Recently I have been looking into new breeds that are sort of making their way into the US. One that is catching my eye these days is the Thai ridgeback as seen in this picture to your left. The Thai ridgeback is one of three dogs with a ridgeback (basically a line of fur on their back that grows the opposite way) with the others being Rhodesian ridgeback and the Phu Quoc ridgeback.
So why my interest in this specific ridgeback? Well, its reputation is rather good compared to a similar breed. Lets see.
This dog...
*is very family oriented and will put itself in front of family
*loves children
*can be aggressive and EXTREMELY dangerous if put in the wrong hands
*hard headed but with a firm hand, will be an extremely loyal dog
Huh...this seems a lot like America and Britains three dogs often seen as the most dangerous dogs in the world.
you bet
American Pit Bull Terrier
American Staffordshire Terrier
Staffordshire Bull Terrier (obviously from Britain as it doesnt have America stamped in front of it)
So why is it these terrier breeds are "dangerous" but not a Thai ridgeback that has the same qualities? Possibly because it is rare?
The most dangerous dog in the world (as told by government study) is the Dalmation. However, Dalmations are allowed in rental properties and will NOT raise your insurance. huh...
Oh and btw more people are bitten by labs than APBTs, a breed BANNED in countries.
talk about racism.
Now if you arent a dog person then you probably will freak out at the thought of ALL DOGS ARE DANGEROUS but its true. Dogs are a dangerous animal just like horses are a dangerous animal. The thing is with horses, we dont ASSuME that cold blooded horses (like Shires) are more dangerous than hot blooded horses (like arabs) and vice versa. Theyre the same animal and can kill you if in the wrong hands. Why do we assume this with dogs? Yes there are dogs that will lunge if their family is in danger but NO WELL TRAINED DOG WILL BITE UNLESS THREATENED!!!
Sheesh people. So Stupid.
