# 1 year old dies after being attacked by a dog



## apkelly01 (28 December 2007)

Big hugs to the family 
	
	
		
		
	


	





http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,70131-1298626,00.html


----------



## severnmiles (29 December 2007)

Very sad that they are considering banning Rotties in the UK.  Don't blame the breed, blame the owner.  RIP little boy x


----------



## YorkshireLass (29 December 2007)

As far as I can see, no one needs a rottie.  Any dog has the potential to turn on a human, no matter how well trained and kept. It is arrogant to think otherwise. At least with other sorts of dogs the human will stand half a chance of fighting the dog off.

My horse was attacked by a rottie on the public road.  The horse kicked and killed the dog.  GOOD!


----------



## Christmas_Kate (29 December 2007)

That's like saying no-one needs any kind of dog.


----------



## 121272MDV (29 December 2007)

arwful for the family involved but i argee with severn blaming the owner rather than the breed. I personally think that although rotties are big dogs and my be intimidating to others they are one of the most loving breeds of dogs that with the right treatment and care are great family dogs.

also echo kate, I believe your view is very one minded and very crictical of the breed from which from your comments i believe you have never owned


----------



## jollyponies (29 December 2007)

they had had the dog 6 months, a 16 yr old girl was looking after 3 children and the yr old baby, she took the baby out to see the dog and the dog took the baby out of her arms.. and you know what happened next..

i think this is very sad but if you have only had a dog for 6 month you dont know it well enough for it to be left with children...


----------



## Weezy (29 December 2007)

Gosh how devestating 
	
	
		
		
	


	




  I have known 4 rotties VERY well, and all 4 of them were wonderful dogs, really nice to have around, so I am afraid I am with the "blame the owner" on this one


----------



## WelshRareBit (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
As far as I can see, no one needs a rottie.  Any dog has the potential to turn on a human, no matter how well trained and kept. It is arrogant to think otherwise. At least with other sorts of dogs the human will stand half a chance of fighting the dog off.

My horse was attacked by a rottie on the public road.  The horse kicked and killed the dog.  GOOD! 

[/ QUOTE ]

Its that kind of view that makes me sick.  A jack russell could probably quite easily kill a baby.  I dont think a baby stands a chance of fighting any breed of dog off if its hell bent on attacking the child.

All of the rotties Ive known have been excellent dogs.


----------



## Molineux (29 December 2007)

I really do feel for the family and that poor child 
	
	
		
		
	


	





I blame the owners - I have a Rotti and she would never harm anything. 

At the end of the day a Jack Russell could attack if you bring them up to be a gaurd dog. 

This is my Rotti - how could anyone say such things about them


----------



## WelshRareBit (29 December 2007)

Your dog is beautiful.


----------



## nuffield (29 December 2007)

Puts on tin hat
I think Rotties should definately be banned along with other guard dog type breeds including GSD and Staffies
only the Armed forces and the Police should be allowed such dogs.
I also think dog licences should come in to force and people be forced to pass a test before they can own a dog of any discription.


----------



## martyna (29 December 2007)

i  have owned  my  rottie  scince  he was born  10yrs  ago .  he has  never  once  so  much  as  growled at  any family  member  and  i  have  3  children , but  hes  never left  alone  with  small  children as  i  have  common  sense .  but  i  will  say  my  jack  russel  is  far  more  aggressive  that  my  rottie.  my  thoughts  are with  the  poor family  though  truly tragic


----------



## meandmyself (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
Puts on tin hat
I think Rotties should definately be banned along with other guard dog type breeds including GSD and Staffies
only the Armed forces and the Police should be allowed such dogs.
I also think dog licences should come in to force and people be forced to pass a test before they can own a dog of any discription. 

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really fair at all- I had a GSD and he was a lovely, lovely dog. Very well behaved, gentle, and huggy. There's also at least one GSD guide dog in the area.

I do agree with bringing in licences though- but do you really think they'd work?


----------



## alleycat (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
  I blame the owners - I have a Rotti and she would never harm anything. 


[/ QUOTE ]  

But nor did that dog- until that moment.

I have ranted on another post over the issues I have with dogs off the lead &amp; effectively out of control injuring my livestock, and I'd go so far as to say that my daughter, when a young child, was put at risk by a trusted dog whom we trusted a bit too much; an Irish Terrier belonging to my stepfather, this one, who was thought to be OK with kids- but sensed and resented the bond or special affection between "his" people and my daughter. 

I think its the error of judgement thing here. 

I foam at the mouth when people do stupid, stupid things like letting their disobedient dogs out to play uncontrolled among  (my)livestock and poultry; it seems so incredible that they cannot see that this is unwise; but I've seen otherwise sensible &amp; intelligent people , visiting me, do just that uninvited. " Oh, he'd never hurt anything- he's only playing" (Norweigan Elkhound, this time! Bred to pull down ELK for God's sake! What chance do my chickens stand with that?) 

I've come to feel that most dog owners have a blind spot about their own animal or about dogs in general, and a responsible, pragmatic dog owner is actually a rarity- &amp; the first sign that you have of a potential savaging, whether of livestock or a child, is the doting owner who says of this admittedly loving &amp; beautiful purpose-made hunting machine &amp; carnivore- "He'd never hurt anything".

I don't know what the answer is, as dogs seem to have evolved to ingratiate themselves into a human "pack"- (seemingly puppies, unlike wolfcubs, are genetically hardwired to interact with humans) and I think dog lovers will always be inclined to bond with them and trust them; its that bonding that makes the animal so attractive as a pet. Sometimes the trust will be misplaced, although there may have been no previous indication of this. 

Maybe the real problem is our culture re. dogs which shows dogs as either angels or villains: perhaps we need a reality check, and people should receive training before they can own a dog.

I would also say that the most independant, intelligent  and potentially villainous dogs I have known have been collies and labs.


----------



## alleycat (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]


I do agree with bringing in licences though- but do you really think they'd work? 

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes- and they could be dearer for entire animals, if you found you needed to reduce production- exceptions only for the breeding of guide-dogs. Money to go to providing rehoming services, neutering, doggie bins and training schemes for owners 
	
	
		
		
	


	





Wouldn't happen of course; the government would just snaffle the money.


----------



## Rachel_M (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
Puts on tin hat
I think Rotties should definately be banned along with other guard dog type breeds including GSD and Staffies
only the Armed forces and the Police should be allowed such dogs. 

[/ QUOTE ]


What a silly and narrow minded idea.


----------



## Sags_Deer (29 December 2007)

dreadful news but why leave and 1 year old with a dog!! at that age they are so into annoying anything could the dog have been provoked.


----------



## alleycat (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]



What a silly and narrow minded idea. 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]

What a silly and narrow minded reply.

I don't think we can deny, in the face of ANOTHER child's death that these dogs are potentially dangerous, if only because their owners' errors of judgement. Given that you cannot suddenly make all dog owners wise, restricting the availability of the dogs is a viable alternative, little as we may like it.

The only questions are, do we lose more than we gain from doing this (in terms of the pleasure that these animals give) and - is this going far enough? Aren't all dogs larger than a pug potentially dangerous?


----------



## starllight (29 December 2007)

Ditto.  Small minded people


----------



## Nickijem (29 December 2007)

I think dog licences should be brought back.
Except they should be issued by the police - like a shotgun licence.  Then drug dealers, those with any previous etc can be stopped or have their dog confiscated.  The cost of the licence pays for these checks to be made.
*runs for cover*


----------



## Patches (29 December 2007)

What a dreadfully terrifying ordeal for the seven year old and the teenage babysitter to witness...and of course for poor Archie who lost his life.

I'd be more concerned with how the 7 year old came to open a door and let herself out of the house with the baby in her arms. Says the babysitter was upstairs. She could've just nipped to the loo, I realise that, but it does make you wonder who was actually watching the toddler in the first place.

Dreadful tragic accident of course, but it's the fact that this and indeed any other form of accident could be prevented that makes them hard to bear.


----------



## WelshRareBit (29 December 2007)

The fact of the matter is had it been any breed it could have harmed a child, people need to realise that kiddies and doggies do not mix, and if you leave your child with one - you only have yourself to blame if something goes wrong. Its not the dogs fault or the childs but the 'competant' adults who put kids and animals into these situations just will not learn.


----------



## Rachel_M (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]



What a silly and narrow minded idea. 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]

What a silly and narrow minded reply.

I don't think we can deny, in the face of ANOTHER child's death that these dogs are potentially dangerous, if only because their owners' errors of judgement. Given that you cannot suddenly make all dog owners wise, restricting the availability of the dogs is a viable alternative, little as we may like it.

The only questions are, do we lose more than we gain from doing this (in terms of the pleasure that these animals give) and - is this going far enough? Aren't all dogs larger than a pug potentially dangerous? 

[/ QUOTE ]

The fact is ALL dogs can be dangerous, without the correct training, not just your stereotypical "scary" breeds. In fact, if you research, you will see that other breeds also have attacked humans. Removing a couple of breeds from general sale will not decrease dog attacks. The type of people who train their dogs to be vicious, will carry on incorrectly training other dogs that way, no matter the breeding.

You have to get away from the dogs themselves. It is the people behind the dogs that we need to clamp down on.


Even a Pug can do damage to a baby, if it is encouraged to be vicious.


----------



## WelshRareBit (29 December 2007)

QR!


----------



## rforsyth1984 (29 December 2007)

lets face it, one of the most dangerous creatures to a baby can be.... a cat! Apparently cats like the smell of babies and like to cuddle up to a 'little warm bundle'... doesn't take much to suffocate the baby. 
Never should a baby be left without adult supervision IMO.
With regard to dogs, I think licences are the way forward, dogs can be very much what they are brought up to be, regardless of breed. Though some sort of scheme to make scallies and other reprobates have to walk the streets with poodles could be amusing.....
Anyway, I digress. My OH always had staffies, apparently this breed of dog is very good with children, something I would never have believed prior to meeting his dogs, on the other hand the YO's dads miniture dacshund is the most evil and dangerous little horror I have ever met


----------



## alleycat (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
 Even a Pug can do damage to a baby, if it is encouraged to be vicious 

[/ QUOTE ] 

Not in quite the same league as a Rottie, though, is it...

I have this irresistable vision of RAF dog handlers urging on their attack-trained guard-pugs...

I basically agree though: in fact it was sort of the pont I was making: all dogs are potentially dangerous. So how do you control this?


----------



## alleycat (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
  My OH always had staffies, apparently this breed of dog is very good with children, something I would never have believed prior to meeting his dogs

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I've heard them called "nanny dogs" because they are supposed to look after &amp; guard children. Wouldn't quite go there myself, though...


----------



## severnmiles (29 December 2007)

They may not look as frightening as a rottie would, if the army and police wanted a dog that could do damage they wouldn't train Dobes/Rotties and GSD's, they'd train APBT's.  A 12 inch JRT can kill a Ewe...imagine what it could to a 1 y.o baby.


----------



## WelshRareBit (29 December 2007)

You dont leave your kids alone with your dogs. Seems simple to me!

I wouldnt leave a 1year old alone with my horse, so why leave them alone with a carnivorous animal that has the ability to kill it.  People never cease to amaze me with their stupidity.

Apparently the child was left, with a 7YO and a 6YO under the care of a 16YO - recipe for disaster anyone?


----------



## severnmiles (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
 [ QUOTE ]
  My OH always had staffies, apparently this breed of dog is very good with children, something I would never have believed prior to meeting his dogs

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I've heard them called "nanny dogs" because they are supposed to look after &amp; guard children. Wouldn't quite go there myself, though... 

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think I'd 'quite go there' with any dog.  Dogs and babies/children should NEVER be left alone together.  And that doesn't matter whether its a Yorkie or a Rottie!


----------



## alleycat (29 December 2007)

But a 16yr old is old enough to go out to work, marry, begin a family? Some babysitters are as young as 14- don't know if its legal. but its certainly not uncommon.


----------



## WelshRareBit (29 December 2007)

Here here, lets leave some dumb defenseless things together and see what happens..

Oh my dog bit my kid what a suprise, maybe I should have thought before I acted and left them all in the house together..


----------



## rforsyth1984 (29 December 2007)

why do these incidents always seem to happen when a baby is left with an innapropriate person, I do wonder (!)

In this case, a 16 year old CHILD. and some other children

In a case not so long ago (and fairly local to me) the child was left with a drunken grandma or something

Do we really need Sherlock on the case?

Babies + irresponsible minders + animal = problem!


----------



## severnmiles (29 December 2007)

Alleycat, do you have a dog?


----------



## Rachel_M (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]

I have this irresistible vision of RAF dog handlers urging on their attack-trained guard-pugs...

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, after looking at their faces, even I would be be scared off. 
	
	
		
		
	


	









[ QUOTE ]
I basically agree though: in fact it was sort of the point I was making: all dogs are potentially dangerous. So how do you control this? 

[/ QUOTE ]

I honestly believe that banning the "type" of dogs, that the thugs tend to veer towards, is merely nipping the head off the weed. The root of the problem is still there. The owners. For the majority of Rottie's that are dear family, and very friendly, pets there is one that, being involved in an attack, is blown utterly out of proportion by the media and then the rest of the breed is slurred.

As already mentioned, trying to bring in a system of licensing may be impossible and "monitoring" ownership would be even harder. 

The only way to do this is to start right at the beginning, with the children. There is going to be no quick fix for this. We are going to have to raise awareness with the future owners of dogs, the children and make sure they understand correct handling and training.


----------



## WelshRareBit (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
why do these incidents always seem to happen when a baby is left with an innapropriate person, I do wonder (!)

In this case, a 16 year old CHILD. and some other children

In a case not so long ago (and fairly local to me) the child was left with a drunken grandma or something

Do we really need Sherlock on the case?

Babies + irresponsible minders + animal = problem! 

[/ QUOTE ]

So true.

Regardless if some people may think its a good idea to leave their 1YO child with a 16YO, its certainly NOT a good idea to add in a 6YO a 7YO AND a big dog...


----------



## WelshRareBit (29 December 2007)

True Huggy bear, people have a responsibility to their kids to bring them up respecting the dog, understanding it and accepting it for what it is.  
On this site alone there are so many good dog people, so if this is a reflection of life, surely there are enough sensible people out there to change the ways of the incompetant owners.


----------



## nuffield (29 December 2007)

Some very good points here.
Alley Cat,  very well said, all of it.
I simply fail to understand how anyone can own a dog without having a licence. as already said, any dog can bite, but some dogs are bred to do that , bite and attack, ergo are therefore more likely too and so as a type are more dangerous. Unless someone is in the security business why on earth would anyone want a Rottie anyway? are they sad people with inadequate personalities.? I agree about Border Collies , as a sheep farmer our BC are working dogs, the most dangerous ones i've ever seen are household pets. I just cannot understand how people become attached to dogs, they are animals, not family members.


----------



## WelshRareBit (29 December 2007)

I can completely see how people get so attached, what I cannot understand is when they let their emotions get in the way of common sense, I had a dog that bit, everyone was warned about him, he was never left alone with strange adults, let alone children.  Subsequently he only ever managed to bite two people, one who ignored my warnings and the other who was the first person he bit.  Both could have been avoided by more intelligence on my part, in my defence I was younger then.
Grown adults have no such reason for such gross negligence of both their kids and their pets, both of which have been put into their care expecting them to know better...


----------



## severnmiles (29 December 2007)

Nuffield, are you licenced for your horse?


----------



## alleycat (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
 I don't think I'd 'quite go there' with any dog. Dogs and babies/children should NEVER be left alone together. And that doesn't matter whether its a Yorkie or a Rottie! 


[/ QUOTE ]   
Agree- but when the dog is a trusted part of the family its easy to forget; and the trust itself can give the dog ideas above its station.

When my stepfather's previously blameless dog (about 7 years old, used to kids) turned on &amp; bit my daughter, I was present; about six feet away. He had previously shown no resentment or jealousy. The child wasn't molesting the dog, or even touching him and was quiet; in fact she was standing still because I was about to take her photo. We were not anywhere near any of the dog's possessions- bones, dish, kennel. It was (with hindsight, which is a wonderful thing) clearly a dominance issue; the dog was trying to put the upstart pup in its place. She was three. He got her by the head; he wasn't trying to kill her (or he would have done it) but she shrieked, and had I not already by this time leapt in to drive him off, this itself might have driven him further.  

More revealing is perhaps my stepfather's reaction; I kicked out at the dog to get it away from the child. "Be careful! " he yelled- " You could give him a heart attack!"

Could this have been forseen? I don't know. I didn't forsee it; I was aware of the possibility of the dog being jealous and had been looking out for that- but he seemed fine. But then I'm not that experienced with dogs. The owner, my stepfather, had no inkling at all. He trusted &amp; doted on the animal, and perhaps this was the trouble.


----------



## nuffield (29 December 2007)

Yes I have my BHS qualifications 
And a driving licence for my car.


----------



## Stella (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
As far as I can see, no one needs a rottie.  Any dog has the potential to turn on a human, no matter how well trained and kept. It is arrogant to think otherwise. At least with other sorts of dogs the human will stand half a chance of fighting the dog off.

My horse was attacked by a rottie on the public road.  The horse kicked and killed the dog.  GOOD! 

[/ QUOTE ] I had a Rottie bitch for 12 years until she was PTS with cancer. She grew-up with my children. She was a great guard of the house and family, but she was also intelligent and kind. always sweet with the children. When she died, we were devastated. We bought a Rottie dog puppy as we couldn't find a bitch puppy and we were keen to fill the gaping hole in our lives. He was a beauty and we adored him. Sadly, when he was 15 months old we had to return him to the breeder. We had raised him the same way as our bitch, firm and fair, lots of affection, but clear boundaries. He was always pushing them though and was becoming increasingly aggressive. It was clear to us that he would attack someone one day. It turned out, he was the third from his litter that had gone this way. One had already bitten a judge at a show!

They are fabulous dogs when the temperament and training is right, but they are terrifyingly strong when either or both of these things is wrong and a mere human could not pull off a determined adult male if it was determined. You'd have a chance with a bitch (there is a big difference is size and weight in that breed), but a lot of damege would still be done in the process.

I have two standard poodles now as less work (physically and psychologically) has to go into the training than is needed in the 'guarding breeds' - and I'm getting on a bit! Even so, one of them is quite jealous in respect of me, so I wouldn't have her around a tiny child. The other is a pussy cat. They would only be with children under supervision anyway. 

From what I know of this baby's death, It was an accident, with no-one to blame.


----------



## WelshRareBit (29 December 2007)

The answer is in the last part of your story, you arent that experienced.

Certainly with my dog I knew when he was going to turn, body posture, eyes etc will tell you how the dog is feeling long before he acts - they are all there to be seen if you know what to look for, but your situation is in no way linked to the story here.

Im sure some of the more knowledgeable dog people here will know the answer but I personally doubt wether a dog perceives if a human trusts it or not - I dont know either if a dog would be able to percieve this and act upon it in a deliberate way...to suggest such is perhaps putting too many human feelings on the dog.


----------



## severnmiles (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
Yes I have my BHS qualifications 
And a driving licence for my car. 

[/ QUOTE ]

A BHS qualification is not a licence for your horse.


----------



## WelshRareBit (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes I have my BHS qualifications 
And a driving licence for my car. 

[/ QUOTE ]

A BHS qualification is not a licence for your horse. 

[/ QUOTE ]  I quite agree - it is neither compulsory nor neccessary in owning a horse. A car licence is a good example but not very comparable to owning a live animal.


----------



## severnmiles (29 December 2007)

Yet a horse is more than capable of killing a grown adult....


----------



## WelshRareBit (29 December 2007)

Agreed although thats a whole different argument!


----------



## severnmiles (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
Agreed although thats a whole different argument! 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]

Not really, if the rule applies to ban rotties because one in several thousand kills a child then I feel we should have a level playing field and ban horses too, or atleast licence them.  Whats good for one is good for t'other....surely?


----------



## WelshRareBit (29 December 2007)

Quite right I agree, infact I think TB's should be on the dangerous breeds list too because we all know how notoriously nutty and evil they ALL are ...


----------



## Stella (29 December 2007)

Surely licening will just be another money raising exercise for the exchequer! Passports for horses had the potential to protect horses, but in practice, I suspect we all agree, they are a waste of time apart from raising money for the exchequer!


----------



## WelshRareBit (29 December 2007)

**** it while we here why dont we ban cars as well because of the odd few wankers who insist on driving drunk!?


----------



## alleycat (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
  Alleycat, do you have a dog? 


[/ QUOTE ]  

Yes, I do now....

My dad wanted a dog when he was young; wasn't allowed one. (They got him a TORTOISE instead 
	
	
		
		
	


	




). He went off dogs &amp; grew up NOT a dog person: so, when I wanted a dog when I was young, I wasn't allowed one either (had other pets though; animals a bit more interactive than a tortoise.)
I went off dogs and grew up NOT a dog person (oddly though, I couldn't have horses either, but I never went off them.)

So then my daughter (aged about 10 at the time) got it into her head that she wanted a dog. (She had &amp; still has a passion for  animals and had many pets; but a dog, of course, is in a league by itself). I resisted this at first, but looked at the pattern of my own life &amp; my father's and wondered if denying her this for now was going to make her lose an empathy for dogs in later life.

I decided, though that I would load the dice in my favour and find a small dog of a companion breed- in the (mistaken)belief that small dogs are easier to handle and that a pedigree puppy wouldn't have any past "issues" like, say, a rehomed dog, which I might not be competent to deal with. We had a lot of support, too, from a friend who is professionally &amp; personally a dog-person.

So we got a Papillon. WHAT a culture shock! 300 years of lap-dog breeding haven't removed the pack instincts and even something the size of a rabbit is remarkably intimidating when set on world domination. She also has a really good nose, and I've seen her track my daughter around the field by scent, twenty minutes after she had walked that way.

Shes a smashing little dog: for my daughter's sake I'm glad we got her and its given me a lot more respect for the species in some ways, but without really converting me personally into a dog person. I can see why people get hooked, though. But I can see too that dogs can be a lot more "wolf" than I realised before.


----------



## Patches (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
The fact of the matter is had it been any breed it could have harmed a child, people need to realise that kiddies and doggies do not mix, and if you leave your child with one - you only have yourself to blame if something goes wrong. Its not the dogs fault or the childs but the 'competant' adults who put kids and animals into these situations just will not learn. 

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree to a certain extent, but then I never said that all Rotties should be banned, nor did I blame the dog in this instance. 

Heck, little terriers have awful locking jaws too and can certainly do alot of damage to a small child. I was bitten by a Westie once, had to have several stitches to my hand. Not nice but would've been alot worse on a child.


----------



## WelshRareBit (29 December 2007)

Sorry Patches that reply wasn't aimed at you!


----------



## DressageDiva1962 (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
As far as I can see, no one needs a rottie.  Any dog has the potential to turn on a human, no matter how well trained and kept. It is arrogant to think otherwise. At least with other sorts of dogs the human will stand half a chance of fighting the dog off.

My horse was attacked by a rottie on the public road.  The horse kicked and killed the dog.  GOOD! 

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry love but you are out of order with these comments, you wouldnt stand a chance with any breed of big dog, as with any breed of dog Rottweilers are okay in the right hands. I dont think being pleased that a dog was kicked to death by a horse is very nice, its the owner of the dog you should be angry with.


----------



## Neddies (29 December 2007)

Firstly this is so sad that a child lost his life.

I've known a few rotties and they've all had very good temperaments apart from one which belonged to my neighbours, small people with a big powerful dog not a good mixture in this instance, they appeared to encourage it's aggresive behaviour and liked to intimidate people with it, after it killed one of my cats (which they tried to keep secret) and then savaged my other cat I moved house. Now that was a dog that belonged to irresponsible owners and I blame them for the way it turned out. 

The most vicious dogs I have come across are terriers, but then think about the difference in the size of the jaw compared to a rottie. Yes terriers could do some damage to a human being but the damage isn't in the same league compared to what rotties can and have done! 

I can fully understand people's opinions on wanting breeds like rotties banned as there have been some awful stories in the press about babies and children being mauled to death by them and again recently of a kennel maid loosing one arm and possibly her other arm due to a maulung by a rottie, BUT, I can't help but feel that it's not the breed as such that should be blamed but perhaps the unscrupulous breeders who are breeding these dogs purely for profit and not taking into consideration the temperaments of the dogs they are using for breeding, anyone can go out and buy one of these dogs and they can be a very dangerous weapon in the wrong hands.

Another thing to look into is how the dogs are trained and kept, all dogs should be trained to a certain level of obedience but dogs of this caliber in particular, they need to learn from any early age that they are not the leader of the pack. Also how many of these dogs are kept as pets but not properly exercised? The Rottie that killed my cat rarely left the house, when it did it was just walked up the road and back on the lead, it must have been going stir crazy being shut up in a house all day.

Just my thought on the matter anyway.


----------



## Tia (29 December 2007)

QR -

Poor child.  Very sad accident.....again.  
	
	
		
		
	


	





I honestly have no idea what the people who are harping on about dog licences are expecting these licences to achieve?  Can anyone tell me?

I live in a country where Dog Licences are mandatory, along with certain restrictions and regulations, which have no authority over me as I do not live in town and instead reside on a farm.

All of my dogs have Licences.....and?  What difference will a Dog Licence make in your opinion?  Because I'm not getting your point.

As for people having a choice as to which dog they have; well I own 3 dogs in all; 2 are here for a purpose, 1 is perfectly capable of taking down wolves and bears so wouldn't have too much trouble killing even a grown human.   The reason I chose this breed of dog is because of the wolves and bears; no I would not have a breed such as this if I lived in similar locations to some of you, but it would still be my choice to if I wished.  How do you think you could possibly decide what type of people would be allowed to have certain dogs?

The bottom line is; dogs and children just don't mix.


----------



## WelshRareBit (29 December 2007)

I think the point people are trying to make with the licensing is that you stop the wrong type of people being able to have ANY dog.  I quite believe that if you did choose to have any of the breeds you talked about above, in a different situation, you would manage them appropriately and have no such problems with your dog, thats because you are a good dog owner.  
Some people could manage to have problems with any dog and thats because they are not capable dog owners and shouldnt be allowed to look after mice, let alone dogs.  I guess you cant stop people choosing these type of breeds but what you can do is stop them from getting into the hands of the dross of society who seem to have these dogs as status symbols and have no idea of effective management or handling.


----------



## foxviewstud (29 December 2007)

well said severn i agree with you, i have grown up with rotties and they are a very placid breed, how come you never hear of the so called family dogs attacking and killing because that would not be as exciting as a rottie doing it. yorkshire lass any dog is capable of going for a horse and i think your coment was harsh and upsetting.as severn has said a terrier is more than capable of taking down a ewe and often bite kids but they are not slagged off why????some of the coments have really upset me as there is normally a reason for the dog to attack they are not like humans who murder for the fun of it. wat the hell was that child doing being allowed to get near to a dog they only had for 6months and prob do not know her full history sorry but i would put some of the blame on the owners and the babysitter for allowing the children access to the dog in the first place.


----------



## Tia (29 December 2007)

But that isn't the purpose of Dog Licences.  All a DL does is say that you have a dog under your ownership legally.  Over here the restrictions are the amount of dogs you are allowed to own within the towns etc.  There is nothing about what height, weight or size the dogs have to be.

A DL is simply a means of collecting a tax (for those who don't lose their dogs) or a means of contacting the owner if the dog becomes lost.

DL's do not vet people - on getting your licence no-one would ask any questions about the dog - they aren't interested.


----------



## seza (29 December 2007)

I have a JRT who is the most difficult dog I have ever owned.  I have owned and had friends that have owned large breeds and none of them are half the trouble of this JRT - who has to be regularly muzzled for other peoples' and dogs safety!!


----------



## Tia (29 December 2007)

I think every single dog should be muzzled in public, regardless of the size of it.


----------



## Molineux (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
Puts on tin hat
I think Rotties should definately be banned along with other guard dog type breeds including GSD and Staffies
only the Armed forces and the Police should be allowed such dogs.
I also think dog licences should come in to force and people be forced to pass a test before they can own a dog of any discription. 

[/ QUOTE ]

Wacks Tin Hat round your head 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 What are you going on about?? 
Armed Forces and the Police??? Yes they can go to them but they will also train to attack people 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 Because they have been trained to do so, however I have brought my rotti up to be a pet.. And thats what she is, she would never do anything to hurt anyone. 

I think you should wake up love we are in the 2008 not 1958.


----------



## foxviewstud (29 December 2007)

i have often muzzled my two not because they would bite anyone or anything but for the fact i dont trust other people not to lie and say they have bitten them which would not happen with one of them on so i do it for my peace of mind and my dogs safety.


----------



## Tia (29 December 2007)

You're a smart girl.


----------



## foxviewstud (29 December 2007)

thanks just wish others would use the commen sense they were born with.


----------



## Onyxia (29 December 2007)

(QR)
Firstly,it's tragic that a child has lost it's life to a dog attack 
	
	
		
		
	


	




Breed is NOT an issue,the childs death is.

Rottie's are  the 11th most popular dog with 6,575 registered with the KC in 2006(along with god knows how many not reg).
How many have caused a death/serious injury since Jan 2006?
Surely if they were dangerous ALL of them would be attacking their owners at first chance....  
	
	
		
		
	


	




A handfull of attacks out of nearly 7,000 dogs isnt the problem the media would have people belive.
YES of course every death is tragic,but it is NOT reason to bann a breed.

As a child we had GSD's.All of them were free to a good home jobs with some serious issues.
They were muzzled outside of our house for safty of other people,but they never NEEDED it unlike the yorkie who would have the ankles off the world if he was given half a chance.I was 4 when first came,was never at risk from him because I was simply NEVER left alone with him.
Aunt had a dane that was a handfull to most people-he dropped like a stone when she told him to sit whatever was going on untill the day he died.
She is in her 50's with lupas,desperatly needs a hip transplante and could still controll a big dog because she had bothered to train him well.


----------



## SpruceRI (29 December 2007)

Licencing dogs to stop the wrong sort of people owning dogs won't work.

The 'wrong sort of people' drive un-insured cars, sell drugs to kids or burgle houses, and we're swarming in people like that.

You can't make people carry their doggie licence with them every time the dog goes out.  Yes, dogs could be chipped, and someone somewhere could have details of the registration and whether they've paid their fee for the year, but then who is going to police it?   And who decides who are the wrong and right sort of people for that dog?

Again, to my mind, dog licencing, like horse passports is another stealth tax.


----------



## Shilasdair (29 December 2007)

I think the point is that there is no such thing as a safe dog, regardless of breed or size.  
All dogs should be properly controlled in public, and if I had children, I wouldn't let them be alone with any dog...
Those of you who say 'But my dog is a poppet' are not recognising the true nature of dogs, and are thus liable to take risks with other peoples' health and safety, which is irresponsible in my view.
I have to say that there is also no such thing as a safe horse or pony...either.
S


----------



## Breezesbenefactor (29 December 2007)

Very sad but I'm sorry not all dogs are suited to different family set ups. I think if the Rotty gets branded here then it is a very sad state of affairs. the ownership of animals is not a right it is a privaledge and when this is understood in law then this and many other sorts of injustices may begin to end.


----------



## Breezesbenefactor (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
I think every single dog should be muzzled in public, regardless of the size of it. 

[/ QUOTE ]

I take your point here and think in principle it's good however my flatcoat is going to have a hell of a job collecting birds


----------



## lachlanandmarcus (29 December 2007)

The only people who would buy a licence would be the ones who are also responsible enough to control and supervise their dog and to neuter it.

There are cases where guard breeds are appropriate - our livery yard is next to a badly managed (being generous) travellers site and the YOs rotties are absolutely the only thing that keep my horses safe. 

We have a Border Terrier and a Doberman. Despite having the terrier from a pup and the Dobie only since 2yo rescue case, I would absolutely rather put my hand in his mouth than hers. I can take food off him no problem, she would resist. The vet muzzles the terrier to do nasty things but does equally and more painful things to him with no thought of a muzzle or any other control. If his teeth graze your hand while you're playing tug he is completely horrified and drops the whole toy and looks miserable. And hes a rubbish guard dog, unless you count sticking your snout in the visitor's crotch area a deterrent (mmm might work that) or smacking them in the face with your Dobiefulltail.

Owners do need to be careful and realistic about dogs especially when they get them with an unknown history and especially around children. Rotties etc arent the best breeds to choose if there are little ones around, but banning/licensing isnt the answer, just as passports for horses didnt work and the Dangerous Dogs act didnt work.

I dont think we can outlaw risk by legislation and Im not sure Id want to live in a world where it was....


----------



## Tia (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think every single dog should be muzzled in public, regardless of the size of it. 

[/ QUOTE ]

I take your point here and think in principle it's good however my flatcoat is going to have a hell of a job collecting birds 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]
Ah but presumably your retriever is working on private land?  I wouldn't advocate it to become mandatory on private land, just on public land/streets/towns etc.


----------



## Tia (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
Those of you who say 'But my dog is a poppet' are not recognising the true nature of dogs, and are thus liable to take risks with other peoples' health and safety, which is irresponsible in my view.


[/ QUOTE ] 
I completely agree with your comments above.  I think it never pays to become blase about what dogs will or won't do.  I am always very aware of what 2 of my dogs could be capable of; given the way in which they are being brought up means that the risks of them doing something horrendous is fairly slim, but I am still aware of this so I keep a close eye on what goes on.


----------



## Breezesbenefactor (29 December 2007)

Ah but presumably your retriever is working on private land?  I wouldn't advocate it to become mandatory on private land, just on public land/streets/towns etc. 

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah back at you if that passes they'll be a duty of care in other words such a rule will echo into far reaching corners. Besides I personally don't want my dog wearing a muzzle.

Infact I'm going to say it because we're all thinking it but nobody will dip their toe in the water so I'll dive in. All these tragic accident involving dogs always seem to happen in the scum section of our society, the lower intellects who can barely dress themselves. For the love of God look at the make up of this family are any of you surprised, TBH I'm not what I find unpaletable is that we blame the animal rather than society who allows the excessive unregulated breeding of animals, the unregulated ownership, the inadequate means to monitor welfare of the animals and the lack of education regarding dog ownership is it a wonder a dog who lived outside ate the 1 year old?


----------



## foxviewstud (29 December 2007)

i can see where you come from but with these sorts of people you would be protecting yourself and your dog by muzzling in public, its horrible that thats what you have to do these days but i would rather that than somebody accuse my dog of biting them and something terrible happen to them.my rottie is a rescue and we no nothing of his past but i no he is fantastic with my boy and as a guard dog(yes they are always supervised) but i shut them away if another young child comes round as i do not want a young child provoking him to snap again for my dogs protection.


----------



## alleycat (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
 Infact I'm going to say it because we're all thinking it   

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope- we're NOT all thinking that. That's just YOUR personal bigotry- don't ascribe any of it to me, thankyou.

Incompetence with dogs, like the love of dogs, spans society. And you find pillocks in all walks of life.


----------



## Breezesbenefactor (29 December 2007)

Excuse the generalization then however, if the media bias is used I think the 4 examples used exasperate my claim...you can't keep a dog in a 4x5 back yard if you think about it it's almost like keeping a bird caged...plain wrong


----------



## Stella (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
I think the 4 examples used exasperate my claim... 

[/ QUOTE ] I don't understand what you are saying there, do you have the correct word?  To exasperate is to 'greatly annoy'


----------



## Rachel_M (29 December 2007)

*Exasperate*

_To increase the gravity or intensity of _

There is more than one way to use the word.


----------



## Stella (29 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
*Exasperate*

_To increase the gravity or intensity of _

There is more than one way to use the word. 
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]fair enough!


----------



## custard (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
As far as I can see, no one needs a rottie.  Any dog has the potential to turn on a human, no matter how well trained and kept. It is arrogant to think otherwise. At least with other sorts of dogs the human will stand half a chance of fighting the dog off.

[/ QUOTE ]

I gotta say I tend to agree with this sentiment, why does anyone need any dog that would outweigh a small pony and by that I mean mastiffs and the like?  Would we bother with horses if they had 42 very sharp teeth? I doubt it.

It just beats me that it's against the law to wire your property to the mains and electrocute intruders or carry a machette in public yet it's perfectly ok to walk the streets with a potential killer on the end of a lead or more often than not, off it!


----------



## alleycat (30 December 2007)

Exasperate- to increase the gravity or intensity of?

Going to be pedantic here and say - not in this sense. A problem is exasperated- a claim wouldn't be, except possibly in the sense of being made untenable 
	
	
		
		
	


	




. 

I know what the Poster meams, but can't think of the word myself...

However, I think this is the media thing again, isn't it; just as the papers like their killer dogs to be rotties, so they like the owners to be working class with lots of kids, preferably absent at the time of the attack and if a sozzled granny or a teenager is left in charge, so much the better; you can really stir that up into a nice piece of "news". Anything else just aint worth reporting- oh, unless its Royalty, &amp; Princess Anne's bull terriers have bitten someone in a public place again.....

Actually in the last dog incident I experienced personally, the dog concerned was a large  stock-worrying lab owned by an accountant. It wasn't penned in the back garden though, but let loose, repeatedly and seemingly deliberately, during the foot &amp; mouth crisis (the dog warden couldn't go after it because of this) to roam the countryside.
The family was actually very pleasant, but witless re. their dog.


----------



## k9h (30 December 2007)

When will people learn to stop blaming the dog. It is the adults that own them that put or leave them in this situation.

30yrs ago my Uncle had a Corgie that loved my brother when he was a baby, unfortunetly we think he came from a bad breeder &amp; was inbred. use to have fits.
My uncle was terrified that when the dog had a fit it would attack my bro with not knowing what it was doing so he had it distroyed. 
NOW THERE is a resposible dog owner. It wasn't destroyed because he was ever left alone woith a baby but that he could fit so quickly that if you were at the other side of the room so much damage could be done before getting there.

I have know 4 rotties owned by the same family one after they other that they lost through illness &amp; they were the most softest dogs I met &amp; use to go &amp; play with when I was young (5-10 yrs old) The owners were always present aswell.


----------



## Bedlam (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
I really do feel for the family and that poor child 
	
	
		
		
	


	





I blame the owners - I have a Rotti and she would never harm anything. 

At the end of the day a Jack Russell could attack if you bring them up to be a gaurd dog. 

This is my Rotti - how could anyone say such things about them 
	
	
		
		
	


	








But ANY dog could kill a child - that's just the point! 

Your dog looks lovely - so do mine. I have a pointer and a lakeland terrier - cute as could be.

I would trust the pointer about 99% with any situation and guarantee she wouldn't harm anything/one, the lakie would probably only get 75%. 

HOWEVER - that 1% of doubt I have even with the pointer is what reminds me that these are dogs, and that children are more important. I would never, ever leave any dog, howveer much I trusted it, with a child.

Yes, your dog is lovely looking - and I'm sure it has a fantastic temperament, but we must never forget that they can - and sometimes do - kill.

Huge sympathy and hugs to the family......esp the 16 yr old who was 'in charge' at the time.


----------



## Hollycat (30 December 2007)

TBH I find this thread a little odd and disturbing.  One incident and people want to ban dogs they know nothing about.  Most animals over a certain height or weight can kill if the circumstances are right.  Its not an old wives tale to put sleeping nets over babies cots if there's a cat in the house as was already very well pointed out.  A cat would also be perfectly capable of inflicting severe damage with its claws if it had a mind to, and with these new big breeds of domestic/wild cat crosses coming into the country a determined one would scare me a whole lot more than a big dog.  Cats are also very adept at removing the eyes of puppies and if not supervised toddlers. Cats aside as I don't want them banned, this is tragic but, like the quad bike accident its life.  People die.  We will all die.  Many deaths are prevetable and caused by negligance but no more or more less tragic.  I am sure more young children die per year from not having the smoke detector batteries in their house checked than they do being bitten by a dog. Or in RTA's - we could all walk you know. So why ban a breed of dog when children die far more frequently through acts or omisions of parents.

It wasn't the dogs fault - it was the handlers.  I am very sorry for what happened to the child, but you know, if this had been a lab in a nice middle class family it would't have been all over the news and there would be no calls for labs to be banned either.  Its the media yet again rubbing their hands together for a good story and getting the more gullible in society wound up, And if we REALLY, REALLY wanted to protect children we'd cull all male humans before puberty only keep frozen semen and a few caged men for our pleasure.  Not many women go out starting wars or are guilty of rape.  Some men do though - they are big and strong animals. I've never heard of dogs raping and torturing kids but sadly a very, very small minority of men have a habit of it  - in the same way a very, very small minority of dogs bite.  And in both cases what do you bet they both had a bad start in life and not the care and education they needed to be good members of society.  I like rotties, men and cats and don't want any of them banned.  What I would like is better education and care for all.

I know I'll be slated for the man comparison but I have never been bitten by a dog but I have almost lost my life to a large, powerful man.  For me and many others the fear and danger from a bad man is far more real than the fear and danger of a bad rottie


----------



## Hollycat (30 December 2007)

Just want to add plese don't think me unsympathetic, sadistic or heartless - this poor little chap deserved a long and happy life.  But over-reacting won't bring him or the little girl on the quad back. Everyone is entitled to their views, but I don't want my freedom to own the aniamls I like restricted.  Anyone who has lived in London will tell you that pit bulls are ten a penny in the east end. None are ever muzzled.  No-one cares and a ban had no effct whatsoever. Also, as a lone female who admittedly is pretty fearful of men, I liked having a big dog like a rottie as it gets dark at  4pm in winter.  With a more imposeing dog I felt safe going form a walk. Dog obedience/agility is not on every night for exercise purposes and not everyone has the luxury of living in a nice safe area. ok so a man can pull a gun or knife and a rottie who isn;t trained would be unlikely to attack as it wouldn't know the threat (although it may recognise body language and be on guard).   But the perception is there so for a lone female walking a dog after dark a sweet, gentle rottie is a good deterrent due to media hype and perception so why shouldn't I have my sweet gebtle dog if you can have your lab?


----------



## echodomino (30 December 2007)

At the end of the day, regardless of what breed it is, a dog is an animal, and just like a horse! it is unpredictable. Your dog could be as soft as grease 100% of the time but anyone with a single ounce of common sense would know not to leave a child, or at least a very young one, on it's own with said dog. You're asking for trouble. There's only so much ear/tail pulling and eye poking any dog will tolerate. Not saying that is what happened but it's a good example.

And just to put the record straight, Rotties aren't by nature nasty. They were bred as working dogs with natural guarding instict BUT is NOT vicious by nature. My Jack Russell and Wire Viz's have guarding instinct - doesn't mean they're going to pull people to shreds!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Same as Mastiffs, bred to oringinally to guard and help gamekeepers, but no where in it's breed history/breed standard does it call for viciousness! Infact the opposite, it says "Devoted to his 'family' " and "bred to give the appearance of a formidable guard dog" not "it has sharp teeth it's a man eater! And the GSD wasn't bred to attack either, it was bred to herd and protect flock and even during the war or now in the police they have to be of an even temper! Actually they're trackers. Then there's the Dobermann - also a tracker not a killer and "fits into the family well, playing with children". Just one more; Staffies: ok not always good with other dogs but is described as being "kindness itself" with people.

SO there you go it's just bad press, which is all the media is good for and extremly stupid people going out and buying a dog without a flaming clue as to how to keep the poor creatures that are the ones who are going to suffer in the end.

I'll get down from my soap box now! And please don't rant at me, this is just my opinions and not aimed at any body in particular!

Edited: To say I just thought I'd better add that my info came from "The Kennel Club's Illustrated Breed Standards" just so that you know it's not a load of waffle I've made up!


----------



## WelshRareBit (30 December 2007)

Went away last night and missed the rest of the thread!  Tia, I can see your point entirely, I think my view of how dog licenses could work is somewhat based on a eutopian society, which of course we dont have!

I have to echo what breeze has said and say all to often it does seem to happen to these type of people.  Why? Thats a question that Im sure has a thousand answers, money, upbringing, surroundings etc.  If they had more money maybe they'd have hired a competant baby sitter, if they had had a better upbringing maybe the dog would hae been trained better, if they had been surrounded with knowledgeable people maybe the dog would have had a chance of being a normal doggy citizen...

Also, we dont know the facts of the 'attack'  I dont know exactly how big a 1YO is but is there a chance that the dog was being over exuberant and killed the kiddy? Perhaps he was playing and was too rough with the child.  We dont know if the baby was dropped perhaps by the child and that caused and injury that started the dog off (my mum always told me that if a dog gets a taste of blood then it can easily revert to instinct...??)  All these ideas are completely random but if we are to demonise the dog, perhaps we should think a little outside of the box - as Im sure a lot of us are just seeing the baby wrenched from the childs arms and mauled to death - but that might not be what happened.

There's only one killer in this situation and thats ignorance. And thats something you cant attribute to the dog.


----------



## echodomino (30 December 2007)

Agree WelshRareBit, ignorance is the only killer in these situations. That along with irresponsible breeders selling to irresponsible owners and again that's not the dog's fault. Infact in these situations it's never the dogs fault - end of. 

I think that it is just a myth that if a dog tastes blood it turns nasty (I know they're not WelshRareBit's exact words!! But I've heard other people say it too) 

Also, would just like to say that ITN news have reported that the Government have no intentions of banning the Rottweiler.


----------



## k9h (30 December 2007)

Pick self off floor after fainting because the goverment seem to have sense for once!
I do not believe the whole blood thing either. My brother whenever he gets a cut  has my old dog lick it clean he swears it is the best thing to clean a wound with. She has never bitten you can play ruff with her &amp; stop it in an instent just by words. She is also a patadog for visiting hospitals.


----------



## severnmiles (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
Pick self off floor after fainting because the goverment seem to have sense for once!
I do not believe the whole blood thing either. My brother whenever he gets a cut  has my old dog lick it clean he swears it is the best thing to clean a wound with. 

[/ QUOTE ]

Me too, sounds gross but heals in half the time!


----------



## Stella (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
Exasperate- to increase the gravity or intensity of?

Going to be pedantic here and say - not in this sense. A problem is exasperated- a claim wouldn't be, except possibly in the sense of being made untenable 
	
	
		
		
	


	




. 

I know what the Poster meams, but can't think of the word myself... 

[/ QUOTE ] Cheers! I didn't have the energy to get into the 'not in this sense' discussion last night. I think its as simple as "strengthen my claim".


----------



## Rachel_M (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
Exasperate- to increase the gravity or intensity of?

Going to be pedantic here and say - not in this sense. A problem is exasperated- a claim wouldn't be, except possibly in the sense of being made untenable 
	
	
		
		
	


	




. 

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree.


----------



## Mid (30 December 2007)

i've always found collies to be the most agressive dogs... my grandparents had one, very irritable, never bit, but wasn't far off. also i was bitten by a collie in the park once when i was little...


----------



## gloster_image (30 December 2007)

I havn't read the last page of replies because my brain started to hurt!
But I agree with whoever said that all dogs should be muzzles in public - I completely agree!
I also agree with whoever said that people saying "oh my dogs a darling" is getting far too blase and ignoring the risks.  ALL dogs - no matter how they are raised and trained - pose a risk.  Training just minimises that risk.  Never under any circumstance should that risk be completely ignored.


----------



## severnmiles (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
i've always found collies to be the most agressive dogs... my grandparents had one, very irritable, never bit, but wasn't far off. also i was bitten by a collie in the park once when i was little... 

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been bitten twice by collies and mauled once.  Nearly every farm down here has 3+ and they scare the life out of me because they're sly and fly!  However I met one in the vets the other week who was a 'pet' and she's restored my confidence in them somewhat, she was sweet, soft and gentle!


----------



## severnmiles (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
But I agree with whoever said that all dogs should be muzzles in public - I completely agree!
. 

[/ QUOTE ]

Now I sort of think this is a pointless exercise, how many child deaths by dog have been in a park?  They've nearly all been in the home.


----------



## Mid (30 December 2007)

sly - that describes collies well. they're just a bit too intelligent to be trusted...  

i've met one agressive Rottie (obviously had a crap owner, was wandering around the streets, no collar, anything, attacked my mum and her dog, a drunk guy tried to rescue them, it attacked him too) one agressive whippet, one agressive GSD cross, several snappy collies and collie crosses, a bitey JRT, and one completely mental and savage pekinese. just goes to show


----------



## gloster_image (30 December 2007)

But its about more than a childs death its about overall safety!  I know several people (and horses!) who have been attacked by dogs while out walking/hacking/at local events and it wouldn't have happened if muzzles were made compulsory.  I think its a smart move and personally I don't see why people are against it?  Just seems like pigheadedness to me "well my dog wouldn't do that so why do I have to" its just awkwardness and thats what makes this world so difficult half the time!
At the end of the day it is your (and i mean a general your, not your actual self SM) sole responsibility as a dog owner to make sure that everyone around it is safe.  It may be annoying for the owner of a well behaved dog to put a muzzle on when its out but it surely is a small price to pay if it stops innocent people getting attacked by people who cannot control their dogs?


----------



## shelly018 (30 December 2007)

It's very sad, but as many people have said, you can't blame the breed, any dog has the capability to attack.

Prime example the other week at our yard, YO's 5 year old son was playing with their jack russell x which they have had for years.  They play together every day.  Dog grabbed the finger of the boys glove and was pulling it, child was shaking his hand, laughing and the dog just pulled and shook until the child ended up on the floor - no harm was meant, but it just shows you that no matter what the size of the dog, or the breed, they all have that instinct, some just show it more than others.  Like us, we can be nice as pie one minute and snapping at someone the next.


----------



## GinaB (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But I agree with whoever said that all dogs should be muzzles in public - I completely agree!
. 

[/ QUOTE ]

Now I sort of think this is a pointless exercise, how many child deaths by dog have been in a park?  They've nearly all been in the home. 

[/ QUOTE ]

Baaaa! I totally agree with SM! 

I find it crazy so many are calling to ban a breed of dog due to attacks that have happened. Most of which have been totally avoidable. 

Children should never be left alone with *any* breed of dog. I would never leave my dogs (a schnauzer and two labs) with any child. 

I wonder how many of those calling for them to be banned have any true experience of the breed? Or in fact, with any breed of dog full stop?


----------



## Bedlam (30 December 2007)

" It may be annoying for the owner of a well behaved dog to put a muzzle on when its out but it surely is a small price to pay if it stops innocent people getting attacked by people who cannot control their dogs? "




It may have been said before, but muzzling dgos in public would not have stopped this child being killed, because the dog wasn't in public - it was at home.

Should we all muzzle our mutts all the time? Perhaps all dogs should just have their teeth extracted so they can't bite anyone?

Or should we just all take responsibility for our animals and our children with a little bit of common sense, and not leave a small child alone with anything that has the ability to kill it - a cat, a dog, a lion, a tiger, a quad bike on a dark street, a large angry aggressive drunkard, or even alone in their beds in a holiday apartment.....etc etc etc.

We can't legislate to avoid all tragic accidents.... because they are mostly just that.


----------



## severnmiles (30 December 2007)

Were the dogs in question on leads?


----------



## GinaB (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
But its about more than a childs death its about overall safety!  I know several people (and horses!) who have been attacked by dogs while out walking/hacking/at local events and it wouldn't have happened if muzzles were made compulsory.  I think its a smart move and personally I don't see why people are against it?  Just seems like pigheadedness to me "well my dog wouldn't do that so why do I have to" its just awkwardness and thats what makes this world so difficult half the time!
At the end of the day it is your (and i mean a general your, not your actual self SM) sole responsibility as a dog owner to make sure that everyone around it is safe.  It may be annoying for the owner of a well behaved dog to put a muzzle on when its out but it surely is a small price to pay if it stops innocent people getting attacked by people who cannot control their dogs? 

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you own a dog GI?


----------



## Skhosu (30 December 2007)

I am strongly against muzzling ordinary well behaved dogs because I know all of ours would hate it. No throwing sticks in the park? Besides which it is the minority which as usual is the problem here-and do you think they will muzzle(are these dogs walked even?) their dogs?


----------



## Skhosu (30 December 2007)

I am strongly against muzzling ordinary well behaved dogs because I know all of ours would hate it. No throwing sticks in the park?


----------



## Onyxia (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
I am strongly against muzzling ordinary well behaved dogs because I know all of ours would hate it. No throwing sticks in the park? Besides which it is the minority which as usual is the problem here-and do you think they will muzzle(are these dogs walked even?) their dogs? 

[/ QUOTE ]
It comes down to being a resposable owner and knowing your dog.
Yorkie(who BTW is by far the most agressive dog I have met!) doesnt need to eb muzzled all the time while out-but he does in certain situations.
I am aware of what set him on edge and as soon as we come to a situation that he *might* be trouble in the muzzle goes on.
Having said that,he knows I carry it with me all the time and he knows although I love him dearly I AM the boss so a cross word stops him 9 times out of ten.It's the odd one i have the muzzle in my pocket for.

After the problem GSD's of my childhood(problems caused byprevious owners,they were angels in the house and garden where they felt safe)I always keep a muzzle in my pocket and would put it on without a second thought if I felt even  tiny bit it was needed or MIGHT be needed whatever the breed but dont think all dogs should have a muzzle on all the time,it's just not fair.
Bit like saying no men should be allowed near children because some will violate them.


----------



## xspiralx (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]

Children should never be left alone with any breed of dog. I would never leave my dogs (a schnauzer and two labs) with any child. 

[/ QUOTE ] 

Just as a general question - what age child are you referring to? Do you mean strange children or your own children/those familiar with the dogs?

People keep bringing this up in the thread and yet most people I know who have had a family dog have been playing with the dog, often alone, since the age of 6/7 or so.

When I was a kid I used to take my grandmother's Doberman on walks alone - I was probably 9/10? And I used to walk the labradors owned by my neighbour at a similar age.

I'm not disagreeing with the idea that you shouldn't leave a dog unsupervised with little children, I'm just wondering how you're defining "child" in this sense.


----------



## GinaB (30 December 2007)

Good point Spiral! Ok let me re-phrase, I would never leave anyone alone with my dogs! 
	
	
		
		
	


	









Seriously though, any children I know have always been brought up to respect dogs and help with training of gundogs. The oldest would be 9. I wouldn't leave her alone. And she knows exactly what she is doing with dogs. 

Even children brought up with a family pet shouldn't be left alone (even at the age 8/9)

So I guess I'm saying, if they know what they're doing and have been around dogs all their lives, probably the age 11/12.

If they are not used to dogs, probably I would never leave them alone with a dog!


----------



## Skhosu (30 December 2007)

We always have dogs in the room, with or without parents I'd say 5/6 at a guess, maybe younger if watching tv and dog left in the room, never had any problems, we all know to watch the one dog who snaps..


----------



## Onyxia (30 December 2007)

Very good point Spiral!

For us,we were allowed to be alone with them once we were old enough to be seen by the dog as higher in the pack so about 7/8 depending on the child.
Strange children)friends,cousin's that dont live localy ect) were not left alone untill they were in their teens.


----------



## echodomino (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
I havn't read the last page of replies because my brain started to hurt!
But I agree with whoever said that all dogs should be muzzles in public - I completely agree!
I also agree with whoever said that people saying "oh my dogs a darling" is getting far too blase and ignoring the risks.  ALL dogs - no matter how they are raised and trained - pose a risk.  Training just minimises that risk.  Never under any circumstance should that risk be completely ignored. 

[/ QUOTE ]

I think someone else has already asked this but, do you own a dog? You sound very anti dog to me. There's no need to muzzle every dog out in public, they're not all of a sudden going to start tearing into people. There are a heck of a lot more sensible dog owners than given credit for and these are the one's who know whether or not their dog is of a good temperament. It's the minority who get the rest of us a bad name/image with their carelessness!!!!! A lot of these deaths could have been prevented.

And like a lot of people have said, these incidents are mostly happening in the home not in public. You couldn't keep a dog muzzled 24/7 "just incase" because it's inhumane. The practical answer to the solution is to educate people better in the way of keeping and training a dog and making sure it's well socialised - something you can't do with it's face wrapped in plastic or fabric.  I stick to what I say, these incidents are never the dogs fault.


----------



## gloster_image (30 December 2007)

Anti dog??  Oh come on its not a cult! lol
I don't own a dog but have done in the past - however I have known many people including myself to have bad experiences with dogs PURELY because they were not under control by their owner.  It's about TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR OWN ANIMALS ACTIONS.
I can't read this post anymore its making me angry.


----------



## severnmiles (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
Anti dog??  Oh come on its not a cult! lol
I don't own a dog but have done in the past - however I have known many people including myself to have bad experiences with dogs PURELY because they were not under control by their owner.  It's about TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR OWN ANIMALS ACTIONS.
I can't read this post anymore its making me angry. 

[/ QUOTE ]

Does that apply to horses aswell?


----------



## Tia (30 December 2007)

QR -

Well I am confused as to why the uproar about dogs being muzzled whilst out in public.  If this were the Law then yes I would have no qualms whatsoever to muzzle my dogs in a public place.  Muzzles are no big deal and dogs get used to wearing them just as they do a collar and lead.  Dog parks may be the place to allow running around and chasing sticks without muzzles on - the same as in many towns dogs are not allowed to wander around unleashed or poop all over the pavement.  I personally can't see the big issue with this - and as for the people who allow this sort of thing to happen not obeying this Law, well I actually believe most would; particularly if there were on the spot fines for those who didn't.  If it was something everyone did, they would follow I suspect.

As to the age of children, well as Anima says, when the dogs accept the child as a higher order - this is generally around the 8 year mark I believe.


----------



## Skhosu (30 December 2007)

At the end of the day this looks like a tragic accident. People are run over by cars, driven by irresponsible idiots?
People are bitten by dogs, owned by irresponsible o wners?
It will never happen and I am glad, that dogs will be muzzled by law.


----------



## Tia (30 December 2007)

Oh I think it will.  Possibly not in my lifetime but I believe it will at some point.


----------



## alleycat (30 December 2007)

I wouldn't mind a law for the muzzling on the street- really for the protection of my (small) dog rather than of myself or my child. Dogs are a magnet to other dogs, and whilst most of them are being friendly, if they were both muzzled it would be reassuring.


----------



## gloster_image (30 December 2007)

Yes it most certainly does apply to horses as well!  I'm fully aware that horses can be dangerous animals and because of that fact I always make sure that if I have anyone with me who is non horsey that they are safe at all times because they are unpredictable!
I don't like the fact that people on here appear to prejudice because they own dogs.  I'm not prejudiced against dangerous horses and lowering the risks with horses just because I own one and work with them?
If my horse is out in public (eg a competition, out hacking) I always have him in a bridle for maximum control and keep a strict eye on the goings on, particularly with children.  
And I would be the same if I had a dog (which i'm hoping to in the future).


----------



## Rachel_M (30 December 2007)

QR

Having just read a piece, regarding this in the paper, where it tells of how the seven year old took the baby out side to pet the dog.

Now, lets look at this from a dogs point of view. How often do we, as owners, take over treats and toys to our dogs? We even sometimes laugh when the dogs start shaking the teddies whilst playing...

That dog wouldn't have know the difference between a baby and a toy. The child would have come towards it with a "thing" in its hand. 

Dogs, or the family pets that I know, do not just attack, to kill, for the sake of it. The baby died from it's injuries in the hospital but if the rottie was intentionally trying to kill the baby, it would have been dead along time before that.


----------



## gloster_image (30 December 2007)

Yep I agree with you there - dog perhaps thought the child was bringing it a toy.


----------



## Tia (30 December 2007)

That was exactly my take on the situation.  The dog made a mistake but it was such a big mistake that it cost the dog it's life and the childs.


----------



## Stella (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
QR

Having just read a piece, regarding this in the paper, where it tells of how the seven year old took the baby out side to pet the dog.

Now, lets look at this from a dogs point of view. How often do we, as owners, take over treats and toys to our dogs? We even sometimes laugh when the dogs start shaking the teddies whilst playing...

That dog wouldn't have know the difference between a baby and a toy. The child would have come towards it with a "thing" in its hand. 

Dogs, or the family pets that I know, do not just attack, to kill, for the sake of it. The baby died from it's injuries in the hospital but if the rottie was intentionally trying to kill the baby, it would have been dead along time before that. 

[/ QUOTE ] Most, if not all, animals know the difference between an inaminate object and the young of another animal (even of another species). Dogs certainly know the difference. Its hard wired into most, if not all, animal species!


----------



## Rachel_M (30 December 2007)

I disagree. A toy is a toy, to a dog, whether it is inanimate or movable.


----------



## Stella (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
I disagree. A toy is a toy, to a dog, whether it is inanimate or movable. 

[/ QUOTE ] Its a bloody miracle that they can survive in the wild then! How stupid do you think dogs are?


----------



## Tia (30 December 2007)

I would also disagree with Stella, sorry Stella.

Just watching my 4 week old puppies has given me an insight into something which I found fascinating.  They have just been introduced to my cats and my other dogs.  Not one of the pups paid any attention whatsoever to the cats - it was almost as if they were not there.  The dogs, on the other hand, proved totally intriguing to the puppies and they seek them out.

We all know that dogs do not accept small children as anything as other than an object of absolutely no consequence, which is why there are often accidents like this with very small children.


----------



## Stella (30 December 2007)

But adult dogs tend not to show any interest in another bitch's puppies either. Little interest is shown in the young of others unless something unusual brings the young to their attention!


----------



## Tia (30 December 2007)

Hmm I'm not so sure about that.  Most dogs will show an interest in pups whether they be their own or another bitches; it's all part and parcel of the pack mentality where dogs do share the upbringing of one anothers pups.


----------



## Stella (30 December 2007)

Well I guess Weimaraners must be very unusual then - I used to have several and breed them!


----------



## severnmiles (30 December 2007)

But GI, what I'm saying is that several years ago (I'm sure Millbrooksong will remember this) a horse got loose at a local show and killed a young girl, people didn't cry out for a ban on horses being tied up at shows.  So why try to ban a certain breed or enforce a muzzling law?  In some cases muzzling a dog can actually make it aggressive because it can feel threatened and vunerable.


----------



## gloster_image (30 December 2007)

Blimey thats awful!!!  How did the horse kill the girl??  I think the main difference between horses and dogs though is that dogs are carnivores and at the end of the day they're natural instinct (however many generations ago and with however much training) is to use their teeth to eat live animals.  Very unlike a horse.  A horse kills by kicking - unfortunate but accidental (although not always) but i can't imagine a horse jumping on someone and ripping them to shreds with their teeth :-S  (Extreme image i know).

Muzzles may be extreme but if there is no other way to control your dog?  I know good dog handlers have their dogs well trained but I remember very well being chased down the railway line by a god while I was on Rocky and no matter how much the owner called it back it wouldn't come - only left Rock alone after a few swift kicks (he didnt come into contact with the dog but it gave it something to think about).


----------



## Tia (30 December 2007)

Perhaps it was just your dogs and not necessarily the breed?  Most bitches (regardless of breed) will foster another bitch's pups if she has enough milk, and most bitches will help raise these pups.


----------



## Tia (30 December 2007)

I can't see that this is relevant.  Horses and dogs are nothing like each other - they are at the opposite end of the Animal Kingdon spectrum to be honest.


----------



## Skhosu (30 December 2007)

So on the basis of that one dog all dogs should be punished? Sorry no deal. That owner is again one of the ones in the minority.
As for instinct, my lab is horrified at the thought of eating a mouse/rat, the terrier yes, she chases and kills them through instinct but two of the three big dogs wouldn't dream of trying to catch something live, they just dont/
One of the other big dogs did do a chicken, a clunk on the head and he hasn't since, but they all know people are in charge, and it's not like they are particularly trained. I know very very few dogs I would class as having to be wary (one of ours, snaps in defence) around, most are happy friendly dogs that provided handled sensibly are no problem


----------



## Tia (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
 So on the basis of that one dog all dogs should be punished? 

[/ QUOTE ] 
Ahh now I understand your disdain.  You are placing human values on a dogs mind.  Okay so yes I agree if you think that dogs think in the same way as humans, then you could definitely see it as a _punishment_ for them to wear a muzzle.  Collars and leads are presumably fine because they are viewed as clothes?


----------



## TGM (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
Muzzles may be extreme but if there is no other way to control your dog?  

[/ QUOTE ] But that doesn't justify a blanket muzzling of all dogs, does it?  I used to own an unpredictable rescue dog, and I always used to muzzle him when out in public, so I'm not adverse to muzzling when there is a need.  However, the dog I have now is totally different and I wouldn't want to have to muzzle her.  She has good recall, and has never shown aggression towards other dogs or humans.  If she did, she would be muzzled.

I do sympathise with the dog chasing problem though, as I have had encounters with horse-chasing dogs in our local woods.  However, I can't see that compulsory muzzling would prevent those incidents, as the animals can still give chase when muzzled!


----------



## Skhosu (30 December 2007)

lol, from my experience all I can say is ours hate muzzles/haltis/anything around their noses but are quite happy with collars.
Technically I suppose if they wore them as pups it would be supposedly fine but I still do not see the need.


----------



## GinaB (30 December 2007)

Agree with TripleSandH, my dog is the same, hates anything near her nose. And why should all dogs have to be muzzled due to the actions of others?


----------



## TGM (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
lol, from my experience all I can say is ours hate muzzles/haltis/anything around their noses but are quite happy with collars.

[/ QUOTE ] I know the dog I had to muzzle really didn't like his although he learnt to put up with it.  It is also an art to fit them properly so they allow a dog to pant if they have been running fast, but not so loose that they can come off or get caught in things.  Whilst muzzling was appropriate for the dog in question, I really wouldn't want to be forced into putting one on my current dog by law, particularly as I don't feel it would do much to prevent the dog mauling tragedies that often happen in private homes and gardens.


----------



## GinaB (30 December 2007)

Seriously though can you really see a muzzling law being enforced?


----------



## severnmiles (30 December 2007)

I think it had got a stake or hurdle wrapped around its leadrope or something and hit the girl.  Very sad.

I agree re. carnivores but flight animals can be just as dangerous because through fear they don't necessarily *think*.  A guy at our hunt was collecting money and a horse struck out at him and knocked him to the ground, he couldn't breathe properly for half an hour and he's very lucky it didn't kill him like the poor man in the above thread.  My sisters horse picked my mum up once by his teeth and threw her 6ft.  Horses and dogs are equally as dangerous but the difference to me is that horses are an unpredictable animal whereas with the dogs it is mainly incompetence.

Re the Rocky incident would it not be better to create a law stating that all dogs must be kept on leads when in public areas but exclude enclosed dog parks e.t.c.  If the dog had been muzzled then he would still have been capable of chasing you and Rocky, fair enough he couldn't harm R but he could cause R to bolt would could injure the pair of you and possibly others too.


----------



## aimeerose (30 December 2007)

Gosh .. what a long thread.

TBH it sounds like a terrible accident, a product of bad situations and events.

Muzzling in public .. ummmm .. thats fine as the good well behaved peeps would tow the line and muzzle - necessary or not ... but since the deaths are due to bad handling/breeding do you think this 'element' of dog owners would also tow the line???


----------



## gloster_image (30 December 2007)

Actually Severn I think that is a very sensible suggestion!  Possibly one which would be more happily entertained by dog owners as well?  Definately better than my muzzling suggestion I think!


----------



## severnmiles (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
I can't see that this is relevant.  Horses and dogs are nothing like each other - they are at the opposite end of the Animal Kingdon spectrum to be honest. 

[/ QUOTE ]

End of the day Tia both can kill.  I expect a level playing field and what applies to one potential killer should apply to the other.

You wouldn't hobble your horse in public to prevent him from kicking so I fail to see why I should muzzle my dogs who apart from the GSD (who doesn't ever leave our property) have not ever shown aggression.  Remember the APBT who killed the girl last NYE had shown aggression on many occasions previously.


----------



## echodomino (30 December 2007)

I seriously think that the media cause a lot of trouble too. Just been reading the Mail on Sunday and it contradicts itself. It says in one column: the dog belonged to his grandmother and was a 2yr old bitch, was a pet and often played with the children, that it had NEVER shown signs of agression - or words to that effect. Then it says: the dog was bought after the grandmother's house was broken into, was normally chained to the fence and was described as nasty. The neighbour wasn't much better, saying that it was a vicious looking dog and was up to his waist - now either he is very short or this Rottie had been given stilts, they're not big dogs at all.

Any way, I think all this post is doing now is making people cross.


----------



## severnmiles (30 December 2007)

Echo, love the first 3 pics in your siggy...made me smile


----------



## alleycat (30 December 2007)

The big difference between horses &amp; dogs IMO is that we take dogs into our homes in a way that is impractical with horses. We live far closer to dogs than horses, and they are in contact with us when we are off-guard, relaxed, in company with others who are not used to them, etc. 

Many people treat their dogs as honorary humans. Not many people would think its OK to let a horse run "off the halter" down a public street or across someone else's field: far from it; yet this is commonplace with dogs. So you can generally avoid horses if you want to; but you can't avoid dogs.

I suspect that neither horses nor dogs are actually unpredictable in themselves; they do what they do for a reason; it is WE who don't always understand THEM. But I think with dogs the problem is compounded by the amount of trust that people put in them, and the way that they are seen as honorary humans and their carnivorous and territorial instincts are forgotten. 

One thing that surprised me with our dog is the way in which she is continually pushing, pushing for control. I have to be very strict with her, and I feel like a tyrant at times; I never felt this to this extent with a horse, where you seem to reach a sort of agreement as to who is boss. Is this normally the case with dogs? Do you always have to be asserting your authority?

I have also seen dogs which are obedient with one person or with that person's teenage children in her presence, act quite differently and ignore the children when she wasn't there. So there is scope for the pack dynamic to change and for control to shift from humans to dogs.


----------



## echodomino (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
Echo, love the first 3 pics in your siggy...made me smile  
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]
LOL SM! They always make me smile 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 Need some better head shots of the Wires to put in my siggy


----------



## foxviewstud (30 December 2007)

some good points here and i am so glad more people are saying its the owners not the breed.good example of this in kennels we had a stray rottie come in and he was lovely had no problems with him, and this dog was with us for nearly a yr he was then rehomed to people that i wish never had him but in was out of my control, they kept him thin and hit him a lot, he came back to us for boarding and he went for me when i tried to take an empty bowl away something he would never of done before this dog looked like he was around 9/10yrs old that day but he was only 2yrs old i was so upset by what he had become because of bad ownership.


----------



## Eccles (30 December 2007)

QR:-

Personally I don't think its the dogs but the people that own them and the circumstances the animals are kept in.  I would never personally want a rottie, although I do have a JRT cross and a Border Collie.  I think the world of my dogs but I would never ever trust them with a child, BUT if you have an  dog that is bred to do a job, why in god's name would you allow small children round it anyway? 

I agree that horses are dangerous too, all animals are dangerous because their unpredictable (as far as we are concerned) but horses by nature are flight animals, not fight animals which is the difference IMHO.  

The dog didn't just bite the baby, she grabbed him in order to kill him so FGS of course we need licences and we need to re-educate people to be responsible when they are going to chose a "pet."

Poor little boy.


----------



## Rachel_M (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]


The dog didn't just bite the baby, she grabbed him in order to kill him  

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? How do you know this?


----------



## meemzul (30 December 2007)

It was awful but no dog should be left alone with kids, full stop!

The opinion about banning breeds is all well and good but there are enough 'banned' pit bulls about to tell us it doesn't work!


----------



## foxviewstud (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
QR:-

Personally I don't think its the dogs but the people that own them and the circumstances the animals are kept in.  I would never personally want a rottie, although I do have a JRT cross and a Border Collie.  I think the world of my dogs but I would never ever trust them with a child, BUT if you have an  dog that is bred to do a job, why in god's name would you allow small children round it anyway? 

I agree that horses are dangerous too, all animals are dangerous because their unpredictable (as far as we are concerned) but horses by nature are flight animals, not fight animals which is the difference IMHO.  

The dog didn't just bite the baby, she grabbed him in order to kill him so FGS of course we need licences and we need to re-educate people to be responsible when they are going to chose a "pet."

Poor little boy.  
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]

i disagree with the last bit if she had grabbed him to kill him the baby would not have needed to go to hospital as the dog would have killed instantly. rottweilers are actually bred to be multi purpose in germany they are bred to guard and to be a family pet. and taliking about dangerous animals wat about people????i trust my rottie with my child more than any stranger.


----------



## joshesmum (30 December 2007)

My neighbour has 3 dogs 2 labs and a german sheperd,now these dogs are well looked after and the owners think the world of them but 2 of them i wouldnt trust as far as i could throw them.A few months ago we were going out in the car as we went out to the parking bay the neighbour was in her car with the dogs in the boot.Its a big car a volvo estate, as soon as we walked past the car to our car the dogs went balistic throwing themselves at the window barking and going mad. I dread to think what would of happened if those dogs had got loose they went mental luckily the owners have no children.Is it always the owners fault that dogs  turn or can some dogs have it in them these dogs are a prime example of it i think. They are never off the lead when they are taken out but i wont walk past them if i see them they frighten me.


----------



## TGM (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
A few months ago we were going out in the car as we went out to the parking bay the neighbour was in her car with the dogs in the boot.Its a big car a volvo estate, as soon as we walked past the car to our car the dogs went balistic throwing themselves at the window barking and going mad. I dread to think what would of happened if those dogs had got loose 

[/ QUOTE ] That doesn't actually mean the dogs are vicious at all!  A lot of dogs I know will bark like maniacs if people walk past their garden or past the car they are in - but would not be at all aggressive to the same people if they escaped from said car or garden.


----------



## Eccles (30 December 2007)

err, because the child is dead! I don't think the attack was just a warning do you?


----------



## Eccles (30 December 2007)

I agree. I can't see how you can blame a breed when half the time its the circumstances the animal is kept in.


----------



## mrgoop (30 December 2007)

There are so many mixed opinions on this one,,, but:

Firstly what a terrible tragedy, and my heart goes out to the parents of poor Archie, and those girls who had to witness such an awful scene.

ALL dogs have the ability to hurt us. Wether they mean to or not. 
I have personally been bitten twice and neither of those times i would count as my FAULT. 1st time by my friends next door neighbours very vicious German Shepherd. He lived in a snoopy kennel in the back garden tied to a few feet of chain. He would spin round and round snarling at us if we were in the garden. One day i went to call for her (the 2 gardens were attatched by a communal front gate!! "Sabre" was somehow free from his chain...... He launched himself at me and took a chunk out of my bum!! i was 10 years old
This was an unprovoked attack, and the dog should have been destroyed. As an animal lover i pleaded with my mum to let it go. I don't know if he went on to attack anyone else!!

Second time.... i was on holiday with my step nan. She has a westie and a rottie x lab. I was watching tele and the big dog was lay beside me. I was gently stoking his paw (and had been for a while) without a warning growl or anything else, he shot up and had hold of my face.
Again this dog was spared!!!!

I know of a rottie, that pulled a neighbours lad off his bike and mauled him and broke his arm. And my friend had a Rottie x Belgium shepherd (a lethal combination) he was bought as a 7 week old pup and raised very well BUT..... he was never destined to be a pet. I loved him to bits, but would never trust him. He had some very big issues in his head. And was a very scary dog.

Now i'm sure there are some very lovely rotties out there. No sorry i know there are. But at the end of the day, they are a guard dog. And no matter how we treat them, or how we raise them, that is in them, and always will be.
As with all breeds, they all have a use. I have a terrier, she has never been trained in the art of catching things, but she will sit for hours and wait for a mouse, or a rat.

Sorry if i offend any rottie owners, but this is a breed not there as a family pet. They have a place in the world to do a job, but don't put them in a position where they are likely to cause damage.
I see what everyone else has said, about all dogs. But i would far rather be savaged by a Jack russell, etc, than a rottie. At approx 10 stone, who would stand a chance.
As Tia said, she has her dog, to protect her from wolves and bears. It is doing it's job, and is not there to be a pet


----------



## Rachel_M (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
err, because the child is dead! I don't think the attack was just a warning do you?  
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]

As correctly said, if you read back, if the Rottie (given it's size and known power) attacked to kill, the baby would have been dead along time before it reached the hospital. It did, unfortunately, die of its injuries but those were not necessarily inflicted to kill the baby. 

So yes, the attacked could have very well been a warning that was inflicted on something a lot smaller, and more easily wounded.


----------



## Eccles (30 December 2007)

Well admittedly I made an assumption tbh when I said that the animal grabbed the child in order to kill it, but we can't really say that she didn't aim to kill because the other child was there also who I  * think * , tried to intervene (correct me if I'm wrong.)  I am not saying that the dog wanted to kill because of its breeding, I'm saying that it could be due to the environment it was kept in.

TBH I am sure my dogs would be fine with children on their own.  But then I will never test that because I will never leave them alone with a child.


----------



## Eccles (30 December 2007)

The end result was that the child was killed by the direct actions of the dog, for whatever reason, provoked or not or as a warning or not.


----------



## mrgoop (30 December 2007)

Forgot to mention.......

On the other side of the coin

I had a resue lurcher, who had a serious case of fear aggression. With strangers, especially men. He would go mad at them, showing his teeth and barking. Even chasing them if they came near me. He never acted on this though, just made his warning known. I don't know if he would have taken action to protect me if necessary.

Anyway, this dog was the perfect family pet. He never showed any kind of agression with any of my family or friends. My daughter (who was 4 at ther time he came) was told and told how to treat a dog. I have pics of them cuddled up asleep together. But she knew if he was sleeping, to leave him alone, and to respect his space.
In our home there was harmony

THEN&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;
my nephew came to stay over christmas with my mum.
He pestered my poor dog continuously, and was told and told to leave him alone. Or he would get bitten
It took 3 days, but in the end my "poor" dog, got fed up and took a snap at him. I think it was meant to be a warning, but he caught the top of his head, and frightened the life out of the damn kid!!!!
Needless to say, said child was told it was his own fault, and the dog, NEVER blotted his copy book again


----------



## Rachel_M (30 December 2007)

True but there is a difference.

I do believe, and I still stand by what I said earlier, that it is the education of the children where we should start.

Rottie's are pets and can be very good pets, as long as you understand that, just like any dog, they need correct training and most of all respect the fact that are dogs. As I do with my Labrador crosses.


----------



## dainewell (30 December 2007)

I have heard (although im unsure how reliable my source is) that the breed responsible for most dog bites in the country is the retriever. 
 I believe that in MOST cases it is the way a dog is treated that causes these terrible tragedies to happen.


----------



## Eccles (30 December 2007)

This is also what I was pointing out, I have no doubt that rotties  _can_  make good pets. If they are living with an educated owner in the right environment.  

What I am saying is that the environment some "dangerous" animals are kept in is part of the problem and I agree that children need educating but the responsbility must lie with the owners.  At the end of a day, a child is just a child and can't be blamed for any outcome, howsoever caused when the child is that small.


----------



## echodomino (30 December 2007)

You could say the same about the animal though, if the dog isn't taught by the owner it doesn't know if it's doing right or wrong.

Has anyone else noticed that these incidents are happening in similar settings? I don't mean at home but the types of homes? Says it all really! Well IMO


----------



## Eccles (30 December 2007)

*echodomino* yes!  But I was trying not to point it out!


----------



## echodomino (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
*echodomino* yes!  But I was trying not to point it out!  
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]
Ooops! LOL 
	
	
		
		
	


	








 Well I am known for saying what I think without thinking of the consequences!!! 
	
	
		
		
	


	





At least it's not just me!


----------



## Rachel_M (30 December 2007)

That is the point of why I get frustrated, when people want to ban an entire breed. 

We do not know the entire circumstances of what happened, and the environment and training that dog was given, so we can not judge and condemn an entire breed on the standard of one incident.


----------



## Eccles (30 December 2007)

Well we agree on that then M_H_B!


----------



## skewbaldpony (30 December 2007)

Have not read the whole thread, so apologies if someone has already said this, but rottweilers are like horses and quad bikes. If you don't have the space, the knowledge and the common sense to operate them properly, they are dangerous. 
The danger is in a society that encourages people to believe they can do/have/be anyone anything they can dream up, whether or not they have the space, money, talent or brain cells to match. 'Self esteem' allows them to know no sensible limitations.
Every other kid just wants to be a 'celebrity'.


----------



## Rachel_M (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
Have not read the whole thread, so apologies if someone has already said this, but rottweilers are like horses and quad bikes. If you don't have the space, the knowledge and the common sense to operate them properly, they are dangerous. 
The danger is in a society that encourages people to believe they can do/have/be anyone anything they can dream up, whether or not they have the space, money, talent or brain cells to match. 'Self esteem' allows them to know no sensible limitations.
Every other kid just wants to be a 'celebrity'. 

[/ QUOTE ]

You see, I am a firm believer that anyone can be anything they want. That is how the others succeeded and, if no one bothered to try and raise their standards, what a poor world we would live in.

I am glad the world is, in fact, a free place- Where people are given the support to try their best and not like the world you want.


----------



## skewbaldpony (30 December 2007)

But there's a difference becoming what you want to be, by dint of hard work, and changing the circumstances so that you *are* in a position to have a big dog, a horse, or what ever, and just assuming it's ok for you to have one, because someone else has, and it goes with the music you like and your haircut.
Raising your standards would imply becoming a responsible person, able to deal with these things, learning about them, keeping them in sensible conditions, and not ending up causing an accident.
The world, however, is not a free place, by any stretch of the imagination, and not many countries even deserve that title.


----------



## NicoleD (30 December 2007)

It does  not matter what the breed of dog is- all breeds are descended from wolves and have a natural fight instinct however cute or fluffy or big and brute like. Trying to ban certain breeds is like trying to ban certain breeds of horses. What if one horse breed was found to cause more injuries than another would we accept that to be banned!!!
Dogs behave according to how they are treated if they are allowed to be the alpha dog then they will assert this if they feel threatened such as by a new family member. Unfortunately all these children being killed seem (and i assume this) but they seem to be owned by people who have no idea how to control animals let alone be responsible for their own children. Where was the mother, why was a 7yr old allowed to take the baby to see the dog, WHERE WAS HER SUPERVISION is the real question. I feel sorry for the 7yr old who will have to live with her actions for the rest of her life. I feel that dog licences are the way forward to prevent such incidents arising. No more idiots owning animals.Sorry if you dont agree but this really gets my goat!! And yes i am a dog owner i have two greyhounds.


----------



## skewbaldpony (30 December 2007)

If there was a licence that was proof against idiots, it would solve all sorts of problems!
Sadly, they haven't developed one yet.


----------



## Eccles (30 December 2007)

I agree with both you, no, when it comes to animals (and *arguably* dangerous ones) people shouldn't be allowed to get whatever they want.  They must have the right environment and the knowledge to deal with that particular animal and its not the 7 year old that has to live with her actions it's her mother and whoever was caring for her at the time! She's just a child.   
	
	
		
		
	


	





Its absolutely no different from someone with no prior knowledge of horses saying they will have a TB off the track and keep it in their back garden.  People need to be responsible for whatever is in their care.


----------



## Rachel_M (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
Well we agree on that then M_H_B!  
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ]







 Great minds, great minds.


----------



## Rachel_M (30 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
 People need to be responsible for whatever is in their care. 

[/ QUOTE ]

That is very true. They must also admit the responsibility when things go wrong, whilst children and animals are in their care and not just brand the animal, when often situations could be entirely avoided, entirely at fault.


----------



## Eccles (30 December 2007)

Again, great minds, great minds!!


----------



## liveryblues (30 December 2007)

As an owner of a large breed dog i feel they are being given a really bad press. I am aware that my dog looks intimidating to others, but as a single mum who has been broken into (PRE_dog)that was one of the reasons i got him. However i am experienced owner &amp; reseached this breed exstensively. My dog Is our protector, my kids love him, i trust him with my family. How many families out there over how many years have had dogs who have been nothing but faithfull family friends. A few bad stories concerning rogue dogs/bad owners and all of a sudden every dog is a potential killer. By the same tolken we could say as mothers one of us somewhere is currently raising a child who will become a killer/murderer. A fact unfortunately tho none of us may wish to accept it. Bad things unfortunately will happen &amp; i am so sorry for the poor lad along with all the other people in the world who have died in unjust tragic circumstances. But no one is ever going to make me believe that my large breed dog is anything other than a much loved irriplacable canine friend.


----------



## WelshRareBit (30 December 2007)

I have since heard that the mother of the child (and owner of the dog.) was 18 herself........
In this case need I say more?


----------



## Skhosu (30 December 2007)

Why? At 18 she is perfectly old enough. The child was being babysat.


----------



## Stoxx (31 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
why do these incidents always seem to happen when a baby is left with an innapropriate person, I do wonder (!) 

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this - however I'd be more inclined to take it one step further and say that these incidents generally seem to occur with inappropriate FAMILIES.
An 18yr old with a 1yr old, with 3 other kids in the house and a dog all of which are being looked after by a 16yr old KID.  Irresponsible family in my opinion, where are the real parents?
Any dog can be dangerous if put in a threatening situation, the actual problem is not the breed but the sort of people that purchase them for their 'status symbol'.
Molineux, your Rottie is lovely!
(sorry if this has all been said already, I haven't read the whole thread!)


----------



## __Annie__ (31 December 2007)

QR


I wouldn't  trust any child  to be left alone with my dog. He totally adores people and has never shown aggresive behaviour towards a human BUT children(and yes some immature adults) tease and have no concept of enough is enough until the dogs warns or bites.

Regarding muzzling dogs in public areas, well I think that responsible owners will comply and the custard owners won't and it is my opinion that the latter are the ones with messed up dogs that are more likely to attack.

My very bright dog has a high prey drive that was made worse by his selective deafness 
	
	
		
		
	


	




 so I chose to fit him with a stimulation collar to aid his re training.
It worked BTW. 

I appreciate not all children are like this but I am not going to risk my dog being PTS because of an irresponsible child or parents/carers/babysitters  behaviour.


----------



## WelshRareBit (31 December 2007)

[ QUOTE ]
Why? At 18 she is perfectly old enough. The child was being babysat. 

[/ QUOTE ]

At 16 she'd be old enough - quite obviously not responsible enough.


----------



## H's mum (31 December 2007)

I've got to agree with you - we own two collies and I wouldn't trust EITHER of them - they are never allowed in a situation where something could happen - Neither are left with children - or for that matter any people who they don't know - and even then I warn people and tell them to ignore the dogs - It's about knowing the animals and their capabilities - I think people who think their dogs incapable are being a little bit niaive.
Normally I don't comment on things like this but it's quite an emotive subject.
Kate x


----------



## YorksG (1 January 2008)

At the risk of my mother being branded irresponsible, she used to leave our Lab tied to the pram handle to guard first my sister and five years later, me. The dog looked after both of us when mum was in another room or when we were playing in the garden. He was much more trustworthy than passing strangers.


----------



## trundle (2 January 2008)

Shoving my two penn'orth in on this one....dog attacks tend to be so much nastier when certain breeds of dog are involved, but hand on heart, I don't think that any particualr breed is more prone to mauling humans than any other. 

What I DO think and absolutely believe, is that a certain type of bad dog-owner is always attracted to the same small array of breeds. These bad owners get dogs PURELY on the basis of them being scary-looking or intimidating, don't train them properly, and encourage them to behave in an anti-social way even at home. These people ALSO tend not to "train" their children to behave properly, either around animals or other people, so their children are more likely than other children to provoke the badly-trained dog. 

Certainly in this case, and in 99% of these pit-bull-eats-toddler cases, its bad ownership at the heart of the problem, rather than bad breed.


----------



## WelshRareBit (2 January 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
Shoving my two penn'orth in on this one....dog attacks tend to be so much nastier when certain breeds of dog are involved, but hand on heart, I don't think that any particualr breed is more prone to mauling humans than any other. 

What I DO think and absolutely believe, is that a certain type of bad dog-owner is always attracted to the same small array of breeds. These bad owners get dogs PURELY on the basis of them being scary-looking or intimidating, don't train them properly, and encourage them to behave in an anti-social way even at home. These people ALSO tend not to "train" their children to behave properly, either around animals or other people, so their children are more likely than other children to provoke the badly-trained dog. 

Certainly in this case, and in 99% of these pit-bull-eats-toddler cases, its bad ownership at the heart of the problem, rather than bad breed. 

[/ QUOTE ]

Very true.


----------



## ecrozier (2 January 2008)

Echo Trundle.  I own a rottie - and for whoever said earlier, no, I am not a sad person with something missing in my life!!  I was given him by a friend who DID buy him for the wrong reasons (the look, the stereotype etc) but luckily was intelligent enough to realise his mistake and gave me the dog after a few months.  Now, my dog is 4 years old.  I would happily licence him, muzzle him etc if that was the law.  I don't NEED to as he has never even so much as growled/raised his hackles at anyone/anything, but if the law required it, I would happily comply.  But then I like to imagine that even if for example tests/home visits were introduced, I would pass....the problem isn't with owners of rotties like mine, and molineux's, and I imagine most of the others on this forum.  It is with the owners that buy them or PBTs or shepherds or any other bull terriers etc as status symbols, don't walk them, don't train them, keep them in little yards etc.  That is when danger occurs, and sadly these are usually the people who leave their dogs in a position where they could attack a child.  
Even if we did have a ban on Rotties (which IMO would be a tragedy), well, we have a ban on APBTs and yet how many of them do you see, all over the rougher areas of most of our cities!  Pretty easy to see how well THAT ban is working I'd say.  And, even if the bans did work and were effectively implemented, well, that 'type' of owner would just get another dog!!  It would likely be german shepherds next, then we'd have calls for a ban on them, then god knows what the 'fashion' would be?  English Bull Terriers?  Whatever they can get, they will still have dogs.  It would just never end, so sadly banning any breed would not IMO work.  I'm afraid I don't have any better suggestions though!

PS However much I trust my dog, I would never leave him alone with a child.  Even though I don't THINK he would ever hurt anyone, I'd never be able to live with myself if he did, because it would be my fault.  And all sorts of accidents can happen!


----------



## ecrozier (2 January 2008)

Just to add.....many people who meet my dog don't believe he is a rottie....the image of them portrayed by the press is some kind of slavering monster...which is far rom the truth in my experience!  And he's not actually that big, same size as a friend's weimeraner, and smaller than the golden retriever that belonged to an ex boyfriend of mine years ago.
He also once allowed someone to break into my horsebox and steal my handbag which he was sitting on....think his guarding gene must have been bypassed somehow...!


----------



## trundle (2 January 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
god knows what the 'fashion' would be?  English Bull Terriers?  Whatever they can get, they will still have dogs.  

[/ QUOTE ]

I really, really like English Bull Terriers. I like their funny triangular eyes and their great big noses. Not relevant to the original discussion at all, but i just thought I'd throw that in.


----------



## ecrozier (2 January 2008)

Trundle, my rottie's best playmate when he was younger was an EBT, he was fantastic....his name is Winston! He's ever so funny.  He can be pretty boisterous though and my life is he strong!!  
There is a girl at our yard (though not for much longer!) with one though and they have managed to get us all to have to keep all dogs on lead even if they have been fine before, because her EBT went for a horse....dare I say it in public though - that is a case of owner rather than dog being to blame


----------



## Skhosu (2 January 2008)

sorry, completely wrong IMO. 16 is the legal age for babysitting, you have no idea why the 7yr old was left alone with the baby, maybe the other one threw up? Don't tell me kids are never alone in a room of the house!
I think it's wrong to make an assumption on her parenting skills based on her age since she wasn't even there at the time...or next thing you will be saying she should never have left the baby in the first place?


----------



## ecrozier (2 January 2008)

Going to play devil's advocate here.....guessing that TSH is (quite rightly IMO) disputing that people are assuming that the 16 year old couldn't be responsible because of her age.....fair point, but therefore why should we assume that all rotties are vicious because they are rotties?  Not saying that everyone is, but there are some people who do! 
Now obviously I realise that rotties/all other dogs are animals not people, and that there are rotties who are dangeous, but then there are some very very irresponsible 16 year old babysitters/18 year old mums.  And equally some very nice rotties and some very responsible young carers.
Unfair to make assumptions in ANY case, be it human or animal in my opinion.


----------



## Tia (2 January 2008)

I have to say; I actually really like Rotties.  Every single one I have met, and there have been lots in my life, have been the softest and loveliest dogs imaginable.

At least 2 times in our life (when we lived in England) we have considered buying a Rottie, however because we have always lived in the middle of farmland, and because my dogs ride out with me, we have always felt it was a risk that the dog may be shot by farmers just for being in a field full of stock....therefore our chosen breeds have traditionally been collies or springers.

Over here I have dogs to do a job which is why I carefully researched and chose the breeds which compliment our lifestyle.....exactly the same reasoning as I did when choosing the breed of dogs we had in England.


----------



## aimeerose (2 January 2008)

I am going to really stick my neck out and probably get stoned for it 

BUT ......

I have left kids alone with my doglet, as a child i was left alone with our dogs .. shock horror ... regularly.

I hope, when i have kids i will be lucky enough to have the type of dogs that i can leave my kids alone with, be it in the garden, sitting room or walking.

Maybe i'll be a terrible parent ... maybe i wont, my mum certainly wasnt.

Anyone else out there willing to own up to leaving people/kids alone with their dogs???



*edited to add my doglet is a terrier and mums dogs were working gun dogs - spanials mostly*


----------



## WelshRareBit (2 January 2008)

In  my eyes it wasn't an assumption it was a fact, an 18YO with a 1YO child left it with a 16YO, who then left one of the kids alone for whatever reason and then the baby got killed by the dog.

Yes kids can be alone whenever they like, though not usually with an admittedly viscious dog outside. That spells either a bad mother or a bad baby sitter to me, and certainly a bad dog owner.


----------



## Tia (2 January 2008)

I don't but that's because my dogs live outside.

To be honest; I would wager that almost every single person who keeps dogs and children INSIDE their home HAS in fact left their child/ren unattended with the dog at some point in their lives.  Quite unbelievable to me that the claims that children and dogs have never ever been in the same room together without adult supervision every single time....sorry if this is not the case with a handful of people here, but I just don't believe that this is not the norm for most people with dogs in houses.

I doubt anyone would leave a baby in a room unattended, but that would be the case whether or not they have a dog surely?  But 3 or 4 year old children?  Nah I'm not buying it.


----------



## aimeerose (2 January 2008)

Is there ANY evident the dog had previous?

From what i have read the dog and baby had interacted before with no horrible result?


----------



## WelshRareBit (2 January 2008)

Ah now what I heard on the radio was the dog was kept outside because it was a bit snappy...just goes to show how different stories can be.

I still dont think Id be happy to leave my kids with the dog in that way though, because of its propensity to cause so much damage.


----------



## TGM (2 January 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
I doubt anyone would leave a baby in a room unattended, but that would be the case whether or not they have a dog surely?  But 3 or 4 year old children?  Nah I'm not buying it. 

[/ QUOTE ] I can say quite categorically that I never left my daughter alone with the dogs at that age, even if I was popping upstairs briefly.  I think children that age are probably more at risk than babies, as they are much more likely to provoke the dog with their actions.


----------



## WelshRareBit (2 January 2008)

Agree wholeheartedly with TGM, I simpy wouldnt because kids dont know better and neither do dogs. I would just put the dog out.


----------



## Tia (2 January 2008)

So did your daughter go to the bathroom with you every time you needed?  And did she go into the kitchen with you every time you made meals?  And is the telephone in the room where the child and dog are?

These are not specific questions to you TGM - more rather questions that have just mulled through my mind.  I know a number of people who tell me the exact same thing "no I never leave my children unattended with the dog".... well from what I have viewed from these very same person is that oh yes they most certainly do!  It may only be for 1 minute whilst they go out into the hallway to answer the phone or the door, but that is my point.


----------



## TGM (2 January 2008)

The dogs would be put in the kitchen or the garden if I had to leave her, even if it was just to go to the bathroom.  Admittedly I was extra careful because one of them was unpredictable.


----------



## Tia (2 January 2008)

Then you are one of the handful I mentioned.  
	
	
		
		
	


	





My experience of others has been that most are not as careful as you are.


----------



## WelshRareBit (2 January 2008)

I think if more people took the two minutes it probably took TGM to be as vigilant as she was, there would be so many less dead kids and dogs.


----------



## Tia (2 January 2008)

I agree; however do people lock the doors of the house when they go to the loo?  Could a child of 3 or 4 not just simply open the door and go outside to the garden with the dog in the absence of the parent in the loo, or answering the door or phone?


----------



## WelshRareBit (2 January 2008)

Well personally I would lock the door and take the key with me, but again its a matter of how vigilant you are. If you are a person who is likely to be forgetful when something that big is at stake perhaps the best idea is to not have the dog? Or (put on riot helmet) a child..?


----------



## Tia (2 January 2008)

Once again I agree.  I just don't think that all of the people in the world who have commented on this story are really being truthful to themselves....of course this is just based on what I have viewed in person with people I know who have said how awful it was that the child was left with the dog.....when the child wasn't even left with the dog in the house (like their children so often are for very short periods of time); particularly as the dog in this case, was outside.


----------



## 0 (2 January 2008)

I was occasionally left unattended with the dog we had when I was small. She never so much as snapped although at times she was provoked. We were taught from a very young age that we were not allowed to touch the dog if she went in her basket or behind the settee so when we anoyed her, she would just go there. Of the 4 dogs we have at the minute, we would not leave any of them unattended with a child; although 2 would probably be ok, 2 are definate no no's as they can be snappy.


----------



## TGM (3 January 2008)

I suppose it depends on your doors - mine are difficult enough for an adult to open, let alone a small child!  

Returning to the original story, I think the problem was leaving the seven year old unattended with the baby, regardless of the dog situation.  Even if the dog had not been there she could have dropped the baby, caught its head on something hard, tried to feed it something inappropriate, etc, all of which could have put the baby at risk.

If the case was truly that the 16yo had briefly popped upstairs to answer a call or nature, then it terribly tragic that the 7yo chose that very brief space of time to pick the baby up and carry it outside.  If, however, the 16yo was upstairs for a significantly longer period of time, then I personally feel it was negligent to leave the 7yo and the baby alone together.


----------



## emma69 (7 January 2008)

Yup, our lab used to baby sit me when my mother popped into the shop etc, and i know I was left alone with the dog on hundreds of occassions before the age of 5! he was a great dog and knew I was something to care for/protect. Our new lab is a big bouncy puppy despite being 8 - I would never leave him alone with a child, he would never deliberatly hurt one, but he could accidently, just by his sheer size, and the fact he isn't very used to children. That said, the first time he met children (3 of my friends kids) this big bouncy thing just lay down and allowed himself to be stroked, prodded etc - he knew that he had to be gentle with them. 

What amazes me here is the number of unleashed dogs on public trails etc, now I have nothing against a dog running, but when you see people you call it to heel. I am not fazed by dogs, but so many people are - just a few days ago I was walking on the Bruce Trail (well used trail in Ontario) and two lovely (but very big!) dogs bounded up to me at full tilt. Now I come from the naive 'assume they are friendly' school of thought, and it's second nature to say 'hello, pup what are you up to' as they approach. But so many people would have been terrified. I find far more loose dogs over here than I did in public in the UK, despite more exensive 'leash laws' here.


----------



## antiantianti (8 January 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
 Aren't all dogs larger than a pug potentially dangerous? 

[/ QUOTE ]

Why ban everything that is potentially dangerous?


----------



## GinaB (8 January 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
 Aren't all dogs larger than a pug potentially dangerous? 

[/ QUOTE ]

Why ban everything that is potentially dangerous? 

[/ QUOTE ]

*ALL* dogs are potentially dangerous. Size doesn't come into it. Horses are potentially dangerous, cars are potentially dagerous (depends what kind of driver they have 
	
	
		
		
	


	




) you could go on for hours of things that are potentially dangerous but should we ban them?

I can't believe I just agreed with Giles.


----------



## Tierra (8 January 2008)

Only just gotten round to reading (most) of this thread and im so saddened by it.

You can't ban every potential risk from our lives; its not feasible 

My parents bought our first rotty when I was in my early teens. We researched the breed carefully and opted for a bitch. When my parents divorced, neither were in a position to keep sally and so, she came to live with me. I lost her in June of this year to cancer. That dog was the sofest and most gentle animal ive had in my life; with the possible exception of a goldfish i won at a fair.

I would never leave her with someone she didn't know. Then again, id never leave my other dog with someone she didnt know either. I can also say hand on heart that my husky would be of more danger to anyone than my rotty would and in comparison, my husky is smaller than most sheepdogs

Sally was always leashed, not for other peoples' safety, but for her own. I would never have risked people accusing her of x, y and z. I always said if we moved somewhere more built up, she would have been muzzled (incidently, the husky is always leashed too and the same rule would have applied with the muzzle).

What i did find so heartwarming was the number of people who did meet sally and commented on what a darling of a dog she was. In relative terms of course, it was a very small number of people compared to the population but i just hope that the opinions of those who did meet her were influenced for the better. 

The problem is not these dogs at all, its some of the people who are buying them. Dog licensing - how exactly do people envisage this working... you pay for a piece of paper? Or do you have to take a test of some kind also to prove your worth as an owner? How long before theres a black market in forged licenses?

Ban any breed over the size of what... a collie? PTS any in current existance to destroy the lines completly? What gives us any right to do that and what a completly devastating and authoratarian move to make.

Consider that we DID indeed do that. Would the dog attacks stop? of course not. Theres many terrier breeds notoriously snappy and nippy and dont be naieve, these breeds can still kill a young child. Of course, it would then be THESE attacks that the press would pick up on. No longer would they have the rottweiler to expose as our undercover murderers. So how long until we ban all dog breeds? Kill the lot of them as a potential hazard to human life.

Theres some pretty common sense rules need applying to dog ownership and given the apparent intelligence of the human race, i dont think its asking too much for them to adhere to.

Dog licensing is unlikely to help. If we're particularly pinpointing the type of people who buy such breeds and then chain them up finding their then developing vicious natures to be amusing; dont be stupid enough to think they wont get around the licensing laws. The only thing it would do is create another form of tax for the genuine people out there. The ones who buy these dogs out of a love for the breed itself. 

Banning certain breeds is futile as once the uproar has died down, another breed will just come into profile that should be added to the black list.


----------



## Stella (8 January 2008)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
 Aren't all dogs larger than a pug potentially dangerous? 

[/ QUOTE ]

Why ban everything that is potentially dangerous? 

[/ QUOTE ]

*ALL* dogs are potentially dangerous. Size doesn't come into it. Horses are potentially dangerous, cars are potentially dagerous (depends what kind of driver they have 
	
	
		
		
	


	




) you could go on for hours of things that are potentially dangerous but should we ban them?

I can't believe I just agreed with Giles.   
	
	
		
		
	


	





[/ QUOTE ] Lets not forget that humans are potentially dangerous - especially men. Human men attack, kill and mame far more often than dogs! A fasicious point? Yes, but also true!


----------



## emma69 (9 January 2008)

Didn't the UK used to have dog licences? I may be becoming senile in my old age, but I am sure they used to exist?


----------



## Tia (9 January 2008)

Yes the UK used to have Dog Licences.  They were abolished back in the 80's and they cost 37p.  Total waste of time as all it was was a registry for the local council....ie a tax on competent dog owners and a help to those who lost dogs.


----------

