Hi all,
We've all been up against those who think our dogs are vicious, regardless of how many studies you can quote, or titles you can earn on your dogs.
With those types in mind, what is the most convincing arguement that you have to prove the following statement:
"Dog : Dog Aggression has NOTHING to do with Dog : Human Aggression."
The reason I'm asking is because of this. In Toronto this week, we had 2 pitbulls get away from their owner, attack and kill a 13 year old Shih Tzu(literally ripping it apart in front of her). Of course, one of the questions to the police by the reporters was "So this could have been a person or a child...."
This is a horrible situation that could have been avoided. But how do
you explain the fundamental difference to the Average Joe?
Of course - our complete sympathies go out to the owner of the Shih Tzu. The two pitbulls were put to sleep at the owners request.