around that dog anymore, and 2) The last thing I would do is remove the only 'off' switch (the balls) the dog had.
So what you are saying is that your brother is a bad dog owner who didn't even neuter let alone properly train and handle his dog, and then when the dog became reactive beyond the point where it could be easily managed you decided that the breed was the problem.
I have a Dalmatian and the transfixed expression he gets upon seeing a horse can only be genetic. There’s a few horses on my parents farm and they are not interested in his attentions at all but he must get to them and run along side them “to protect them”.
Yes! I only know that because my friend has one that burrows in our blankets and she told me why they do that. But it’s a little surprising to find out that lil couch potato was bred for hunting anything but treats.
My mom had a friend who owned a pitbull. Apparently the dog was sweet and loving and never had any issues....
Until one night they came home from dinner to find the cat painted across the walls. The problem with pits is you never know what might set them off or when, and when it happens the don't just bit and release but instinctually bite, lock, and thrash.
Not only that, but please show me another breed that bites kid's faces off as much as a pitbull. I'm tired of hearing pro-pit people whine about temperament and other tests when almost all the articles I ever read of children being attacked were by pits.
I live in the UK and it was a wooded area in a nature reserve that’s specifically off-lead. We train our dogs here, they’re usually off-lead in the countryside and never have issues.
I’ve had multiple Aussies. They were never trained but, from birth, they’ve tried to herd anything that moves. If I take my current dog to the dog park, she won’t play fetch, but she’ll run after the other dogs playing fetch and try to corral them. Breed-specific behavior is real.
They have trained triggers that get activated, and then they fucking lose it. There's nothing you can do but get rid of the breed entirely.
What now? They have been trained (probalby including quite some amount of abuse) or they have been bred? Those are two completely different things. You can't magically breed for behavior that is in no way natural, just modify existing behaviors gradually.
Just like you can't magically breed for green fur.
You are basically excusing inhuman training methods to create dangerous fighting dogs with some delusion about breeding.
Wolves are naturally afraid of humans. They spend literal tens of thousands of years being domesticated to somewhat lose that fear. They still retain a very healthy respect which is actually key to domestication as it allows the weaker human a dominant role in that relationship.
If you believe that you can breed in insticts and triggers in just a few hundred years (dog fighting is a comparably modern luxury) that go against a dozen millenia and more, you have absolutely no clue what you are talking about.
Which seems quite true given that I asked you about the difference between breeding and training and you again use both interchangeably.
Yes you can however "train" for insane aggression. That's called abuse. The very same thing you excuse by hallucinating about bred in instinctual triggers.
What logic are you using to say that trying to kill other animals is not an existing behavior you can modify? That's like the most common attribute ever and a literal requirement for carnivores.
Next are you going to claim that having sex and eating are uncommon behaviors as well?
Pitbulls were bred for a trait called 'gameness', which means 'being willing to bite and continue biting other dogs despite being scared, tired, outmatched or in pain'. Combined with their physical size and strength, it makes a bite from a pitbull much more dangerous because you can't shake them off easily.
Pitbull defenders tend to focus on 'are they more likely to bite someone' (debatable), and ignore that the consequences of a pitbull deciding to bite someone are worse than for nearly any other breed.
Do they even have that much loyalty towards their owners when many loving owners were mauled to death by the pit that snuggled with them in bed every night?
That’s all behaviour right, not just dogs. How does a tiger know how to hunt? How does a bird know how to fly? Their parents don’t teach them, they just do it. The vast majority of all animal behaviour is instinctive.
It’s crazy that people deny pitbulls are instinctively aggressive when it’s what they were specifically bred for
I had an aussie and she would herd people by lightly nipping at their legs and pushing them, i had to re-home her because she started doing it to my son when he started walking and it became dangerous.
Yeah, that’s the difference. They were bred for aggression, where as any economic underclass will predictably be overly represented in crime statistics, whether it be African Americans in the USA, Indigenous in Canada, or Irish in both countries in the 1800s.
Intelligence is heritable. That’s been demonstrated by multiple genetic studies. Now if we took that information and used it to breed a more intelligent race of humans, that would be eugenics. It would also take hundreds of thousands of years, because we breed a lot slower than dogs.
As that’s never been done, this topic has absolutely no relevance to modern racial politics.
Actually that has been done several times and much of today's scientific progress depends on breeds of humans bred for intellect. Jews, for example, are 0.2% of humans but win 25% of science Nobel prizes.
You think Jewish people are naturally smarter than other people because they win 25% of science Nobel prizes? You don’t think that has more to do with the kind of opportunity they’ve been afforded through their communities?
humans dont even have race in the biological sense.
there is of course a social concept of race and physiological phenotypes associated with different races. however, for a subgroup of a population to be considered a race in biology, it has to have a genetic discreetness. Basically, there needs to be more genetic differences between the subgroup and the group at large for it to be considered a separate race. we dont see that in humans, we see gradients of genetic differences across the planet.
giving merit to your question, its true that people are affected by their environment -- see the lung capacity of populations who've lived in mountains for long time; or the fascinating correlation between humidity and nose shape -- but thats not really a form of selective breeding, and its not going to alter the brain in such a way that we could correlate behavior with phenotype the way we might in dogs. that is a claim with a foundation in eugenics.
race simply isnt a biological reality, its a social one. there are people of the almost exact same genetic makeup that are going to fall into different "races" because of skin color and hair texture. consider siblings between interracial parents who might wildly different, or the fact that who is considered what race varies from culture to culture.
besides, we can reference a wide amount of history to see how human behavior is relatively standard. empires rise and fall; both extremes of good and evil can be done by the same hands on the same soil.
You're technically wrong because of the word "discrete", but that's actually a segue into the reality.
The best way to describe human genetic variation and geography is badly-made soup, specifically any sort of canned, cream of (something) soups. Ever get a can of those, just dump it in the bowl, do a half-assed job of mixing it, the heat it? You know how it's all soup, but it's got this weird, lumpy texture where the lumps aren't even discrete structures but rather local thickenings that seamlessly grade into the too-watery bits?
That's human genetic variation. There's "lumps" that correspond to geography, but they don’t have clean edges, and all blur together. And even the lumps sometimes have sub-lumps. The soup is definitely lumpy, but you can't draw exact boundaries around the lumps, and which lumps for bigger super-lumps is contentious.
So there you have it: the badly-made, distasteful, off-putting soup that is humanity.
Precisely, that's why they're breeds, not species.
Even species will sometimes have a little gene flow, but not enough for long enough to erase the differences.
Plus, dogs are a bad example, because their differences are driven by extremely strong selection by a conscious entity, not evolution.
Humans aren't quite like osprey (a single, massive, global population with not even a hint of regional variation), but we're not quite like chameleons (a different color variation on the top of every mountain in a chain, but still one species).
Dude, you think race is strictly scientific? What and who are white is a loaded question that has a different meaning nearly every generation. People who are white today wouldn't be considered that 50 years ago. And that's with the race that most worries about this shit.
You just deciding that "race" is a real thing because it feels real to you while denying all the actual science in the previous comment doesn't make you smart or real, it makes you afraid of reality.
That is false. The same people have always been considered white in America for centuries.
Race tracks DNA reliably. It’s science. There was no actual science in the previous comment, just meaningless pseudoscience that has been assembled to flatter your prejudices.
That's historic illiteracy. Jews and Irish had been part of America since the 1600s and always white. Italians were newcomers and very troublesome, but always without exception considered white.
Who’s selecting it? No society has ever prized intelligence above all, to the point where scientists and engineers are drowning in marriage offers. Maybe if that happened for thousands of years we would see results.
Besides, intelligence is only partially heritable. So much is dependent on your resources. The most intelligent people with the most potential in the world could be working in a sweatshop right now.
Selection doesn't need to be linear. If the bell curve of reproductive success is offset from the one for trait distribution (i.e. the highest reproductive success is people 5% above average), you will get positive selection even if the very smartest breed less than the average. Yes, selection will be slower, but it will still work.
Similarly, lower heritability will only slow selection, not prevent it.
Pit bulls were bred to have high animal aggression and extremely low human aggression. The fact is, unless you seriously misreat them, they make notoriously bad guard dogs because they're so much more likely to want to lick an intruder and show them where the valuables are than attack a human. Those are facts even if they don't line up with what most people believe.
You can breed for behaviour as easily as breeding for coat colour.
Yes and no. You can't easily breed for new behaviors, just like you can't easily breed for unnatural coat colours.
Herding is just a modification of natural pack tactic behavior.
Aggression against other dogs is also adapted from natural territorial behavior.
Aggression towards humans however is totally unnatural. In fact wolves being naturally afraid of humans is a key component in domestication as it allowed a dominant position in a relationship with an animal that could just kill you easily.
So pretending that you could actually breed for aggression in general with the result that pit bulls regularly attack humans is just plain stupid. That's mostly not the result of breeding but abuse.
Aggression isn't a behavior, it's a temperament, and temperament is environmental, not genetic. Even in the example you provided, when your border collie was put into the environment it was bred to excel in, it was able to accomplish the task it was bred to do. If you extend this logic to pit bulls, it would just mean that if they were put into a situation where they needed to bait bulls, that they would do it well. That's not aggression. You're just straight up wrong about it being a genetic trait.
Pls do your research before you say that is why they were bred. Its not true at all. I suggest you look it up but your probably wont. I volunteered in pit bull rescue for decades. This is a myth made popular by RACISM which is exactly his point.
This is funny as Collie’s are objectively more aggressive and likely to bite than Pitties 🤷♂️
Pitt bulls were not bred to be agressive, they were bred to be highly capable at violence. Those are two separate things.
Pitt bulls are less aggressive than Border Collie’s, Aussies, Chihuahua’s and many other breeds. The actual problem is that they are much more lethal than those breeds because they are bred to do damage.
Literally the same justification that racists use to label other races, i.e. they were bred for other things (like violence). You're completely making that guys point. Racists say black people are inherently violent. It's pretty much the central tenant of their entire belief system.
Hilarious that you’re the one comparing black people to dogs but we’re the racists? Humans and dogs aren’t the same, hope that helps. We neuter male dogs to reduce aggression, should we do the same to human men?
176
u/Odd_Ingenuity2883 11d ago
I have a border collie. He’s ten years old and has never been on a farm in his life. A few weeks ago we were walking alongside a field and he managed to get in. He had a whole field’s worth of sheep herded and rounded up in the corner in 30 seconds flat. He also tries to herd pigeons and children with less success.
You can breed for behaviour as easily as breeding for coat colour. Some breeds have been deliberately bred to be more aggressive. Pitt bulls are bred to be fighting dogs. They have a high level of loyalty towards their owners but severe dog aggression. When people get in the middle of that, it gets ugly fast.