The poor kid killed by a dog

NoloBoro said:
I honestly don’t see why anyone would want to own something like that. I had a terrier, soft as anything. It was like a lottery walking it on the beach. I’ve had to welly loads of dogs out of control, I thought I’d lost him one day when a pillock had a Rottweiler(incidentally a dog I like) off its lead. This however puts that into real perspective, a 10 year old boy mailed like that. Poor kid.
if that happened to mine my response would be biblical. RIP
Click to expand...
Had the same thing happen many times to our dog, horrifying how many have dogs they have zero control over, surprised this sort of thing doesn’t happen more often
 
So many scary videos on YouTube. Children (under a year old) with 'best mate' massive dog.

I get 99% of the time it's fine. Just needs one 30 secs of dog 'playing' and anything can happen.
 
i would say about four dead children a year is acceptable collateral damage to ensure the right of inadequate men and their boneheaded families to continue to keep slavering steel-jawed killing machines in their front yards. After all, ' it's the owner not the breeds', right? It's pure coincidence that labradors never kill children (unless a fat one rolls over onto that cunningly-placed baby)
 
I am wary of anyone who feels the need to have a muscle dog, its a sure sign to steer clear. What's worse is some owners encourage their dogs aggression. You have to question the motives and mindset of people to get such dogs particularly in a family environment.

Just to balance the negative posts on dogs, we have a golden retriever who is an incredible friend and positive influence on my youngest daughter who is autistic. She's a wonderful dog, with an incredible sense of how my daughter is feeling, and source of comfort for her when she feels overwhelmed. There's more and more research to suggest dogs are great help with peoples mental health.
dogs-have-a-magic-effect-the-power-of-pets-on-our-mental-health
 
i would say about four dead children a year is acceptable collateral damage to ensure the right of inadequate men and their boneheaded families to continue to keep slavering steel-jawed killing machines in their front yards. After all, ' it's the owner not the breeds', right? It's pure coincidence that labradors never kill children (unless a fat one rolls over onto that cunningly-placed baby)
Whilst I generally agree with your point, Labradors have attacked and killed children.
 
My family dog is a small lhasa apso. He's a lovely little creature and I wouldn't even consider having a massive dog in the house.

Like others have said. I do not see why people need any dog that if it turned could cause absolute chaos. That poor little boy would not have stood a chance.
 
Most every breed of dog has killed at some point. Between 2015 and 2019 there were 2 deaths from chiuhau in the USA (no idea how to spell that)..

Pit bulls account for more than twice as many deaths as all other dogs combined in the USA. They are clearly either more dangerous or attract the wrong kind of owners. It isn't just size that is the issue as doberman, for example kill or attack very infrequently, less so than labs or retrievers.

All dogs present some danger, the owners more so. If you banned pitbull those owners would move into mastiffs or doberman.
 
Alzi said:
i would say about four dead children a year is acceptable collateral damage to ensure the right of inadequate men and their boneheaded families to continue to keep slavering steel-jawed killing machines in their front yards. After all, ' it's the owner not the breeds', right? It's pure coincidence that labradors never kill children (unless a fat one rolls over onto that cunningly-placed baby)
Whilst I generally agree with your point, Labradors have attacked and killed children.
Click to expand...
I see you're right: I stand corrected. just goes to show that, whatever people say, dogs retain a wild element that is finally unpredictable. For this reason, dogs with the dangerous characteristics I describe must be held to be beyond the pale. When I see someone with a pit bull or a rottweiler, I just think: we wouldn't allow someone to walk around the park with a tiger on a lead, so why that?
 
equaliser said:
I see you're right: I stand corrected. just goes to show that, whatever people say, dogs retain a wild element that is finally unpredictable. For this reason, dogs with the dangerous characteristics I describe must be held to be beyond the pale. When I see someone with a pit bull or a rottweiler, I just think: we wouldn't allow someone to walk around the park with a tiger on a lead, so why that?
Click to expand...
The problem is where do you draw the line? For example labradores kill more people than dobermans. I suspect its because they're are many more of them, but I don't know.

How many attacks are too many.

It may be more beneficial to license owners in some way. I suspect that the main issue is the owner rather than the dog. Prey instinct is stronger in some domestic dogs than others but that strong instinct is in terriers and retrievers, for example.
 
Woman charged. If guilty I hope she gets a very hefty jail term.
How often do you see a match up between the aggressive breeds and wannabe owners.
Full on tossers.
 
Laughing said:
The problem is where do you draw the line? For example labradores kill more people than dobermans. I suspect its because they're are many more of them, but I don't know.

How many attacks are too many.

It may be more beneficial to license owners in some way. I suspect that the main issue is the owner rather than the dog. Prey instinct is stronger in some domestic dogs than others but that strong instinct is in terriers and retrievers, for example.
Click to expand...
No easy solution. I think more breeds should be banned unless under some kind of licence like you say though.

Why a family with kids would choose to take in a dog like that one in this incident is madness though. The seller had even said it was a handful.
 
Alzi said:
No easy solution. I think more breeds should be banned unless under some kind of licence like you say though.

Why a family with kids would choose to take in a dog like that one in this incident is madness though. The seller had even said it was a handful.
Click to expand...
Is an odd one. My parents breed German Shepheards through the 70's and 80's at a time when they were the go to gangster dog. Ours were all soft family pets.

License the owners with stringent weights and measures, for example, certain criminal records should have people banned from owning any dog, you would end up with more responsible owners.

I dunno its a difficult one.
 
Fascinatino thread.
There is an extended discussion to be had on dog/pet ownership in general.

When you think about it we ‘own’ them because we can. We have the power.

Now, I know they bring lots of joy to lots of people but it is a bit of a moral dilemma.
As an example, I’ve witnessed (when I lived abroad) people having Lions and Tigers as pets - because they can.
Most of us would think that is abhorrent.
But, where do we draw the line?

Just a thought.
 
Last edited:
Glover_elbow said:
I am wary of anyone who feels the need to have a muscle dog, its a sure sign to steer clear. What's worse is some owners encourage their dogs aggression. You have to question the motives and mindset of people to get such dogs particularly in a family environment.

Just to balance the negative posts on dogs, we have a golden retriever who is an incredible friend and positive influence on my youngest daughter who is autistic. She's a wonderful dog, with an incredible sense of how my daughter is feeling, and source of comfort for her when she feels overwhelmed. There's more and more research to suggest dogs are great help with peoples mental health.
dogs-have-a-magic-effect-the-power-of-pets-on-our-mental-health
Click to expand...
I came across this last night on YouTube and your post reminded me of it.

The right dog are great for kids, they can be good company for them and also teach them life's responsibilities.
 
Dogs are man's oldest companion, we "domesticated" dogs before any other creature and this is because there is a certain symbiosis between humans and dogs (living in families/packs, omnivores, etc. lots of similarities and links). The problem with trying to identify problem "breeds" is that a "breed" is an artificial construct with no meaning. Trying identify a Pitbull (for example) by DNA is unlikely to work. You have to remember that we have had domesticated dogs for 15,000 years we have tried to define "breeds" for something like 200. The fact that a Chihuahua can cross with greyhound (difficult, I assume some sort of ramp is required) tells you that there is little difference between "breeds" in genomic terms.

In my experience there is no such thing as a "problem breed", there are only "problem owners". A guy near me has a Rottweiler it is the softest dog in the street and I would say that everyone loves it, paradoxically another guy has a black lab and it is horrible it has to be kept away from other dogs, people cross the street to be away from it. He has never trained it properly and I suspect (I believe it was a rescue) it may have not been properly socialised when it was a pup.

I don't know what the answer is but dogs add tremendously to us as humans, they work for us, they keep us safe, they guide our blind and help other disabled people, as therapy dogs they help many troubled youngsters and those with Autism, the list goes on and on; but not least they help many people with their mental health and well being.
 
You are right of course Muttley but certain dogs have been bred for fighting - American pit bulls etc and they do seem to attract people who shouldn’t be allowed to own a goldfish
 
magic said:
they do seem to attract people who shouldn’t be allowed to own a goldfish
Click to expand...
Agreed.

The thing about the breeding is that they often cross with other breeds to make them bigger or stronger and the dog is basically a mongrel so no chance of DNA being a useful tool. And I do know of stories of Pitbulls being adopted in the US and being perfectly good companions and pets, living with kids, cats, etc. no bother, The problem is always at the other end of the lead.

I hope that whoever was responsible for that dog goes to jail for a very long time but it sounds like the dog has a very blurred ownership history. The rats are disappearing quickly.
 
Muttley said:
In my experience there is no such thing as a "problem breed", there are only "problem owners".
Click to expand...
Nonsense. And the reason why some breeds are banned. And rightly so.
Undoubtedly owners have the most influence on a dog's behaviour but some breeds are far more dangerous than others.
 
I went digging around the internet earlier and couldn't find any cases of cats killing kids.

Therefore I've come to the conclusion that's cats are fine and dogs are bad. Unless you own a poodle or one of those little rat dogs that tiktok influencers keep in their handbags.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top