Sorry, I have to gripe.........

[sturkiej]

Anyway I don''t post much but people I see everday are tired of hearing me gripe and complain about stuff so this is the next best place maybe some people feel the same way. But, anyway why do people try to rob the young??? Like insurance companies that charge you three times what everyone else pays or mortgage companies that charge you 2 percent more than the real interest rate because you "have excellent credit just not enough of it", so sorry I couldn''t get a credit card when I was 15!!! This stuff drives me crazy!! Sorry just had to get it out again today!!!

 

[rodentman]

It's profiling. Sadistically, teenagers (IOW young 'uns) have the greatest vehicle accident rate so they pay the highest premiums. Same with loans. I co-signed for my son's truck and they STILL charged us half a pernt higher than I would have paid had he NOT been on the loan. But this way he shall build credit. It's a royal hose job but there aint much we can do about it.

I rec'd an application for a MC for my 18 year old HS student. It was target marketed to students with no credit. They declined the app saying he had no credit. I could not get away with posting here the letter that those retromingent morons got from me, but it was a winner! It started with "have a native English speaking person read this to you" and went downhill from there.

And get this: I am 53, have had flawless credit for over 32 years, never a late payment, etc. I have no outstanding debt save for 1 car loan and the mortgage.I STILL do not qualify for the lowest ins rates; they use credit reporting as a factor in underwriting. They got a splendid letter as well.

 

[sturkiej]

I have encountered a new thing I have aproblem with, Insurance companies that "Blacklist" dogs. How can you blacklist an entire "Breed" of dog?? I just think that is crazy problems with dogs come from the owner not the breed.

 

[AGBF]

Profiling a breed of dog may be illegal. Companies may do it until forced to stop. I am not a legal expert, but there was a case in Connecticut (?) in which a woman successfully sued to keep her Pit Bull from being discriminated against. (Her dog was not vicious.) I will try to look this up.

(PS-My yellow Lab *did* bite a jogger! His teeth grazed her *THROAT* in a "warning" bite. Guess why we had (and have) a Lab? Because we have a young child and wanted her and her friends to be with a gentle breed!!!)

 

[AGBF]

The 'net has a lot of information on what breed discrimination is legal and what is not (also on which laws are ignored an which are not). Here is an excerpt from one website:

http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Garden/8302/PitBullArticle.html


"Despite all the information that is available about the Pit bull breeds, these dogs are still a target of discrimination. Pennsylvania Dog Law prohibits "breed specific legislation", yet shelters that are ignorant of the breed and have no knowledge of temperament testing still create blanket policies to kill anything that resembles a Pit bull. And, insurance companies can refuse coverage to homeowners who have Pits in their families. Chris Caterson of Little and Nelson Insurance in Montrose says that the larger the insurance company, the less prohibitive the guidelines, but all companies address the problem of vicious or biting dogs. Allstate Insurance, one of the largest, specifically refuses policies to anyone who owns a Pit bull, American Staffordshire Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier or American Bulldog. Lebanon Mutual adds Chow Chows, Dobermans, Rottweilers and Boxers to the list. And Penn Millers, with by far the most extensive list according to Caterson, includes all of the others and adds Akitas, Great Danes and Siberian Huskies to the already overwhelming list. Yet, Caterson said he hasn't seen a dog bite claim in recent years."

 

[AGBF]

From the "Norwich Bulletin" - 7/1/2000

"No Bad Breeds, Only Bad Owners"

"It happened right here in Connecticut. A man called his German Shepherd to go for a ride. From the corner of his eye he noticed a woman walking and before he could stop his dog, Bandit started to chase her. The result was, despite the man's diligent effort to stop his dog, the woman was repeatedly bitten. This was the only time Bandit had ever bitten someone.

She landed in the Berlin pound for five months while her fate was being decided. Her life was spared, but she must be kept within a fenced in area or wear a muzzle whenever she is outside. And after twenty-five years without a homeowner's insurance claim, Bandit's owner was dropped like a hot potato.

As the number of dog bite reports increase, we see more restrictive laws, costlier insurance policies and educational campaigns. Since 1986, the number of dog bites have steadily increased. At this time, every day, dogs bite more than 900 people! State Farm Insurance paid out more than $80 million in dog claims in 1997. This had led to insurance restrictions that sometimes target specific breeds.

The hit list typically includes Pit Bulls, Staffordshire Bull Terriers, American Staffordshire Terriers, Rottweilers, Dobermans and German Shepherds. These are the dogs commonly regarded as prone to aggression. There are even advocates who want to ban these breeds from city limits and insist the number of dog bites will drop dramatically.

The truth is breed specific laws discriminate against responsible dog owners who properly train and socialize their dogs. Everyone knows that any dog can bite if provoked, and I have personal knowledge that makes me more wary of nippy Chihuahuas and Jack Russell Terriers than a Rottweiler.

So vicious breed laws are not going to stoop dog bites. What these laws will do is incite fear, kill thousands of healthy, innocent dogs and prevent proper veterinary care because owners won't want the authorities to know what breed of dog they own if it has been banned in their municipality.

What should be done to help stop this wave of dog attacks? Seek laws that deal with proven dangerous dogs of any breed and punish the owners who allow their dogs to roam unleased. I had an instance where my neighbor's Labrador Retriever (not a "vicious dog") attacked my cat and growled at me when I tried to chase him from my yard. So there is absolutely no breed that has all vicious dogs or all friendly dogs.

And what needs to happen is that owners must take responsibility in training and socializing their pets or face the consequences if their dog bites someone.

In general though, dog owners nationwide are finding it more difficult to obtain homeowner's or renter's insurance. The alternative is to buy pricey liability policies. Responsible dog owners who have had insurance policies for decades are now receiving cancellation notices because they own a German Shepherd, and their company has deemed the breed a dangerous dog!

Nationwide no longer provides homeowner policies for owners of Pit Bulls, Dobermans and Rottweilers because they have been identified as vicious dogs. Metropolitan Life, Auto and Home does not automatically reject dog owners, but if you have a Pit Bull, Doberman, Rottweiler, German Shepherd, Siberian Husky, Chow, Alaskan Malamute or Dingo, you must provide letters from your veterinarian and dog obedience school certificate to be considered for insurance coverage.

And State Farm is the fairest of them all, not discriminating against any specific breed, but weighing every individual dogs' disposition and history of biting in their decision to provide coverage. On the other hand Ohio State Farm does not provide coverage for Pit Bull owners as many cities have banned the breed.

The American Dog Owners Association (ADOA) has battled breed specific proposals for years. They rely on calls, emails and letters from dog owners to alert them about pending legislation in the different states. They stopped a law banning Pit Bulls in Hollywood, Florida in 1997 and again in 1999. In the 23 years they have been fighting breed specific laws, they have won over seventy per cent of their cases. Their biggest success is that twelve states so far have laws outlining methods to control dogs, but are not breed specific. For more information about the ADOA, email them at [email protected] or call them at 518-477-8469.

The American Kennel Club works hard to update members on pending dog laws, including breed specific or "dangerous dog" legislation. And the Humane Society is working with insurance companies to both cut down insurance costs and still protect responsible dog owners. If insurance companies would ask dog specific questions (Where is the dog kept, has it had obedience training, etc.) instead of lumping all dogs of one breed together, it could save the insurance companies money and make sure at risk owners are properly insured.

In all the years I have worked in animal rescue, I have only been bitten once. Not by a Pit Bull (and I handle lots of them), not by a Rotti or a Shepherd. I was bit by a Dachshund. Go figure."

 

[sturkiej]

Great articles, well I am the proud owner of a 3-year old Pit, I am a firm believer that aggressive dogs are created by the owner and not by the breed. Even with that being said you still have to be aware of the type of dog you have and be wary of allowing them to be around a person they may view as a stranger, I have a younger sister and will not allow her to be with "Macho" alone, even though I know he has never bitten anyone you can't always be sure they won't be provoked!!!
Anyway I will be more than glad to not pay a company that would do that to a breed of dogs and the owners!!!

 

[fire&ice]

Kemper Ins. defines Standard Schnauzers as a risk. By there very nature, they do not bite. They may take someone down & hold at bay - but only on the very unusual of circumstance will they bite. My St Sch. is a registered Therapy Dog. TDI (Therapy Dog International) carries policies for the dogs when they are working. SS's are not signaled out; but, Dobermans, Rotties & a few others must carry different insurance. These are dogs that are well trained & socialized.

This whole thing saddens me. It's not the BREED. It's the dog OWNER. We had mini's growing up & they were far more "ready to bite".

Thanks for the interesting article. Allstate has never asked if we own a dog. Maybe they ask for new policies.

 

[AGBF]

Since everyone keeps saying, "It's not the dog; it's the owner" and *I* just posted that Biscuit bit a jogger, I feel compelled to defend myself!!!

Biscuit was *not* trained to bite joggers! No! No! No! Biscuit (whom we adopted when he was two) is a big, overgrown nut who doesn't mean harm to *anyone*. He is a Crazy Dog. After he joined our family I spent $85 an hour and a lot of time with a private trainer trying to get him to calm down...that was *besides* the group classes! He loves other dogs and lets them pick on him. He allows children in the house to abuse him (although *I* don't!!). He is great at the back fence if anyone pets him.... But he guards the front . He will bite people on the front porch (or at least their clothing). (He tore the lacket off the man who came to install our DSL line although he didn't hurt him.) And then there was the jogger incident when my husband accidentally let him out of the fenced yard.

As his previous vet told me before we adopted him, he is a big loveable nut. I *REALLY* don't encourage biting!! That dog does *NOT* represent my idea of the proper way to conduct oneself in society!!!

 

[fire&ice]

AGBF,

I have one of those "adopted" SS's. I have one that is a Therapy Dog...and one that needs Therapy (even after extensive therapy ). Dogs learn socialization at a very young age (first 3 months of life). Being in rescue for years, most puppies are "loved" - which makes rescue easier. But, some may come w/ baggage we don't know about.

One never knows what may set a dog off - if you have not grown up w/ it. Fast movement - encroching (sp?) of space - violation of parameters? Basically, my point is - the breed matters less. The dog matters more.

Some dogs can (and want to) do more harm. Unfortunately, all get lumped into one sum "breed".

 

[sturkiej]

I was not trying to imply that in your case it was caused by you but I agree that taking in an adopted dog is a risk. I am currently in a debate with my fiancee over whether to adopt a female to go with my male. A lady in Lexington is a "Foster" parent for a Pit Rescue and she has a female named Mocha I am going to see this weekend, but it is a risk taking in a dog that was treated poorly as a "child". Back to the "It's the Owners Fault" thing, some people don't even realize they do it, it may not be that you "raised" them that way it could simply be the situation you put the dog in. You could put the dog in an uncomfortable situation and not even know it. This could really be the case with an adopted pet, you don't know how they were treated and you could just make the wrong move and get bit or someone else could get bit. I hate to go to pet stores and see people dressed like a "thug" walking around with a dog of the Pit Breed, solely because of the image they give to other people. It's like snakes or sharks people are scared of them but how people people are actually injured or killed by them in a year?? We had a local story where 4 Pits killed a man walking home at night all over the news they talked about the outrage in the community and how bad the breed was, but only once showed the condition that the dogs lived in and how they were treated, so again people don't get the whole story just the wrong impression! I will stop my rant now, this sort of thing just burns my up!!