|
Daminxa wrote: I think when you get a dog you make a choice; either you have a guard dog or a pet
I think you've hit the nail on the head with this one. Unless you are exceptionally good at training dogs, you either choose one or the other. My father is a natural when it comes to dog-training. My whole life we've had German Shepherds which were family pets, extremely well-behaved with strangers, and guard-dogs. The trick is to ensure that they are 100% subordinate, and that they know their role.
Anyone who walks onto my parent's land in Cork will be barked at unless the dog knows them, or until they've been greeted by one of the family. Then the dog ignores them (unless they call it over to pet it obviously). The dog will ignore people when being walked, but will be alerted and stand guard should a stranger physically approach my mum or dad. Again, as soon as the stranger is greeted, the dog is put at ease. It's all about establishing for the dog what his/her territory is. Once it understands that, it will protect that territory (including people) but ignore anything outside it (I say "ignore"; naturally it scampers off to investigate other dogs). Badly trained dogs have a bad sense (or no sense) of what constitutes their territory.
The point, however, with the Leicester case is that these Rotts were very clearly trained as guard dogs. They were trained to attack anything that trespasses on their territory. So when they went for that poor baby, they were simply doing what they believed to be their job. It was entirely the fault of the owners to have allowed the dogs access to the child.
|
