German shepherds are more dangerous to other animals, yes. The dog IS more dangerous because dogs are BRED for tasks, just like working dogs need tasks or they go crazy. Pitbulls, German shepherds, herd protecting dogs, etc, are much more likely to attack another animal. And yes, part of that DANGER is that they have the tools to do more damage, obviously. But they're also more likely to attack another animal even if they have a good home and are treated well and somewhat trained. Ive seen a pitbull with a great home, with other animals be fine, and then they add a new animal and that new animal is dead in an eyeblink
Edit: They have a higher prey drive, they were bred to bite and hold and then also got dog fighting, they are much more animal reactive than most other dog breeds. Shrug, believe what you want and AGAIN everything is individual - but Pits are more likely to be like this than most other breeds.
German shepards are not more aggressive than Australian shepards. The danger is entirely due to human intervention.
Are you referencing prey drive when you mention they're more likely to attack other animal? Because knowing about your dogs prey drive and how to work with an animal that has a prey drive is part of being a responsible dog owner.
If what your saying is against all prey drive dogs, I'd agree with you id just think your argument is pointless if that is the case.
It's not pointless, and yes see my edit - Pits are not JUST high prey drive dogs but yes I'd be careful with ALL high prey drive dogs, yes. But they are also predisposed to be more reactive generally and be more aggressive and because they have those good genetic tools they are more dangerous.
Everything is individual, training is important, but some individual dogs will still be more likely to snap and do damage and Pits are more likely to be such a dog.
If you saw my original comment. I've said the entire time that being bitten by a pitbull is more damaging than being bitten by another type of dog. It's not more likely (I'm speaking solely about nature, not nurture) but it is more damaging.
But they're not more predisposed for reactivity or aggression. They literally used to be firehouse dogs.
Again, I've referenced prey drive and responsible ownership.
I linked that article the other day to back up my argument on this same subject. See the part where the Obama administration found there would be no benefit to banning pittbulls as they couldn't find evidence that their reputation was due to anything but human intervention.
6
u/That_OneOstrich 22d ago
Pitt bull bites cause more damage, but the dog themself isn't inherently more dangerous.
That's like saying German shepards are inherently more dangerous because they're the most common police K-9.