DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**HakTaisanip** · 02-08-2010, 09:54 AM

Am I crazy for thinking human aggressive dogs should be euthanized? I keep seeing more and more rescues that want to "rehabilitate" them or send them to sanctuaries. This is new to me. When I started in rescue, it was common practice to euthanize dogs that were aggressive towards people. Rescues didn't want the liability of adopting out a dog that could bite somebody. I have a hard time justifying rescuing an unstable, human aggressive dog when there are hundreds of stable, loving, happy dogs that are being euthanized. For the most part we are a no kill shelter, but it's our policy to euthanize any dog that is human aggressive or unstable.

If they had the time and money to determine if the dog was truly HA or not it would be different. They do not, they do not want to admit they do not, and the whole sanctuary idea is one that was cooked up by the idiots that think we humans shouldn't be able to have pets period.

I think if an individual owner who knows dogs, can handle dogs, and after taking the proper precautions wants to attempt it while ensuring the dog cannot harm anyone then so be it.

Once the dog is in an owners hands I think we get a little to quick with HA assessment, but at the shelter/foster level if it is a choice between keeping a really screwed up dog (that MIGHT be able to be rehabilitated) or one that is showing no signs of needing any "special care" then given the time and money available I would think the choice is obvious.

This is one of the reasons I won't do rescue work. For too many of the people doing it the choice isn't obvious and I don't handle stupid very well.

02-08-2010, 09:54 AM	#4
HakTaisanip Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 487 Senior Member	Am I crazy for thinking human aggressive dogs should be euthanized? I keep seeing more and more rescues that want to "rehabilitate" them or send them to sanctuaries. This is new to me. When I started in rescue, it was common practice to euthanize dogs that were aggressive towards people. Rescues didn't want the liability of adopting out a dog that could bite somebody. I have a hard time justifying rescuing an unstable, human aggressive dog when there are hundreds of stable, loving, happy dogs that are being euthanized. For the most part we are a no kill shelter, but it's our policy to euthanize any dog that is human aggressive or unstable. If they had the time and money to determine if the dog was truly HA or not it would be different. They do not, they do not want to admit they do not, and the whole sanctuary idea is one that was cooked up by the idiots that think we humans shouldn't be able to have pets period. I think if an individual owner who knows dogs, can handle dogs, and after taking the proper precautions wants to attempt it while ensuring the dog cannot harm anyone then so be it. Once the dog is in an owners hands I think we get a little to quick with HA assessment, but at the shelter/foster level if it is a choice between keeping a really screwed up dog (that MIGHT be able to be rehabilitated) or one that is showing no signs of needing any "special care" then given the time and money available I would think the choice is obvious. This is one of the reasons I won't do rescue work. For too many of the people doing it the choice isn't obvious and I don't handle stupid very well.
	Quote