Protection And Security

[Nienke]

That's what you can get if you adopt one or both rotties, that are looking for a new home. The owner moves to a smaller home and is not able to take the dogs this new home.

Both are friendly males of approximately 5 years old.

Interested and would like more information or see the dogs? Please contact Care for Dogs

Edited March 19, 2009 by Nienke

[caf]

That's what you can get if you adopt one or both rotties, that are looking for a new home. The owner moves to a smaller home and is not able to take the dogs this new home.

Both are friendly males of approximately 5 years old.

Interested and would like more information or see the dogs? Please contact Care for Dogs

No-one should be advocating having a rottweiler or any other dog for that matter for the purpose of PROTECTION.

Are you saying these dogs have been trained already or are you are suggesting they can be trained for protection duties.

I think what you are encouraging may be illegal in Thailand. It is certainly a criminal offence in many western countries.

People who want dogs should do so for positive caring reasons.

If one of your dogs bit or killed someone in the act of protecting, the dogh would be destroyed and the owner - particularly if a farang - would feel a sharp reduction in the bank balance

[Mestizo]

No-one should be advocating having a rottweiler or any other dog for that matter for the purpose of PROTECTION.

Are you saying these dogs have been trained already or are you are suggesting they can be trained for protection duties.

I think what you are encouraging may be illegal in Thailand. It is certainly a criminal offence in many western countries.

People who want dogs should do so for positive caring reasons.

If one of your dogs bit or killed someone in the act of protecting, the dogh would be destroyed and the owner - particularly if a farang - would feel a sharp reduction in the bank balance

Holy Overreaction Batman!

Deterrence is a form of protection. If someone has a large dog with an intimidating appearance, chances are nobody is going to bother them. If that same dog is sleeping outside the house at night, high probability that nobody is going to bother them. Deterrence.

You unfairly equate "protection" to aggressive / attacking.

-Mestizo

[WinnieTheKhwai]

They're Rottweilers though.. known to kill.

Edited March 19, 2009 by WinnieTheKhwai

[gpdjohn]

That's what you can get if you adopt one or both rotties, that are looking for a new home. The owner moves to a smaller home and is not able to take the dogs this new home.

Both are friendly males of approximately 5 years old.

Interested and would like more information or see the dogs? Please contact Care for Dogs

No-one should be advocating having a rottweiler or any other dog for that matter for the purpose of PROTECTION.

Are you saying these dogs have been trained already or are you are suggesting they can be trained for protection duties.

I think what you are encouraging may be illegal in Thailand. It is certainly a criminal offence in many western countries.

People who want dogs should do so for positive caring reasons.

If one of your dogs bit or killed someone in the act of protecting, the dogh would be destroyed and the owner - particularly if a farang - would feel a sharp reduction in the bank balance

You probably own a chimp named " Brett" and dress it as human too....

[thaimiller]

They're Rottweilers though.. known to kill.

I can see this thread turning very quickly into which dogs are evil etc.........

[Ajarn]

They're Rottweilers though.. known to kill.

I can see this thread turning very quickly into which dogs are evil etc.........

Or not turning into anything

[tigerbeer]

waiting for Nienke's reply

[Nienke]

What do you expect me to say, tigerbeer?

[Ulysses G.]

No-one should be advocating having a rottweiler or any other dog for that matter for the purpose of PROTECTION.

Deterrence is a form of protection. If someone has a large dog with an intimidating appearance, chances are nobody is going to bother them. If that same dog is sleeping outside the house at night, high probability that nobody is going to bother them. Deterrence.

You unfairly equate "protection" to aggressive / attacking.

Of course!

[tigerbeer]

What do you expect me to say, tigerbeer?

that even though they are rottweilers, that does not mean that one can not be trained enough to be friendly and a loving dog.

[heybruce]

No-one should be advocating having a rottweiler or any other dog for that matter for the purpose of PROTECTION.

Deterrence is a form of protection. If someone has a large dog with an intimidating appearance, chances are nobody is going to bother them. If that same dog is sleeping outside the house at night, high probability that nobody is going to bother them. Deterrence.

You unfairly equate "protection" to aggressive / attacking.

Of course!

Perhaps the initial post should have been titled "Home wanted for two large, good natured dogs". However it's true that just having these dogs will probably offer some protection.

A dog doesn't have to be mean or a trained attack dog to offer protection, it can be very friendly and still dissuade attack. My 73 year old mother has a mostly black German Shepherd that is a total wimp, but people who come knocking at her door don't know that. They just see a large, fierce looking dog studying them intently. I'm glad Mom has that dog.

I hope someone can offer these two dogs a good home. Unfortunately they look a little too big to share my condo with them.

[caf]

No-one should be advocating having a rottweiler or any other dog for that matter for the purpose of PROTECTION.

Are you saying these dogs have been trained already or are you are suggesting they can be trained for protection duties.

I think what you are encouraging may be illegal in Thailand. It is certainly a criminal offence in many western countries.

People who want dogs should do so for positive caring reasons.

If one of your dogs bit or killed someone in the act of protecting, the dogh would be destroyed and the owner - particularly if a farang - would feel a sharp reduction in the bank balance

Holy Overreaction Batman!

Deterrence is a form of protection. If someone has a large dog with an intimidating appearance, chances are nobody is going to bother them. If that same dog is sleeping outside the house at night, high probability that nobody is going to bother them. Deterrence.

You unfairly equate "protection" to aggressive / attacking.

-Mestizo

The poster has specifically referred to protection, which Is what I take issue with.

( And deterrence is not a form of protection: check a dictionary, they are different concepts)

There are other ways of protecting property and person. Encouraging someone to use a dog for protection is socially unacceptable.

A police dog can be trained to attack but only when under the control of an experienced handler and under strict regulations. To suggest something similar here in Thailand is irresponsible.

Ask yourself why most Thais have dogs and whatb they are used for. Trained to bark or trained to fight?

[Ulysses G.]

Ask yourself why most Thais have dogs and whatb they are used for. Trained to bark or trained to fight?

I would say, not trained at all.

[caf]

Ask yourself why most Thais have dogs and whatb they are used for. Trained to bark or trained to fight?

I would say, not trained at all.

Which means they revert to their basic nature

Which is what?

To hunt in packs and fight. A dangerous weapon which the poster is encouraging others to use for "protection"

How many "accidents" happen with dogs here? Children are of course at a worse risk.

The Op is a most irresponsible post

[Mestizo]

A police dog can be trained to attack but only when under the control of an experienced handler and under strict regulations. To suggest something similar here in Thailand is irresponsible.

Ask yourself why most Thais have dogs and whatb they are used for. Trained to bark or trained to fight?

Actually, I find it a bit irresponsible to make such sweeping generalizations. Because we are in Thailand, nobody is capable of being an experienced handler and enforcing strict regulation of thier animals?

From what I have seen, most Thai owned dogs are not used for much else other than sitting in someones lap and being carried around the market.

Now if someone could train Rottweilers to specifically seek out and attack trolls on T.V., then I think you would have a legitimate concern!

-Mestizo

[harrry]

I am sure Nienke means well and that these beautiful dogs would only lick intruders to death however I do have problems with the idea of dogs being advertised for this purpose. The problem is that it attracts the wrong sort of owners. I am sure Nienke wouldn't want them to have the dogs though.

Edited March 20, 2009 by harrry

[Patriciachas]

That's what you can get if you adopt one or both rotties, that are looking for a new home. The owner moves to a smaller home and is not able to take the dogs this new home.

Both are friendly males of approximately 5 years old.

Interested and would like more information or see the dogs? Please contact Care for Dogs

This type of dog can never be trusted and should never be near any small children.they are far from lovable dogs avoid them like the plague.

[Nienke]

(Nienke @ 2009-03-19 18:15:17)

What do you expect me to say, tigerbeer?

that even though they are rottweilers, that does not mean that one can not be trained enough to be friendly and a loving dog.

IMO, every dog shoud be properly educated.

It's even possible to turn any dog (provided there is no underlying physical problem) into well-behaved and -adjusted dog without the strict training during training classes, by following a proper interaction based on mutual trust and respect where the dog learns to respect the owners to be higher in rank and is guided into desired behavior. Playing wise the dog can learn to sit, stay, come, walk on lead without pulling, no jumping up, no stealing etc.

One can still call this training, but I prefer to call it education.

You don't get a well-behaved dog just by teaching it or having it taught the sit, down, stay, come etc. One does get a well-behaved dog when one spends time and effort in a proper education of the dog, which includes an understanding on the part of the owners of the dog's behavior (development), -language, basic needs and care, behavioral traits, learning processes, etc. without anthropomorphizing the dog's behavior.

For me training is teaching a dog to follow up commands precisely, such as a correct sit right in front of or next to the owner/handler, or a perfect heel.

Education involves more: socialization, prevention of undesired behavior (jumping all over people, running out of the door dragging the owner behind it, barking excessively for attention, chasing other people, animals or vehicles, etc. ) or changing it in desired behavior and a proper interaction betweenowner and dog. And again, for this the owner has to learn, more than the dog.

heybruce Yesterday, 2009-03-19 23:19:10

Perhaps the initial post should have been titled "Home wanted for two large, good natured dogs".

Yes, I could have given it that title. However, would that provide almost 400 views?

caf Today, 2009-03-20 07:55:23

The poster has specifically referred to protection, which Is what I take issue with.

( And deterrence is not a form of protection: check a dictionary, they are different concepts)

There are other ways of protecting property and person. Encouraging someone to use a dog for protection is socially unacceptable.

A police dog can be trained to attack but only when under the control of an experienced handler and under strict regulations. To suggest something similar here in Thailand is irresponsible.

Ask yourself why most Thais have dogs and whatb they are used for. Trained to bark or trained to fight?

Caf, the title is 'protection and security'. Then I wrote That's what you can get if you adopt one or both rotties. It doesn't necessarily mean that you WILL get it.

If you properly read my OP you can see that nowhere I mentioned anything about the dogs being trained or not or were I suggesting something other than if someone is interested in the dogs and would like more info or see the dogs they need to contact Care for Dogs, as THEY are the ones who were contacted by the current owner about re-homing the dogs.

Also nowhere did I encourage people to USE a dog for protection. These things you all made up by yourself.

If you would know me a little, which you obviously don't, you would have known that I would never encourage anyone to adopt or buy any animal just for the sake of it.

As for your remark: Ask yourself why most Thais have dogs and whatb they are used for. Trained to bark or trained to fight?

Maybe you can better ask the Thai people themselves? And then ask them also how many do actually train their dogs to bark or to fight?

I've had several rotties in boarding (and/or training), I also have owned one for many years(may he rest in peace). Most of them are teddybears. However, all of them are very faithfull to their owner/s and will not appreciate it when you do something wrong to them.

Rotties are bred to guard and protect. That's a behavioral trait from that breed. Most, not all, will naturally guard their properties and pack. They don't need to be trained to do so. Of course, they do need to be trained/educated into well-behaved and obedient dogs.

Many people, in general, have the attitude that one should be able to do everything with a dog that's not their own. The dog should tolerate any unwanted touching (petting) at any time. To me it means that these people do not (want to?) understand and respect a dog's behavior and personal space which every dog has. We, people, are just like dogs social animals. Do we like to be touched/petted at any time by others? Do we like that strangers approach our children and just start touching them? Do we feel comfortable when a stranger suddenly enters our home? No, I don't think so. We will feel threatened by it. We also feel highly uncomfortable when in an open space a stranger will come and sit right next to us (unless it's a gorgeous lady, then the man will see it as an invitation ). Why should dogs have to tolerate it then?

Anyway, this has nothing to do anymore with dogs of the guarding breeds vs. protection (training).

[Nienke]

I am sure Nienke means well and that these beautiful dogs would only lick intruders to death however I do have problems with the idea of dogs being advertised for this purpose. The problem is that it attracts the wrong sort of owners. I am sure Nienke wouldn't want them to have the dogs though.

The title was nothing more or less than to attract people to view the post. The more the better, as that will increase the chance for these dogs to get adopted. Never would I have thought that someone would have taken it out of context that much.

But then, that is what happened and probably because I didn't think further.

Nowhere did I intend to advertise the adoption of these dogs for the sole purpose of protection and nothing else.

What I would like to happen is that some responsible person who likes and understands the breed is willing to adopt one or both dogs and is going to spend the necessary time and effort into the education of his/her newly adopted dog. Because, no matter what, that is what is going to be needed, and not only with rotties but with every newly purchased or adopted pup or adult dog.

Big chance that the dogs will be neutered (or maybe they already are) as they go through Care for Dogs which will rule out several potential new owners with not the best intentions for the dogs as well.

[amexpat]

I agree with all that. I think you have a good understanding of dogs in general.

The problem is that rotties just go nuts.

Google "rottweiler attacks owner". I got 781,000 hits.

When one kills a kid, it's usually the same story from the owners: "I just can't believe it. He/she was such a gentle, loving, sweetheart. Never showed any signs of aggression before."

Very sad. They are beautiful dogs.

[Nienke]

it's usually the same story from the owners: "I just can't believe it. He/she was such a gentle, loving, sweetheart. Never showed any signs of aggression before."

More too often, when you ask these owners a bit further about dog behavior and their language they don't really have a clue. Unfortunately. They haven't recognized or acknowledged the many signals the dog had given prior to the bite.

How often do I get dogs in boarding where the owner's arms are full with scratches. But no, that's merely play biting. Too me, how lovely the dog may be furthermore, it is a dog that hasn't been taught 'no dog teeth on human flesh', the bite inhibition and to respect the owner as higher rank.

On the pet forum I've placed a picture of a toddler and a dog. It was send to me with several very cute doggy and kitty pic's. It was meant a a cute picture as well. But I was and am shocked by the total ignorance of the one who took the picture and by all those who think this is a cute and funny picture and do not see how dangerous the situation was at the moment of picture taken. A possible bite is only a split second away.

Here's the pic:

Personally I'm strongly in favor of dog owners doing a sort of doggy license before getting a dog and during the first months after the purchase or adoption. Just like people need to get a drivings license. Dog owners need to have an understanding of the basics of dog behavior, language, learning process, basic needs and care, and also the dog need to be able to follow up basic commands.

Many dog owners still think that dog training only exists of teaching the dog the basic commands and nothing more.

[piercefilmlid]

I am sure Nienke means well and that these beautiful dogs would only lick intruders to death however I do have problems with the idea of dogs being advertised for this purpose. The problem is that it attracts the wrong sort of owners. I am sure Nienke wouldn't want them to have the dogs though.

I agree.

The way these dogs were advertised was naive and provoked the response it got. I would not board my dogs with someone who advertises dogs for "protection"

[adjan jb]

I am sure Nienke means well and that these beautiful dogs would only lick intruders to death however I do have problems with the idea of dogs being advertised for this purpose. The problem is that it attracts the wrong sort of owners. I am sure Nienke wouldn't want them to have the dogs though.

I agree.

The way these dogs were advertised was naive and provoked the response it got. I would not board my dogs with someone who advertises dogs for "protection"

IMO, it was just an unfortunate wording. I believe Nienke is a genuine dog lover and a skilled professional. Please give her a break.

[caf]

I am sure Nienke means well and that these beautiful dogs would only lick intruders to death however I do have problems with the idea of dogs being advertised for this purpose. The problem is that it attracts the wrong sort of owners. I am sure Nienke wouldn't want them to have the dogs though.

I agree.

The way these dogs were advertised was naive and provoked the response it got. I would not board my dogs with someone who advertises dogs for "protection"

IMO, it was just an unfortunate wording. I believe Nienke is a genuine dog lover and a skilled professional. Please give her a break.

I have no doubt the poster loves dogs but her post was naive and badly thought out ( he partly admits this) but admits it was in order to get a high number of hits!

Patrichas made a good point and googling rottweilers gets a more balanced view of the breed for "protective" duties rather than the opinion of one trainer

Everyone is entitled to his own opinion ( even on tv ) and there are trainers who would take a very different view

As a veterinary surgeon who has dealt with rottweilers and other breeds on the dangerous breed list and been called out by the police on emergency cases i obviously hold my views professionally.

That is not to say that all dogs are dangerous - far from it. In summary, the poster should have taken more care as it is clear most people have taken up the "protection " angle but that was because that was what the poster impiled

[heybruce]

Ask yourself why most Thais have dogs and whatb they are used for. Trained to bark or trained to fight?

I would say, not trained at all.

Which means they revert to their basic nature

Which is what?

To hunt in packs and fight. A dangerous weapon which the poster is encouraging others to use for "protection"

How many "accidents" happen with dogs here? Children are of course at a worse risk.

The Op is a most irresponsible post

Have you spent much time with dogs? Dogs have been partnered with people since long before recorded history, and thousands of generations of selective breeding (the troublesome dogs were killed) has resulted in friendly social animals that only attack when they think they or their family is being threatened, and sometimes not even then. They're lovers, not fighters, and it takes training or mistreatment to make most dogs mean. Yes every year some people are killed by dogs, as well as by sharks, bees, lightening, etc. That does not mean we should cower in fear at the sight of a dog, bee, lightening or even a shark; the risk is miniscule. All it takes to properly raise a dog is let it grow up in a safe and secure environment and see to it that it is properly socialized by friendly interaction with other people and pets, after that almost all dogs (there are rare exceptions) will be wonderful companions, not threats.

[cmsally]

Looking at my Thai dogs I think their basic nature is to sleep

[adjan jb]

IMO, it was just an unfortunate wording. I believe Nienke is a genuine dog lover and a skilled professional. Please give her a break.

Everyone is entitled to his own opinion ( even on tv ) and there are trainers who would take a very different view

As a veterinary surgeon who has dealt with rottweilers and other breeds on the dangerous breed list and been called out by the police on emergency cases i obviously hold my views professionally.

Hi Caf

Read your post with a lot of interest.

I don't know much about dogs. I once had a dog (a mongrel) but I'm more of a cat man (I have a lovely Bombay cat. Or she has me. Not sure who is who in our relationship).

When I read the opening post, first I was bewildered because I have always heard that rottweilers are (could be) dangerous dogs. Then I did a Google a search. Among other articles, I read the one in Wikipedia and now I don't know what to think.

Excerpts from Wikipedia:

"[The rottweiler] is exceptionally well suited to being a companion, service and working dog."

"The Rottweiler ranks 9th in Stanley Coren's The Intelligence of Dogs, being one of the brightest 10 dogs ranked by obedience command trainability."

"As with any breed, potentially dangerous behaviour in Rottweilers results from irresponsible ownership, abuse, neglect, or lack of socialization and training rather than from any inherent breed characteristic."

So are they intrinsically dangerous or not ?

Reason for edit: I forgot to add that everyone is entitled to his own opinion. Especially on TV (our little democratic space in Thailand)

Edited March 20, 2009 by adjan jb

[BigSnake]

Beautiful Animals, would love to have them, but have no desire to clean up the Mess they wound make.

[meadish_sweetball]

I don't have space for dogs but I hope you manage to find responsible owners for these beautiful ones Nienke. Good luck.