"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 15:47:37 UTC+1, wrote:
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 14:38:34 UTC+1, www.GymRatZ.co.uk wrote:
On 23/08/2018 12:46, tabbypurr wrote:
someone:

However, beyond a certain point, the dog becomes essentially
irredeemable as
you pretty much can't teach old dogs new tricks, and in particular
you can't
unteach them their current ones.

their ways can be changed, but only if you remove them from the
problem human or teach the problem human some sense. Generally
neither of those happens.

Wholeheartedly agree. People are always the issue. Always expecting
dogs
to act and understand "human" It's humans that need to act and become
"dog" The amount of people that think just because someone's owned a
dog should read "been owned by a dog" in the past makes then an
authority on dogs... and stupid people that see size of dog as the
issue
letting small dogs get away with dominant, possessive, aggressive
behaviour because they don't see it for what it actually is.

Dangerous dogs can be safe IF handled correctly. An example is police
attack dogs, trained to attack people but don't kill people or attack
the officers.

My mate had a GSD that failed Police training because it couldn't clear
the highest obstacle. It had had it's teeth filed to give them flat
tops but the surprise that they found out by accident was when someone
pulled out a toy gun and the dog jumped and grabbed the gun. Did it
every time without fail.

All dogs can be re-calibrated given the correct leader unless they have
underlying medical issues, people on the other hand let emotion get in
the way thereby creating a pathetic, weak and feeble pack member that
Dog will instinctively need to take over the role as "pack leader"
generally without any leadership qualities that would be learnt from
early pack life.

Dogs have a certain mentality that the human needs to understand.

It's eeven more so with cats, dogs have had 10s of thousands of years with
humans cats just a few thousand.
Dogs empathise with humans, they tend to do what the humans want, which is
why they are far more easy to train than cats are. Most cats train their
humans.


Lots of people want dogs to be something else: they're not, they're dogs,
and nothing ever changes their mentality. It's just how they are.

But it is easier to control their behavoiur good or bad.
Also differnt breeds behave differntly and are differnt in more than just
their physical appeance.
One thing I heard recently is that small dogs tend to raise their leg
higher when ****ing to mark their territory, so other dogs think they are
taller.
While tall dogs don't bother to outsize each other.

This was discovered by someone carful watching dogs of differnt sizes
taking a **** and measuring the angle the leg was raised against the post
or wall.
Note it doesn't mean the **** goes higher just that the dog tries to make
it go higher. So before someone like wodney says a terrier can never ****
higher than a great dane is NOT the point from the dogs perspective.

Also that the original dogs in/from the USA died out when Britain and the
like settled in the USA with our dog breeds all native dogs died, so
there;s no trruely american dog breeds.



IMLE small dogs are the most aggressive. I guess they have to be to
survive in the wild.

Not sure what you mean by in the wild.

Yeah, thats a massive brain fart. There were no small
dogs in the wild, before they were bred by humans.