I don't favor an outright ban. Just strict liability for the owner. If your dog is leashed in the yard and taunted by kids, where are YOU?
I think owning an animal large and powerful enough to kill a human carries with it some responsibility.
If you apply that to all breeds, that's fine. Even a chihuahua can kill an infant, and it is far more aggressive than most large breeds.
my in-laws have a chihuahua that all the grandkids call "bites" because she is so aggressive towards everyone
I. Hate. Chihuahuas. If you want a toy breed, get a damned pug. They're cuter, not such inbred little bastards, and won't freaking bite and yip and snap at everything.
I don't hate chihuahuas but they are a difficult breed. If you're lucky enough to get one that's not a nipper, he's sure to be a yapper.
Pugs are great! But only if you can deal with their stubborness and their food obsession. Be prepared to secure your garbage can.
My pugs have always been wonderful animals, and my current pug's stubbornness manifests itself in his inability to accept that my laptop, and not his body, belongs on my lap.
I don't hate chihuahuas but they are a difficult breed. If you're lucky enough to get one that's not a nipper, he's sure to be a yapper.
Pugs are great! But only if you can deal with their stubborness and their food obsession. Be prepared to secure your garbage can.
If you apply that to all breeds, that's fine. Even a chihuahua can kill an infant, and it is far more aggressive than most large breeds.
Not me. If your dog -- especially a pit bull -- killed my baby in my house, I'd be likely to kill YOU.
I'd sure as hell kill that dog.
had never seen the dog. but she knows it is quite aggressive simply because she heard it barking?
like dogs never bark for any other reason :roll:
How did the dog break into a house and get to a 4 year old child?Over here we've had a recent incident where a dog escaped its yard, broke into the neighbours house and killed a 4 year old. Under current laws all the dog owner receives is a fine, and there's a debate over whether the owner should receive jail time or not. So what do you think, should there be a charge of negligent homicide or something like that for owners who allow their dogs to escape and cause death?
How did the dog break into a house and get to a 4 year old child?
The door was open.
I suppose.
Seems silly, but okay.
I don't hate chihuahuas but they are a difficult breed. If you're lucky enough to get one that's not a nipper, he's sure to be a yapper.
Pugs are great! But only if you can deal with their stubborness and their food obsession. Be prepared to secure your garbage can.
What it is, is nondiscriminatory. Pitbulls are not especially aggressive dogs and I would rather my freedoms not be restricted by ignorant persons like you because of stupid bastards like the dog owner in the news article.
actually it is. simply because you assume what the final conclusion is.
First of all, the first article gives little info on the attack itself.
Second, the question was based on that situation but was given as a general question, not just the specific incident.
In regards to the incident specifically, the dog should most definitely be put down, as it most likely was. There is little doubt now that the dog was too dangerous to be a pet, especially in a neighborhood with children. But it isn't because of the breed or the size of the dog but rather because of this incident. If there were other incidents before this one, not just comments on how aggressive/mean the neighbors think the dog was, but actual violent incidents in the past, then the owner should have taken more precautions to ensure the dog did not get loose.
Another thing here would involve whether anyone aggravated the dog, especially people near the house where the child was, before the attack. This is a thing anyone wanting to blame the owner for in any pet attack should keep in mind. You can't say the owner should have kept better control over a dog if someone else is aggravating, hitting, or taunting the dog in ways that a reasonable person could assume might cause a dog to attack.
I have had relatives who had their dog chained on their property, when a couple of neighbor kids went onto the property and were taunting and hitting the dog til the dog bit one of the boys. The dog got put down because of the incident although there is no doubt that he only attacked in defense.
There is a lot of reasoning that goes into determining what happened. There is the reason behind why a particular dog attacked. Was the dog taught to attack people? Was someone trying to aggravate the dog to attack? If so, who? Then there are questions about what the owner did to prevent the dog from hurting anyone and whether the dog had a history of aggressive behavior. Did the dog escape from the property/owner before? How high was the fence in relation to the dog? What was the fence made of? Was the dog secured behind the fence? What was the dog secured with? Had the dog attacked anyone before? If so, was it provoked/unprovoked, on the person's property/in public/on someone else's property? Is there any evidence to suggest that the owner purposely trained the dog to attack people, especially people who would not normally be viewed as a threat, or small animals (I could see a child being mistaken for a small animal if the dog was trained to hunt more than just specific animals).
I would say very, very few dogs are inherently unstable irrespective of breed type. As has been pointed out a true PB should most definitely NOT show aggression to humans. A 'game-bred' Pitbull should show no sign of aggression when his handler has to apply medical attention (usually with next to no anesthetic or pain relief). The trouble with the American Pit bull is actually most are nothing like the original. Its gone away from the true characteristics and has morphed (with many out-crosses) into some grotesque 'big-heavily over muscled' machine.
As you rightly say education is the key. Many owners buy into a breed not knowing the first thing about 'dogs' let alone breeds that have certain characteristics. I am a firm believer in 'horses for courses'. If you buy a Doberman' its far more inclined to have in its DNA traits conducive to guarding/protecting (not all but most). So to expect this new 8-week old bundle of fun to become a well behaved, obedient dog without the correct training is, in my opinion, to have a weapon with the safety catch broken.
As an owner of two American Bulldogs both weighing in at around 80pounds i know full well the obligation i am under. Fortunately my dogs not only are family pets/guardians but form an integral part of my hobby. I attend quite a few field trials entering them in activities ranging from 'Weight-pulling' to 'hardest hitting' (which is sleeve work).
Just thought i'd add a couple of pics
Paul
Or window.Maybe it somehow got into the back yard and went through the back door. Who knows.It is not relevant and it does not alleviate the dog's owner of any responsibility.
Over here we've had a recent incident where a dog escaped its yard, broke into the neighbours house and killed a 4 year old. Under current laws all the dog owner receives is a fine, and there's a debate over whether the owner should receive jail time or not. So what do you think, should there be a charge of negligent homicide or something like that for owners who allow their dogs to escape and cause death?
In Victoria, according to a council survey taken about four years ago, there were said to be about 3300 dog attacks reported in one year.
Yes. In my town, there are charges brought when an animal injures or kills, human beings or other animals. I forget the actual charge, but it is something along the lines of what you are asking. The animal, will more than likely be put down as well.
People are responsible to keep control of their animals. Accidents happen, but obviously, if a dog kills or severely injures, they are a danger to the community.
So what do you think, should there be a charge of negligent homicide or something like that for owners who allow their dogs to escape and cause death?
#16 and it took me 2 tries to find it.
Different article with a little info from neighbors
Answers a few questions about the owner, but not much there really. I haven't voted because I want to know all the specifics. In the panic of the moment, people do crazy things, such as the Mother running to the street for help. When I was 9 years old a neighbor had a German Shepard (ex-police dog), he'd been retired because of agression. The dog got out and attacked my friend (we were playing together in our yard), he was savaging her. My mother ran out of the house and bashed that dog in the head with a cast iron skillet a couple of times. I'm surprised the dog remained conscious, but he did. He staggered away. The neighbor shot the dog with his service revolver immediately (he'd heard the screaming and rushed outside, yes he was a cop). All of this happened within 3 minutes or so. My friend needed 88 stitches in her legs. This dog had jumped a 6ft wooden privacy fence, his owner had no idea he was loose, and he was devastated by my friends injuries. Lucky he was there to help stop the bleeding.
I've completely lost the plot (of the story I'm telling).I think I was trying to make the dual points that dog attacks happen, sometimes they're accidental (sometimes not) and punishment should wait until we know all of the facts.
Nonsense. All i do is take people's faulty reasoning to its final conclusion. It's called logic. I have never claimed to know your thoughts. And i'm glad that I don't.
I think the premise of the thread is if the owner allowed their dog to escape or was negligent in making sure their dog was adequately secured in order to make sure it did not run loose.It actually says quite a bit. If as the article says, Anisah Mama hadn't seen the dog in 3 years then it would indicate that the dog was, under normal circumstances, kept secured properly.
The rest of what you quoted, with the exception of the first paragraph, is pretty irrelevant. Just because the kids heard the dog barking or Anisah Mama heard it barking and was scared doesn't mean that the dog was viscious. After all...dogs bark. Its what they do.
What I don't and can't understand is the need of so many in this thread to exact revenge upon a dog owner for the actions of the dog. I could understand if the owner had purposely trained the dog to attack people beyond his/her property. But this just doesn't appear to be the case with this dog's owner. At least as far as I have read...which is up to post 61. We are after all only humans and accidents do happen. Yes it is chitty. But it is a fact of life. I would no more hold this particular owner responsible for his dogs actions than I would hold someone responsible for thier stolen gun had been used in the commision of a crime. And yes I did read the posts about those states that hold such idiotic laws, glad I don't live in em. Two wrongs does not make a right.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?