My son was attacked by Amstaff - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#61 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 05:00 PM
 
Pynki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Inside the café au lait
Posts: 7,265
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Seven veils, you seem to be placing a giant heap of the blame of this attack on the OP and her son. Which is ludicrous quite honestly. As the owner of two dogs, one a giant newfoundland rottie mix, I would NEVER take my dog out into public tie it up somewhere and then blame the 3 year old he bit. Why? Because if I was concerned with my dog I wouldn't leave hiim alone where he could bit a 3 year old.

He was tied up. They gave him berth. The dog had more leash than anticipated.

The owner should have been more responsible, and since they were not, the city and state should have been more pro actively responsible.

It's lonely being the only XX in a house of XYs.
Pynki is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#62 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 05:15 PM
 
star thistle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: gone to the other side
Posts: 112
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by southernmommie View Post
Just because YOU don't think you could handle your dog after an incident like this, doesn't mean that someone else won't step up to the plate and MAKE SURE it doesn't happen. You can't take that responsibility from the dog's owner.
And just because someone is capable of becoming a responsible pet owner doesn't mean he will.

What happens when this guy, who I'll remind you, left his dog alone, tied up to a bike stand at a public library, doesn't take that responsibility? What if he takes his warning and pays his fine and figures that is the extent of his responsibility? I think we have all agreed that in this specific instance, this owner is at the least negligent, and at the worst, dangerous.

I think op has good reason to fear another child may be attacked by this dog. And, frankly, we all may feel differently if we experienced what she and her family experienced. Why would you want to dispel her instinct to protect her child or other children?

Being a parent and being a dog owner are two very separate "jobs". I think different rules apply and until my son possesses the ability and capacity to maul, attack, or kill me or someone else, I will treat dog ownership and being a parent as such.

As far as I know, there are no other natural consequences in the animal world, for an animal that attempts to harm/kill your young, besides death. There is no jail, no counseling, no rehab. If this was a momma dog protecting her puppy, we would not bat an eyelash to hear she killed the attacker.

only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly -- rfk
star thistle is offline  
#63 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 05:18 PM
 
SleeplessMommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,113
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MamaKalena View Post
...But I can help to protect others in the community. What I was hoping to find here is advice as to what I can do or how I can get the owners to either retrain, muzzle or confine this dog from public places.
I am sorry this happened to your son. One way to motivate the dog's owner to euthanize the dog (or re-home to a remote location) is to make sure the owner's home owners insurance is notified. They will receive an insurance cancellation notice within days - and it will be hard for them to re-insure with the dog's "history".
SleeplessMommy is offline  
#64 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 05:26 PM
 
star thistle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: gone to the other side
Posts: 112
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SleeplessMommy View Post
I am sorry this happened to your son. One way to motivate the dog's owner to euthanize the dog (or re-home to a remote location) is to make sure the owner's home owners insurance is notified. They will receive an insurance cancellation notice within days - and it will be hard for them to re-insure with the dog's "history".
:

only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly -- rfk
star thistle is offline  
#65 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 05:35 PM
 
Viola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nevada
Posts: 22,549
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SevenVeils View Post
I can't advise you on how to get this dog killed, as I don't believe that it should be. My children know not to run or ride too close to a strange dog, especially one that is tied.
The dog shouldn't have been tied to the bike rack, period. It sounds like you are blaming the child. I really like you, SevenVeils, but it is incredibly frustrating for me to read this kind of response. It's possible the child didn't even notice the dog at first, that kind of thing will happen. Yes, the dog being tied to a bike rack kind of thing will happen, we can't control how other people treat their animals, but I would hope that if a dog tied up in a public place bit a human, that there would be some legal action taken to make sure it didn't happen again. I'm not advocating killing the dog, not at all, but if the owner isn't going to take this seriously, then it is a cause for concern.

Quote:
I agree that the dog should not have been left tied in a public access area like that, but the fact is that dogs are sometimes left in that manner. You can't just kill every dog that is tied to a bike rack or tree or fencepost outside of a library or store for a little while.
No one is advocating killing the dog, from what I can see. She wanted the police to take the situation more seriously. And the fact of the matter is that people do leave their dogs off leash or tied up alone in a public place, and the dog appears dangerous, the dog is much more likely to get hurt.

ETA: Oh, I do see where she said that, but that was after your first respsonse, and I didn't see it in her original post. I would just want to make sure the police and the dog owner took it seriously. No, you can't prevent all injuries and accidents, and if you are walking down the street and you fall into an open pit in the ground, you can sue the city for negligence and for medical costs, and try and make sure they change their operational procedures so these things are less likely to happen.
Viola is offline  
#66 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 06:11 PM
 
Lisa85's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
[QUOTE=kidspiration;13048761]I'm not condemning other posters that are trying to "help". The basic facts of the matter are, this dog never should have been where he was, the owner was completely negligent and should be held liable for his negligence. As previously established, the dog was tied to a bike rack near a bike trail and the boy was riding a bike. He was ambushed by the dog. [quote]

RIGHT, again. NOBODY has said that it was the boy's fault. EVERYBODY has said it was completely unacceptable for the dog to be there. Nobody has disagreed with that so I don't know why you keep bringing it up.

Quote:
The preventive "advice" from multiple posters regarding how not to provoke a dog is well-meaning yet misplaced in this thread. You said it wasn't "all his fault", which implies that the boy does bear some of the fault, and I completely disagree with that assessment according to the story that the OP told.

Do not twist my words
. I specifically said it wasn't AT ALL his fault. Meaning it wasn't his fault, at all! If he had been teasing or tormenting the dog, then yes, it would be partially his fault. If you use the quote feature you cannot misquote and twist people's words, unintentionally or otherwise. Of course it wasn't the boy's fault. Nobody said it was. I even said I can see my 3 yo doing the same thing.

Quote:
Of course there is a time and place for teaching your child the correct way to approach dogs. But this thread is not about that, but is instead an excellent illustration of irresponsible dog ownership.
*shrug* I disagree. This ist he perfect thread to give advice on how to avoid dog bites. Again, in the media after a bear attack, they tell you what to do to avoid it happening to you. When a poster starts a thread on a terrible accident that happened to their dc, they tell you what you could to avoid it happening to your dc and beg you not to make the same mistake. When a heavy piece of furniture falls and kills a child that was climbing it, they tell you to bolt your stuff to the wall. I could go on and on. When something terrible happens to somebody, I want to know how I can avoid the same misfortune.
Lisa85 is offline  
#67 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 06:26 PM
 
Irishmommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In the bat cave with heartmama
Posts: 45,457
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MamaKalena View Post
When the Colorado Supreme Court upheld the Denver pit bull ban, the high court set aside characteristics that pit bulls displayed when they attack that differ from other breeds. One of them was their bite:

"[pit bulls] inflict more serious wounds than other breeds. They tend to attack the deep muscles, to hold on, to shake, and to cause ripping of tissues. Pit bull attacks were compared to shark attacks."

According to a well-publicized CDC report, between the years of 1979 to 1998 pit bulls and rottweilers made up 60% of attacks that ended in death.1 DogsBite.org reports that in 2007, this same combination inflicted 71%.
Quote:
Originally Posted by southernmommie View Post
This is a biased statistic. The attacks were only reported attacks. Who is going to go to the hospital over a tiny breed attack? Not an adult. They would get laughed at, which is why they don't go in. I can tell you that only because it is a big breed bite will they even think about going in. In your mind, if a little dog bites you, you don't go to the hospital. You think in your mind that you can deal with it and let it heal on it's own. There are many people that have serious injuries from "ankle biters" (my mom calls them), than any big dog. And we have more big dogs around us than little dogs, so statistically our odds of having a big dog bite are greater. A lot of fearmongering going on here over big dogs. I, personally, do not like it when people are scared of the typical fear based breeds because a report in the paper told them to be that way.

The stat is not biased. It says 60% of attacks that ended in DEATH were pitbull/rottie attack, not that 60% of attacks were pitbull/rottie.

When's the last time a Shi Tzu killed someone? Or any other "ankle biter"? They may bite more, but they don't kill.
Irishmommy is offline  
#68 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 06:39 PM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 12,099
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
As a real pit bull lover, I must say... yeah that dog needs to be killed. A dog as powerful as a pit bull needs to be trustworthy. Pits true to breed are animal aggressive yes, but will not show aggression towards humans, moving at a high rate of speed or not. That is an aberration of the breed, and an unacceptable one. Were my dog to do that, she would find herself euthanized the very next day.
thismama is offline  
#69 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 06:52 PM
 
star thistle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: gone to the other side
Posts: 112
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
As a real pit bull lover, I must say... yeah that dog needs to be killed. A dog as powerful as a pit bull needs to be trustworthy. Pits true to breed are animal aggressive yes, but will not show aggression towards humans, moving at a high rate of speed or not. That is an aberration of the breed, and an unacceptable one. Were my dog to do that, she would find herself euthanized the very next day.
I couldn't agree more.

I think the op was looking for advice on how to prevent this dog from ever attacking a person again. Can anyone else think of something besides euthanasia that would guarantee this never happens again?

In an ideal world, with responsible pet owners and perfectly domesticated, healthy, sane dogs, this would not happen. But it did. And discussing why it should not have, or how to prevent it from happening again assumes we live in that ideal world. Which we don't.

only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly -- rfk
star thistle is offline  
#70 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 07:00 PM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 12,099
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Well, all I can post to that end that might be helpful, is that if ever a pit bull or other strong dog is biting and will not let go, the best thing to do is kick it or punch it with all your might in the throat. This will cause it to lose its breath, it will have to let go to get another breath. Frantically beating it about the head, as I did when my dog got in a fight with another pit bull years ago, is useless. Go for the windpipe. That is more an emergency strategy though than anything else. Frankly a pit bull that would bite a child in a circumstance like this is not a dog I would ever trust again.
thismama is offline  
#71 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 07:09 PM
 
SevenVeils's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lurking in my Lerkim
Posts: 6,418
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pynki View Post
Seven veils, you seem to be placing a giant heap of the blame of this attack on the OP and her son.
No, actually, I place most of the blame on the owner of the dog. With a small amount on the supervisory parent, since the child is so young.

The dog should not have been there. The chances that he had no clue that his dog was prey-reactive are slim. I have no idea why someone would leave any dog tied up like that, actually, regardless of temperament.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hucklebearie View Post
Why would you want to dispel her instinct to protect her child or other children?
I don't see her post in that way. I see it as a desire for punishment, not a desire to protect.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viola View Post
if you are walking down the street and you fall into an open pit in the ground, you can sue the city for negligence and for medical costs, and try and make sure they change their operational procedures so these things are less likely to happen.
Exactly. You sue. You don't call for the contractor to be punished or killed.

The dog should absolutely not have been tied to the rack. Period. I am 100% positive that my dog would not act aggressively toward any person under any halfway normal circumstance, but I would never leave him tied up that way. Things happen. Leave your dog in your house or in your car.

Since the OP seems to feel that sufficient action wasn't taken, she should sue the owner.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishmommy View Post
When's the last time a Shi Tzu killed someone? Or any other "ankle biter"? They may bite more, but they don't kill.
My friend's baby was very nearly killed by two Shih Tzus in the space of three seconds.
SevenVeils is offline  
#72 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 07:28 PM
 
FoxintheSnow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: nak
Posts: 5,822
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Not all children can be "taught not to run". My son was attacked by the dog of an irresponsible owner when he was 18 months old and has been terrified of large dogs ever since. Trust me, I've worked with him, but when he sees a large dog- all logic goes out the window and fear takes over. Should he just never leave the house? No, dog owners need to be more responsible.

Mother of 3, welcomed a new baby girl July 2011

FoxintheSnow is offline  
#73 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 07:32 PM
 
Amylcd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,808
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by I~love~pie View Post
In what world is this the acceptable norm?>>>

No kidding, I can not imagine bringing my dogs anywhere, where I can not watch them. Let alone tied up outside a building
I know. If a dog were to bite my child, a fine would be the least of the owners worries. It is NOT ok to leave your dog unsupervised in a public area.

knit.gifMom of Many  jumpers.gif

Amylcd is offline  
#74 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 07:40 PM
 
Irishmommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In the bat cave with heartmama
Posts: 45,457
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SevenVeils View Post
My friend's baby was very nearly killed by two Shih Tzus in the space of three seconds.


But she wasn't, and there was two of them. One pit bull doing that and the baby would have been toast. Hence, 60% of dog attack DEATHS, not just attacks.
Irishmommy is offline  
#75 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 07:49 PM
 
Lisa85's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jokerama View Post
Not all children can be "taught not to run". My son was attacked by the dog of an irresponsible owner when he was 18 months old and has been terrified of large dogs ever since. Trust me, I've worked with him, but when he sees a large dog- all logic goes out the window and fear takes over. Should he just never leave the house? No, dog owners need to be more responsible.
I don't know why posters continually feel the need to keep posting things like that. Nobody said dog owners shouldn't be held responsible. The fact remains that regardless of what people and dogs should do, there will always be irresponsible pet owners as long as there are dogs. I shouldn't have to look both ways when crossing the street if I have the right of way, but I do it anyway because there will always be negligent drivers.
Lisa85 is offline  
#76 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 07:50 PM
 
SevenVeils's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lurking in my Lerkim
Posts: 6,418
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irishmommy View Post
But she wasn't, and there was two of them. One pit bull doing that and the baby would have been toast.
Yes, or a Golden Retriever, or a Goldendoodle, or a Springer Spaniel...

I haven't and won't argue that Pits have extra powerful jaws. They do. Just as Greyhounds run extra fast.
SevenVeils is offline  
#77 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 07:50 PM
 
SevenVeils's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lurking in my Lerkim
Posts: 6,418
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lisa85 View Post
I don't know why posters continually feel the need to keep posting things like that. Nobody said dog owners shouldn't be held responsible. The fact remains that regardless of what people and dogs should do, there will always be irresponsible pet owners as long as there are dogs. I shouldn't have to look both ways when crossing the street if I have the right of way, but I do it anyway because there will always be negligent drivers.
Precisely.
SevenVeils is offline  
#78 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 07:53 PM
 
Irishmommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In the bat cave with heartmama
Posts: 45,457
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SevenVeils View Post
Yes, or a Golden Retriever, or a Goldendoodle, or a Springer Spaniel...

I haven't and won't argue that Pits have extra powerful jaws. They do. Just as Greyhounds run extra fast.

True. And all those breeds would be in the 40% of deaths, while TWO breeds are, by that stat above, responsible for the other 60%. 2 breeds, 60%, all other breeds, 40%.

Of deaths, not bites. I'm aware that golden retrievers, etc. actually bite more.
Irishmommy is offline  
#79 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 08:24 PM
 
FoxintheSnow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: nak
Posts: 5,822
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lisa85 View Post
I don't know why posters continually feel the need to keep posting things like that. Nobody said dog owners shouldn't be held responsible. The fact remains that regardless of what people and dogs should do, there will always be irresponsible pet owners as long as there are dogs. I shouldn't have to look both ways when crossing the street if I have the right of way, but I do it anyway because there will always be negligent drivers.
Yes, but a few posters have harped on the fact that this needs to be taught to children. That concept is hard to teach to young children in general, nevermind a child who has been attacked.

Mother of 3, welcomed a new baby girl July 2011

FoxintheSnow is offline  
#80 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 08:41 PM
 
runes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,933
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lisa85 View Post
I don't know why posters continually feel the need to keep posting things like that. Nobody said dog owners shouldn't be held responsible. The fact remains that regardless of what people and dogs should do, there will always be irresponsible pet owners as long as there are dogs. I shouldn't have to look both ways when crossing the street if I have the right of way, but I do it anyway because there will always be negligent drivers.
Posters "continually feel the need" to say what we have been saying because of the way the "advice" is coming across. To say that the child was not at fault yet giving pointers on how to prevent it from happening again, there is the implication that the incident could have been avoided by something that the child did/didn't do that provoked the dog.

As for your crossing the street scenario, let's use that for a moment. Say that you were crossing a street and all of a sudden a car came out of nowhere and you were hit. Then you posted this unfortunate scenario to a forum, and people came back giving you repeated advice on how next time you could avoid or prevent the scenario by you looking both ways and that you should always cross at a crosswalk.

Understand now?
runes is offline  
#81 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 08:59 PM
 
Lisa85's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kidspiration View Post
Posters "continually feel the need" to say what we have been saying because of the way the "advice" is coming across. To say that the child was not at fault yet giving pointers on how to prevent it from happening again, there is the implication that the incident could have been avoided by something that the child did/didn't do that provoked the dog.
There's just one thing though. It could possibly have been prevented. These things are most often, usually preventable. By the owner, by the dog, by the city, by the library, by other passersby who saw the dog previously and did nothing, and yes also the victim. That doesn't imply fault by the 3 yo. Fault implies he did something wrong. The 3 yo had every right to ride his bike there, and the owner had 0 right to leave his dog there. Still, it was preventable. There's no need to be defensive about tips given to prevent (there's that word again) a future incident.

Quote:
As for your crossing the street scenario, let's use that for a moment. Say that you were crossing a street and all of a sudden a car came out of nowhere and you were hit. Then you posted this unfortunate scenario to a forum, and people came back giving you repeated advice on how next time you could avoid or prevent the scenario by you looking both ways and that you should always cross at a crosswalk.

Understand now?
Nope. Looking both ways is beyond obvious, but if it wasn't, then it would be considered helpful. Not running from dogs, especially in a 3 yo's mind, is not always common knowledge. Neither is hitting them in the throat.
Lisa85 is offline  
#82 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 10:02 PM
 
prettypixels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: MD
Posts: 2,622
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SevenVeils View Post
Right. Or most likely, the fact that there were multiple bikes made it irresistible.

People need to be very aware of dogs. This is a dog which was tied up, for goodness' sake. A wider berth would have been quite easy to achieve.
Most of the time, no, there is not such a huge wide sidewalk that a 3 yo would be safe giving a tied up dog a wide berth. At my library that would involve driving in the street. How about encouraging more responsible ownership of your, sorry, PIT BULL, before it attacks a kid enjoying his day?
prettypixels is offline  
#83 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 10:26 PM
 
tree_hugger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 692
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm just weighing in here as a regular person, not a huge fan of dogs in general, but I certainly don't dislike all dogs. I've read the whole thread.

I live in an area where dogs are regularly tied up outside shops while their owners go in. It is common and nobody thinks twice about it. My children know not to approach a tied up dog, but should they also not walk past a tied up dog? That is ridiculous.

This dog needs to be PTS. It bit a small child who rode past, unprovoked. Period. All the analyzing about prey drives and bad pet ownership etc is moot because it doesn't change what happened.

Dogs are not children. That is silly. An animal that has attacked unprovoked and has the physical ability to kill a person does not get second chances. That's just the way it is - humans come first. And I am a vegan!

Kath contented vegan mama to my trio of free-range boys
Permaculture Design Student & Wannabe Urban Homesteader
tree_hugger is offline  
#84 of 142 Old 01-23-2009, 11:24 PM
 
star thistle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: gone to the other side
Posts: 112
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by tree_hugger View Post
An animal that has attacked unprovoked and has the physical ability to kill a person does not get second chances.
Yes!

On a different note, I think that the analyzing and going back and forth has the capacity to really help the op see multiple "sides of the story" and get as many perspectives as possible. This might better enable or empower her make a sound, rational decision, appropriate to her situation.

And I am sure there have been things mentioned on this tread that most people reading have never given a thought to before.

Nowhere but mdc could I imaging reading such varying but equally compassionate responses.

only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly -- rfk
star thistle is offline  
#85 of 142 Old 01-24-2009, 02:46 AM
 
tallulahma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: detroit
Posts: 2,609
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by tree_hugger View Post
I'm just weighing in here as a regular person, not a huge fan of dogs in general, but I certainly don't dislike all dogs. I've read the whole thread.

I live in an area where dogs are regularly tied up outside shops while their owners go in. It is common and nobody thinks twice about it. My children know not to approach a tied up dog, but should they also not walk past a tied up dog? That is ridiculous.

This dog needs to be PTS. It bit a small child who rode past, unprovoked. Period. All the analyzing about prey drives and bad pet ownership etc is moot because it doesn't change what happened.

Dogs are not children. That is silly. An animal that has attacked unprovoked and has the physical ability to kill a person does not get second chances. That's just the way it is - humans come first. And I am a vegan!
I cannot believe how little compassion there is in this thread for the innocent dog... who CLEARLY has a less than desirable owner. I completely would be FURIOUS. beyond FURIOUS if it were my child... but not at the dog.

the owner.

there are very few "that owner should be mandated to do obedience training" or any other constructive advice.

kill it.

because it has theability to kill and has attacked someone ONE time- kill it????

should we kill everything that has the ability to kill a child and attacks unprovoked ONCE.

think about that.

dogs are not disposable creature.

living things cannot be destroyed when they act instinctively in a way that we do not like.

animals should be regarded as animals and owners should protect others from their dogs.

but dogs are thinking, feeling, intelligent beings.

and I am NOT A DOG LOVER.

I am so in shock.

~jen~ )O( mama to k 07/05 o 5/08 and c 12/09
tallulahma is offline  
#86 of 142 Old 01-24-2009, 02:53 AM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 12,099
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
You know what though, this is not an obedience issue. It is an attacking humans issue. Attacking a child. That is not a simple fix, honestly, nor is it a reliable fix. Yes the owner was negligent to tie the dog in a public place, since obviously it is aggressive towards humans. But fact is the dog bit the child. That is on the dog, nobody else. And if the dog is willing to do that, IMO it can no longer be trusted.
thismama is offline  
#87 of 142 Old 01-24-2009, 03:01 AM
 
tallulahma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: detroit
Posts: 2,609
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by thismama View Post
You know what though, this is not an obedience issue. It is an attacking humans issue. Attacking a child. That is not a simple fix, honestly, nor is it a reliable fix. Yes the owner was negligent to tie the dog in a public place, since obviously it is aggressive towards humans. But fact is the dog bit the child. That is on the dog, nobody else. And if the dog is willing to do that, IMO it can no longer be trusted.
i totally understand... i just got emotional thinking about a dogg losing its life for doing something it may not know not to.

this owner could beat this dog, torment the dog.

we have no idea.

the poor little boy is scarred & tratumatized- i totally get thats awful...

i am so down for punishing the owner.... but the dog?

idk, feels wrong.

~jen~ )O( mama to k 07/05 o 5/08 and c 12/09
tallulahma is offline  
#88 of 142 Old 01-24-2009, 03:12 AM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 12,099
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
this doesn't sound like fear aggressive behaviour. dogs are not like people, like he is abused at home so he will abuse others kinda deal. there is such a thing as fear biting, but this does not sound like it, it sounds like high prey drive, or plain old human aggression.

i dont get the punish the owner not the dog sentiment. i mean yes, the owner probably knew his dog was human aggressive and yet tied it in a public area. that is negligent. but the dog bit a child.
thismama is offline  
#89 of 142 Old 01-24-2009, 03:26 AM
 
Sailor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: CA
Posts: 2,433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm not seeing how this is an unprovoked attack.

When my GSD (german shepherd) was a puppy, he had (and still does have) and VERY high prey drive.

If a kid rode by on his bike, he'd have gone after the bike/kid. Instinct kicked in when he saw something moving - whether that thing or person was moving fast or slow did not matter. He'd go after them until he took them down.

Now, he NEVER did this because I was a responsible owner who never put my dog in such a situation. I also extensively trained and socialized my dog. Now, my dog can take someone down - but, only on my command.

Personally, I think most everage citizens are not aware of dog behavior. If a dog is tied to something, and the owner is not around, it is NEVER a good idea to come anywhere near the dog. Literally, the street where the cars are would be safer in order to go around the dog. A tied up dog should NEVER EVER be approached, unless 1. you know the owner, 2. you know the dog, 3. you've done this before with that dog. And, even then, it is risky.

There is nothing worse in terms of an owner tying their untrained dog up. Most dogs have prey drives, the breed you mentioned has it almost as much as my GSD. He saw a bike, it was moving, he reacted on instinct, i.e. going after what to him was the prey.

This is not the dog's fault, but the owners. And this is NOT unprovoked, aggressive behavior. This is prey drive, and it kicks in - regardless of how slow or fast someone is moving. This is also an example of an irresponsible owner who doesn't know how to take care of a dog properly. It's not the dog who should be put to sleep. The dog should be taken away from the owner, given to a more responsible person, and the owner should be tied up for a while. Seriously.

First special delivery - April 2010 :
Sailor is offline  
#90 of 142 Old 01-24-2009, 03:30 AM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 12,099
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
We are talking about a pit bull though? One of the (best!!) characteristics of the breed is that they typically do not demonstrate aggression toward humans. No matter what said human is doing. They were bred for this, they would fight to the death in the pits and would never ever turn on the human referees, if they did they would be euthanized. It is just not in their lineage for prey drive or aggression to kick over into humans. Any pit bull for whom this occurs is an aberration. And we do not need that kind of aberrant pit bull about. They are far too strong, and far too agile, and far too single minded, to tolerate human aggression in this breed.
thismama is offline  
Reply

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off