IF you can post a SINGLE link to a Great Dane attack we can have this debate...............
Just helping you out. There are a few more then just one.
Story one: Another dog was present, no telling what happened, but for the sake fairness you can have this one. Note that the animal control officer says Great Dane attacks are rare.
All dog attacks are rare. Most dogs don't ever attack anyone. Add in the fact that GD's are not a common breed, and what you said is pretty meaningless
Story two: That's an attack on a dog, so has no bearing on Great Danes attacking humans. Also IF these were the same animals then their owners are pieces of shit which they proved by giving false info, no telling how they treated their animals.
Story three: Another attack on animals , not humans. and again sounds like some quality owners
So when a GD attacks a dog, it "has no bearing", but the breeding of PB's to attack dogs is why PB's attack people?
What a hypocrit you are (assuming you're not so dumb that you dont even see the contradiction)
Story Four: From the comments section
Unfortunately, this attack took place in my subdivision. There is reason to believe that the unsupervised 5 year old rode his bike into the acerage property of the dog owners and was attacked in the dogs own yard. The Great Danes were in a electronic fence and were not running loose in the neighborhood and have never been seen outside of the owners yard. This is very sad for the the child's family and the little boy, our family has prayed for his safe recovery.
I have news for you sister, you come into my yard and my Great Dane MIGHT bite you to.
More evidence that you're not just an irresposible breeder, you're irresponsible in every way when it comes to dogs. You haven't even trained your dogs in bite inhibition and bite control. Now, if your dog bites someone, it might get put down. Not that you care about the pet. You just care about what the dog can do for you (ie make money)
Story Five: No details , so it's impossible to tell what happened.
What's the difference about the details. GD attacks makes your claim about the gentle nature of the dogs sound foolish (not that you'd notice)
Story Six: This Great Dane does seem to have attacked a child. I don't see any background on the dog, and in fact if you read the comments I see that the owner had just gotten the dog the week before from an unknown source and was stupid enough to be wandering around with the dog off a leash.
Seems to have attacked a child? You really are a piece of work. Even when confronted with documented cases, you look for an excuse.
GD's have attacked people. Far more often than you seem to know. It makes your claims about knowing about GD's look like the lies they are.
Story Seven: Again the attacks happened on the owner's property because the child's parents were neglectful and letting their child roam around unattended. IMO you should have a fence up if you're going to have dogs and so the dog owner is partly responsible but if you have animals for protection they are supposed to protect? i would surely want my Dane to protect to my family, and Danes are smart, but they aren't smart enough to differentiate a 5 y/o from a grown man.
Regardless of the circumstances, a dog attack is an act of aggression. You're blaming the victim of the attack is just an example of your complete inability to admit to saying you were wrong.
Furthermore, most of the PB attacks are also the product of unrestrained dogs and/or people straying onto the dogs' territory.
Finally, if your dog attacks someone for simply going on your property, then you must be a fool or a liar for claiming that GD's are not aggressive when the evidence is living in the same house with you.
Of course you believe that a parent should get to choose to allow their children to do anything with no penalty so I understand why you'd be pissed that someone would have a dog to keep you from allowing your child to roam their property unattended.
While parents do have a responsibility to protect their child from harm, a dog owner has a responsibility to see that their dog is properly socialized. A dog that attacks simply because it's territory has been entered is not properly socialized.
Now my turn
Google
Hmmm 533,000 hits
LOL!! Again, you prove you're so dumb you think the plural of "anecdote" is "statistics"
Of course I understand that you have no ability to judge that some risks are greater than others, to you risk is risk, so I fully understand that you don't comprehend that the evidence says pitt bulls attack WAY more often than Danes do, but whatever, enjoy your delusions.
Of course, I understand you are just making stuff up since no said PB's pose no risk, so I fully understand that you're trying to distract attention away from the fact that you have no facts to back up your claim that PB's are more likely to attack than a GD
And I'll remind you - the plural of "anecdote" is NOT "statistics"
