Woman mauled to death ... by dachshunds!?

You can never really know what lies in the heart and mind of a dog. They are independent, free-willed creatures after all.

I suppose there is something reassuring in knowing you could kick a 15lb dog a good 25 meters if it had murderous intentions in its heart.
 
arthwollipot said:
That's because you're lurking outside their territory, and are therefore dangerous and to be defended against. If you were to actually enter their territory (with permission from the humans who share that territory of course) you'd see a different kind of behaviour.

This is exactly the reason why people who have never known a dachshund feel that they're crazy aggressive dogs - they only ever encounter them when they're defending their territory.
Click to expand...

So, let dachshunds be dachshunds?
 
arthwollipot said:
This is exactly the reason why people who have never known a dachshund feel that they're crazy aggressive dogs - they only ever encounter them when they're defending their territory.
Click to expand...

I'd rather have a dog that didn't 'defend its territory', frankly. Our dogs, over the years, have positively welcomed people into 'their territory'. Two Labs, a Greyhound and a Lab/Collie mix, in case you're wondering.

So many excuses are made for inherently dangerous tendencies within particular breeds, when there are so many docile breeds.

But, yeah, it's always the fault of the owners, right? For not properly socialising and training those dogs? The dogs with a distinct tendency to bite people? Or the fault of the people approaching 'the dogs' territory' in the wrong way, or daring to approach it at all?

Dear FSM
 
GlennB said:
I'd rather have a dog that didn't 'defend its territory', frankly. Our dogs, over the years, have positively welcomed people into 'their territory'. Two Labs, a Greyhound and a Lab/Collie mix, in case you're wondering.
Click to expand...
You didn't read my statement. Dachshunds defend against people lurking around outside their territory. Once they actually enter their territory, they are as welcoming as any other breed.

GlennB said:
So many excuses are made for inherently dangerous tendencies within particular breeds, when there are so many docile breeds.
Click to expand...
Not making excuses, explaining natural behaviours.

GlennB said:
But, yeah, it's always the fault of the owners, right? For not properly socialising and training those dogs? The dogs with a distinct tendency to bite people? Or the fault of the people approaching 'the dogs' territory' in the wrong way, or daring to approach it at all?

Dear FSM
Click to expand...
Yes, absolutely, dogs should be properly trained by their owners. What on earth did you think I was saying?
 
Dachshunds can be very aggressive but the dogs in the pictures don't look like dachshunds to me. The upright pointed ears make me wonder. Corgis are short, too.
 
GlennB said:
I'd rather have a dog that didn't 'defend its territory', frankly. Our dogs, over the years, have positively welcomed people into 'their territory'. Two Labs, a Greyhound and a Lab/Collie mix, in case you're wondering.

So many excuses are made for inherently dangerous tendencies within particular breeds, when there are so many docile breeds.

But, yeah, it's always the fault of the owners, right? For not properly socialising and training those dogs? The dogs with a distinct tendency to bite people? Or the fault of the people approaching 'the dogs' territory' in the wrong way, or daring to approach it at all?

Dear FSM
Click to expand...

Collies are high up on the 'dog attack' list, the only time my own dog has ever been attacked was by a collie (a pub dog that had had previous incidents). I don't condemn the entire breed for the actions of a single dog.

Labradors are apparently the most common culprit for dog attacks in the UK.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/dog-breed-most-likely-to-attack-bite-you-revealed-a7166296.html
 
GlennB said:
I don't doubt it. And the Ford Fiesta is involved in more accidents than the Ferrari Testarossa
Click to expand...


Which has what exactly to do with the fact that the dogs you said don't defend their territory do actually sometimes defend their territory? You've stated that rotweilers as a breed are "time bombs" due to a single incident, labradors attack people too but you obviously don't think that's the breed.
 
P.J. Denyer said:
Which has what exactly to do with the fact that the dogs you said don't defend their territory do actually sometimes defend their territory? You've stated that rotweilers as a breed are "time bombs" due to a single incident, labradors attack people too but you obviously don't think that's the breed.
Click to expand...

Looking closer at the research behind that article, it places Labradors 4th for attacks on delivery workers, with no details apparent for bites in general. Is the full research available? I searched 'Pet Friends' without any luck.

But such statistics mean precisely nothing unless you look at such things as the numbers of each breed within the overall population and the severity of the attack.

And, no, the 'time bomb' remark wasn't due to that single incident. Look at the figures for fatalities and you'll find Rottweilers second with Labradors a few pages down, despite hugely outnumbering Rottweilers.
 
They say it's from their own research. It doesn't matter though, whether it's top for all attacks or fourth for attacks on delivery workers your example of a 'docile' dog which isn't territorial can be territorial and labradors can and do attack people.

Any dogs can be dangerous if it isn't treated, cared for and trained correctly.
 
P.J. Denyer said:
They say it's from their own research. It doesn't matter though, whether it's top for all attacks or fourth for attacks on delivery workers your example of a 'docile' dog which isn't territorial can be territorial and labradors can and do attack people.

Any dogs can be dangerous if it isn't treated, cared for and trained correctly.
Click to expand...

Yes, but not all dogs were bred for characteristics that make them inherently more dangerous than others. Which was my point.

Meanwhile, Liverpool police conducted a study into dog attacks in 2015 in their city (I don't know the criteria they used for including an attack in the stats and can't easily find them). The top 10:

Jack Russell
Staffordshire Bull Terrier
Pit Bull
German Shepherd
Rottweiler
Dachshund
Boxer
Great Dane
Doberman Pinscher
Siberian Husky

From the history of the Jack Russell:

"An important attribute in this dog was a tempered aggressiveness that would provide the necessary drive to pursue and bolt the fox, without resulting in physical harm to the quarry and effectively ending the chase, which was considered unsporting", i.e. to snap, nip and generally harass. Similar story with the Dachshund. Both are still behaving according to their original purpose.
 
Last edited:
SuburbanTurkey said:
One of life's many jests. Terriers, as a breed, were bred mostly to kill all sorts of nasty vermin. Pound for pound, they are some of the scrappiest dog breeds around. But because they are small, people often see them as harmless lap dogs.

Great dogs, but lurking inside is the heart of a bar brawler. Like most dogs, should be carefully trained and socialized.
Click to expand...

This is a major part of the issue. People tolerate behavior traits in small dogs that would be totally unacceptable and dangerous when crossbred into a larger animal. Terriers as a breed probably should have remained working animals who exist to kill small mammals on mass. Trying to breed pets from these roots is just asking for problems.


I don’t buy into arguments that most Terrier crosses are “not Pit Bulls” which while technically accurate isn’t really the issue. I also don’t buy “in the hands of an experienced and caring trainer” they can be safe because most of the demand for these dogs comes from people who want an animal that isn’t really safe.
 
I have a JRT and her behaviour can be appaling and embarrassing. I live very rurally and anybody coming into our area is greeted with a frankly mental display of barking, gnashing and yelping. If you saw her you'd think that, if let out, she's gonna tear a lump out of you. The opposite is true - the minute she has you within the house you will not get a warmer welcome anywhere and she will be all over you until you leave. I absolutely hate this trait in her and despite my best efforts over the last three and a half years have made no change whatsoever.

The "welcome" she gives to the postie is upsetting to watch and thank goodness he knows her. She channels a tasmanian devil right up until the door is opened and the split second it is she is a licking wagfest of love.

Little ****.
 
GlennB said:
I wouldn't have Rotties around the house if you paid me. Unexploded bombs.
Click to expand...


It's all down to one's own experiences. I've never met a Rottweiler that wanted to do anything but lean on me.

I' have met may Jack Russells that, in my opinion, should be destroyed. Far too many of these dogs are owned by people who don't think it's an issue, cos their dog is so small.
 
Last edited:
arthwollipot said:
You didn't read my statement. Dachshunds defend against people lurking around outside their territory. Once they actually enter their territory, they are as welcoming as any other breed.
Click to expand...

However you want to parse it, the dachschund next door is a jerkwad. To pretty much everyone. Anyone outside he gets really aggressive with... and when we've entered his house he turns into a quivering mass of fear and pee.

May not be true of all instances of the breed... but this one in particular I could really do without. And I like dogs in general, so...
 
3point14 said:
It's all down to one's own experiences. I've never met a Rottweiler that wanted to do anything but lean on me.
Click to expand...

Until you look at the fatality/serious injury stats? Then Rottie behaviour goes beyond personal experience. My pov in (what seems like) a hundred such discussions here is that there are certain dogs that you just don't want to be around when they 'lose it'. A Lab or spaniel 'losing it' might possibly nip, to make its point. A BT breed or Rottweiler 'losing it' can easily be fatal or seriously damaging.

3point14 said:
I' have met may Jack Russell's that, in my opinion, should be destroyed. Far too many of these dogs are owned by people who don't think it's an issue, cos their dog is so small.
Click to expand...

Amen. But when a small child is around the damage can be terrible. My late ma-in-law had such a small dog and it had to be locked away when her little great-granddaughter came to visit. It went dangerously ballistic on the first visit.
 
GlennB said:
Until you look at the fatality/serious injury stats? Then Rottie behaviour goes beyond personal experience. My pov in (what seems like) a hundred such discussions here is that there are certain dogs that you just don't want to be around when they 'lose it'. A Lab or spaniel 'losing it' might possibly nip, to make its point. A BT breed or Rottweiler 'losing it' can easily be fatal or seriously damaging.
Click to expand...

I don't entirely trust the statistics. I don't trust most people, including doctors, policemen or even myself to correctly identify breeds. I believe the stats are confounded by this.


Amen. But when a small child is around the damage can be terrible. My late ma-in-law had such a small dog and it had to be locked away when her little great-granddaughter came to visit. It went dangerously ballistic on the first visit.
Click to expand...


Any dog, anywhere that goes 'dangerously ballistic' at a consistent trigger should be euthanised.
 
Regarding the upstanding ears in the photo - our dachshund's ears did that when he was lying down too. They would be upright ears if they weren't long and floppy. So I can't consider that a sign that they're not dachshunds.
 
GlennB said:
I'd rather have a dog that didn't 'defend its territory', frankly. Our dogs, over the years, have positively welcomed people into 'their territory'. Two Labs, a Greyhound and a Lab/Collie mix, in case you're wondering.
Click to expand...


My female Lab barks at anything and everything outside our yard or house. If it actually came towards her it would be subject to tail wagging and face licking. Barking isn’t really a sign of aggression though, it’s a rallying cry. She probably just wants me to come and see if it’s something she can make friends with. If I look to see what she’s barking at she’s usually happy and quits down.

Her brother isn’t nearly as social; he will give other dogs an obligor but sniff then ignore them. He loves to chase things so small animals could get hurt accidentally but even then he mostly just wants to run. The two once chased a rabbit under my parent’s deck. There is only one way in and out and lots of boxes and yard stuff there so they cornered it. As soon as they did all you could hear was the sound of wagging tails thumping on boxes for 20 seconds until the rabbit made a break for it.

GlennB said:
Yes, but not all dogs were bred for characteristics that make them inherently more dangerous than others. Which was my point.

Meanwhile, Liverpool police conducted a study into dog attacks in 2015 in their city (I don't know the criteria they used for including an attack in the stats and can't easily find them). The top 10:
Click to expand...

Wrt the attack stats probably they are just going by total numbers. Labs have been the most popular breed in the US and UK for decades. This makes “Lab” the most common designation for mixed breed animals as well, and those can be a more mixed bag than pure lab wrt aggression. Another consideration is that generally speaking Labs can’t/don’t bite very hard relative to their size as they were bred not to mangle the things they carry. Again this may not be the case with mixed breed animals.
 
bluesjnr said:
I have a JRT and her behaviour can be appaling and embarrassing. I live very rurally and anybody coming into our area is greeted with a frankly mental display of barking, gnashing and yelping. If you saw her you'd think that, if let out, she's gonna tear a lump out of you. The opposite is true - the minute she has you within the house you will not get a warmer welcome anywhere and she will be all over you until you leave. I absolutely hate this trait in her and despite my best efforts over the last three and a half years have made no change whatsoever.

The "welcome" she gives to the postie is upsetting to watch and thank goodness he knows her. She channels a tasmanian devil right up until the door is opened and the split second it is she is a licking wagfest of love.

Little ****.
Click to expand...

My two Labs are equally embarrassing for different reasons. They get so excited to see new people, or even people they haven’t seen in a while they could easily knock them over. They really just want to lick them and wag their tails but even though they are small for Labs they are very active and don’t do anything half speed.
 
lomiller said:
I don’t buy into arguments that most Terrier crosses are “not Pit Bulls” which while technically accurate isn’t really the issue. I also don’t buy “in the hands of an experienced and caring trainer” they can be safe because most of the demand for these dogs comes from people who want an animal that isn’t really safe.
Click to expand...


Interesting that I've witnessed much of the "pit bull" behaviour in dogs who were not in any way a pit bull cross, but were purebred terriers from other lineages.

It doesn't help that 1) the term "pit bull" is not a specific breed, but a catch-all that is used for at least three different breeds, including the American Pit Bull Terrier; and 2) reporters habitually refer to any dog with a similar size and even remotely similar appearance as a "pit bull" when reporting attacks.

When I was a youth, my parents owned and showed Cairn Terriers (similar to Scotch Terriers). A very aggressive breed, who had that same "lock and hold" tendency when biting that is commonly ascribed to "pit bulls". Once they locked their jaw on something, there was no way anyone was going to get it loose, and they have very strong jaws. One of our favorite things to do with them was get a big stick, play tug of war with it so they'd bite on good and hard, and lift them up off the ground. They'd hold there until our arms got tired and and we had to let them go, or the stick snapped.

Could have been nasty even at their small size, let alone if they had been bigger.
 
Emily's Cat said:
However you want to parse it, the dachschund next door is a jerkwad. To pretty much everyone. Anyone outside he gets really aggressive with... and when we've entered his house he turns into a quivering mass of fear and pee.

May not be true of all instances of the breed... but this one in particular I could really do without. And I like dogs in general, so...
Click to expand...
Yes, different dogs are different. Don't let this one experience fuel dislike of the entire breed. They really are quite affectionate and cuddly when they like you.
 
arthwollipot said:
Yes, different dogs are different. Don't let this one experience fuel dislike of the entire breed. They really are quite affectionate and cuddly when they like you.
Click to expand...

Oh, no worries! I don't usually hold breed traits against individual dogs. Although, to be honest, it will definitely influence what sort of dog I would get as a pet. No terriers or beagles for me - the digging and chewing are traits I don't want to have to deal with. Similarly, I'll only get a hound if I'm living outside of town, simply because they bay - it's what they do. It won't bother me, but it would likely bother neighbors. And I would never get a border collie or other herding dog - I won't be able to give them the enrichment they need to stay sane and not go totally wonky.
 
arthwollipot said:
Yes, different dogs are different. Don't let this one experience fuel dislike of the entire breed. They really are quite affectionate and cuddly when they like you.
Click to expand...

Absolutely, I grew up in a time/place where any Jack Russells I met were almost exclusively owned by older men who weren't particularly keen on kids, strangers or pretty much anyone. An attitude picked up by the dogs, so I grew up thinking of them as aggressive, noisy, ankle biters. I now walk an incredibly friendly JRT that will pledge his undying devotion to anyone, adult or child, that will throw a ball for him. Nature vs Nurture.
 
lomiller said:
Another consideration is that generally speaking Labs can’t/don’t bite very hard relative to their size as they were bred not to mangle the things they carry.
Click to expand...

I'm not certain that's true, or rather, it depends on why they're biting. Their bite strength is pretty average according to this:
http://germanshepherdsgalaxy.blogspot.com/2012/05/dogs-bite-force.html

According to the National Geographic Channel television show Dangerous Encounters, the bite of a German Shepherd Dog has a force of over 238 pounds (108 kg) (compared with that of a Rottweiler, over 265–328 pounds (120–149 kg) of force, a Pit bull, 235 pounds (107 kg) of force, a Labrador Retriever, of approximately 230 pounds (100 kg) of force, or a human, of approximately 86 pounds (39 kg) of force).
Click to expand...

...and any dog biting out of full blown aggression to kill will bite as hard as it can.
 
kellyb said:
I'm not certain that's true, or rather, it depends on why they're biting. Their bite strength is pretty average according to this:
http://germanshepherdsgalaxy.blogspot.com/2012/05/dogs-bite-force.html

...and any dog biting out of full blown aggression to kill will bite as hard as it can.
Click to expand...

I'd buy those force measurements, but how many dog attacks are geared to killing? If a dog's original 'purpose' was to kill or disable a large animal then maybe. But if it was to drive game birds from bushes, or herd sheep, or accompany people? Any tendency towards truly savage attacks wouldn't have been tolerated by the breeders.
 
GlennB said:
I'd buy those force measurements, but how many dog attacks are geared to killing? If a dog's original 'purpose' was to kill or disable a large animal then maybe. But if it was to drive game birds from bushes, or herd sheep, or accompany people? Any tendency towards truly savage attacks wouldn't have been tolerated by the breeders.
Click to expand...

They all have roots as wolves hunting prey of various sizes to eat. I'm not sure how to differentiate between murderous vs non-murderous dog attacks without falling into a tautology, tho. I can only note that "nips" and "warning bites" are different from attacks.
 
GlennB said:
Sorry to say this, but I have memories of when a "well trained, very well mannered Rottweiler"* tried hard to kill my young cousin in his own home. Joe's crime was to come charging down the stairs and fall over in the hall. My uncle couldn't get the dog off his son for love or money, and had to break the dog's back with a dining chair.

* I still have a photo or two I took while horse-playing with this very dog. I had stayed at that house one Xmas - before the attack on Joe - and was the last one up. I had to walk past the room where the dog and his two Rottie bitches were behind a kid's door gate, quite low and pretty feeble as gates go, and my 'friend' Fred was suddenly growling, baring his teeth and staring at me. I knew enough to walk slowly upstairs to my room.

I wouldn't have Rotties around the house if you paid me. Unexploded bombs.
Click to expand...
Based on my experience owning two rotties (I currently have a one yr old), i trust them more than any large breed. However I did carefully vet the temperament of the parents.

Rottie #1 never so much as barked at anyone. He was the most human-friendly dog I've ever met. He made Carl seem vicious.

Based strictly on your contradictory telling, it sounds as if your cousin's dogs were decidedly not "well trained, very well mannered ". Quite the opposite. Clearly they had serious temperament problems before the incident.

Mind you, I'm wary of any powerful dog that I don't know, rottie or otherwise.
 
luchog said:
<snip>

When I was a youth, my parents owned and showed Cairn Terriers (similar to Scotch Terriers). A very aggressive breed, who had that same "lock and hold" tendency when biting that is commonly ascribed to "pit bulls". Once they locked their jaw on something, there was no way anyone was going to get it loose, and they have very strong jaws. One of our favorite things to do with them was get a big stick, play tug of war with it so they'd bite on good and hard, and lift them up off the ground. They'd hold there until our arms got tired and and we had to let them go, or the stick snapped.

Could have been nasty even at their small size, let alone if they had been bigger.
Click to expand...


I've shared this story here before, but now seems like an appropriate place to share it again.

Our next door neighbors (during a past marriage) had a young German Shepherd they let run in their fenced-in back yard. Though young, he had pretty much reached his full growth.

One day I heard an unholy racket coming from our back yard. I looked out and saw that the neighbor's dog had gotten loose and was running back and forth across our back yard.

Our Shipperke had gotten loose as well, and was hanging by her teeth from the Shepherd's neck, the other dog trying desperately and futilely to shake her off. She was roughly the size and weight of a large housecat.

I managed to call her off of the other dog, who promptly ran back next door, trying unsuccessfully to get back into his fenced-in yard. Onyx (our Shipperke) stood at the yard's edge and kept the Shepherd cowed in a corner of the neighbor's driveway until I managed to get her back inside.

This photo from Wiki could have been taken of our Onyx. She looked exactly the same.

440px-Schipperke0001.jpg



Pound for pound, I have never seen a dog with more pure instinct for all-out, balls-on, attack and damn the consequences.
 
varwoche said:
Based strictly on your contradictory telling, it sounds as if your cousin's dogs were decidedly not "well trained, very well mannered ". Quite the opposite. Clearly they had serious temperament problems before the incident.
Click to expand...

The owners were very wealthy and had put all these dogs through strict training. Their pups (from 1 dog, 2 bitches) were sold through the Harrods (a very posh UK department store) pet department and their temperament was a selling feature.

The whole point of this line is that the dog was a gem until things went wrong. Then it became potentially lethal. How many everyday house dogs get put to that kind of test to establish their boundaries? Why not stick to dogs that have a proven record of not doing this kind of thing?

Yes, that snarling at me late at night was disturbing, but then I was an infrequent visitor in an unusual situation.
 
I have a friend who had to be with taken by ambulance to the emergency room after being bit by her pet dachshund. Pretty sure she had a small stroke caused by blood loss.
 
Last edited:
GlennB said:
The owners were very wealthy and had put all these dogs through strict training. Their pups (from 1 dog, 2 bitches) were sold through the Harrods (a very posh UK department store) pet department and their temperament was a selling feature.

The whole point of this line is that the dog was a gem until things went wrong. Then it became potentially lethal. How many everyday house dogs get put to that kind of test to establish their boundaries? Why not stick to dogs that have a proven record of not doing this kind of thing?

Yes, that snarling at me late at night was disturbing, but then I was an infrequent visitor in an unusual situation.
Click to expand...

The problem is dogs don't know when they're in training and that when they leave it they're supposed to take that behaviour with them. Dogs adapt to the behaviour that gets them the greatest reward (or avoids negative consequences) now, dogs that behave perfectly in training can be complete nightmares at home if the owner lacks the necessary skills.

And as has been shown plenty of dogs of other breeds including labradors do attack people.
 
GlennB said:
The owners were very wealthy and had put all these dogs through strict training. Their pups (from 1 dog, 2 bitches) were sold through the Harrods (a very posh UK department store) pet department and their temperament was a selling feature.

The whole point of this line is that the dog was a gem until things went wrong. Then it became potentially lethal. How many everyday house dogs get put to that kind of test to establish their boundaries? Why not stick to dogs that have a proven record of not doing this kind of thing?

Yes, that snarling at me late at night was disturbing, but then I was an infrequent visitor in an unusual situation.
Click to expand...
Understood. I'm just trying to underscore the difference between dogs that are actually human-friendly, e.g. my rotties who love(d) every human they ever met, as opposed to your cousin's dog that snarled at you despite being acquainted, and who later proved the point with the attack. I'll bet vast sums of money that wasn't the only time they snarled at someone, and that does raise the question of owner awareness / competence.

By the way, I don't begrudge you distrust of rotties, and I'm not trying to convince you otherwise. It's a reasonable default position so far as I'm concerned.
 
luchog said:
...
When I was a youth, my parents owned and showed Cairn Terriers (similar to Scotch Terriers). A very aggressive breed, who had that same "lock and hold" tendency when biting that is commonly ascribed to "pit bulls". Once they locked their jaw on something, there was no way anyone was going to get it loose, and they have very strong jaws. One of our favorite things to do with them was get a big stick, play tug of war with it so they'd bite on good and hard, and lift them up off the ground. They'd hold there until our arms got tired and and we had to let them go, or the stick snapped.

Could have been nasty even at their small size, let alone if they had been bigger.
Click to expand...

My bro knows a guy that hunted coyotes in Colorado. He used dogs. Different breeds for different purposes. The trackers would find and surround, then he would loose his "kill dog", a Schnauzer.
 
casebro said:
My bro knows a guy that hunted coyotes in Colorado. He used dogs. Different breeds for different purposes. The trackers would find and surround, then he would loose his "kill dog", a Schnauzer.
Click to expand...


My dad and stepmother had a couple of those. One day when they were out at their farm (in WV) one of the dogs came back from a wander in the woods with its snout crushed.

The vet was pretty sure it had tried to tangle with a bear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom