Protective trait in temprament - Page 3

Vikram I have a question for you what is the difference between social agreesion and active defence,and what is your defination for both.please explain clearly. thanks and have a nice one.

 here is my take on the 2 forms of aggression, active defensive dogs bite straight away when faced by a threat . These dogs have ” an active offense is the best defense ” mentality . They are strong and are not fear biters ,and they quickly become calm , once the threat is neutralised and even accept strangers ( threat ) after they perceive that threat is not harmful . These dogs look similar to socially aggressive dogs but differ in the fact that socially aggressive dogs do not accept strangers even after the threat is neutralised . They may tolerate strangers but never accept their friendly overtures . They only accept strangers , when the stranger is integrated as a pack-member or when the stranger subdues them by force . Socially agressive dogs have inborn motivations to aggression and do not need any particular trigger stimulus.

cheers

i may be totally talking nonsense feel free to bash me i would like to know opinions

regards

You wouldn't be making up definitions to fit your hypothesis by any chance? You lost me with your view towards American breeders who seem to produce dogs with a type of pseudo aggression, being a form of Passive Aggression which is the opposite of Active Defense, not to be confused with Social aggression. 

Say that again, please?

 actaully Weak Passive defense aggression would be the fear biters and the Strong Passive would be more of a sport dog. Nothing American about it its prevalent all over due to changing attitudes of human societies to dogs and the breed specifically

regards

No reason to bash,i got to leave so can not discuss,but will quickly touch on your deffination of social agressive dog.people would consider this dog to a hectic and not so trust worth dog.not a good type of dog unless you use it for junk yard duties.have a nice one.

 not at all on the contrary a social aggressive dog would live for a fight hence giving it a fight would not help and complicate things further in the relationship. When handled the right way they form the winners of the lot. The problem is not many people are able to recognise social aggression leave alone handle it. what we are seeing today is frustration  based aggression


regards

 the dog will fight because he loves to fight not because he is deprived of something he wants

cheers

I had a dog that would bite first ask questions later, we had to keep him in the next room and let company in, then he would accept them. If you crossed him for any reason, he might be taught to tolerate you, but you would never really get a second chance. What type of dog is that?

Then I had a dog that wouldn't think twice about taking the zap to chase after a cyclist, say or a dog, or bunny, prey was the thing. He really didn't care what he bit, just so he could get the bite done. This is a different type of dog than the former, yes? What type is he?

Now, I have a friendlier soul in my current GSD, and in many ways it is such a pleasure. I've seen enough spunk though to think he's got our backs if we need it, I don't think that's gone at all in the GSD. I think he'll mature into the proper aloofness, but we'll just have to see. Until that time, I guess I will rely on a fearsome look and reputation as a deterrent to being harmed. 

Would any or none be considered correct? Just trying for a discussion, not a bashing, thanks!

we all want friendlier dogs now. But some madmen would always love the old ones. There would always be variations because you get to decide the type of shepher you want

regards