Dog who mauled 4 year old has online support

  • #41
BBM for emphasis. I completely agree-- the dog was acting on a level of pure instinct. That is, IMO, why this particular dog cannot be trusted to ever be around humans again-- particularly children.

The dog may, in fact, have been mistreated or abused. The owner may be responsible for that, and should be held accountable. The babysitter may also have been neglectful in watching the little boy. But neither of those things, IMO, mean that the dog should be returned to the owner as a pet, and not euthanized.

If the dog was mistreated to the point that he is behaving as a "wild" or feral dog, it's not a realistic goal (IMO) to try to rehabilitate it. It is a dangerous animal, not a person. It could easily attack again, and not even understand that it was doing something "wrong".

I understand that this is very sad for some dog lovers-- I'm not heartless. But the lives of children and other people simply can't be put at risk. A dog isn't the same as a person, no matter how much someone loves dogs. If this person lived in my neighborhood, I would be outraged to discover that a dog with this history was returned to the owner.

But in the case of, for example, the healthy giraffe in Copenhagen that was euthanized as a public spectacle-- that was inexcusable, IMO. The giraffe never attacked anyone, and was created as a result, IMO, of an irresponsible zoo breeding program. We should all be outraged over that.

I wanted to add that I lived in Germany for a while. Dogs are welcome almost everywhere there, in stores, and even restaurants. It was very disconcerting to me to see big dogs in restaurants at first-- even hotel buffet restaurants. The dogs are incredibly obedient-- and immediately lay down under the table next to their owners. In fact, there is such a preference for "fizzy water" that if you ask a waiter for "still water" to drink, they often look beneath the table to see if there is a dog there! Anyway, several of my German friends told me that the reason dogs are so welcome is that the police have the authority to remove or even kill a dog who misbehaves in public, or attacks someone. No debate-- no trials or complaints. So that's why the dogs are so well-behaved. The owners won't risk taking them out if the dogs aren't 100% reliable. There may be some Germans on the board here who could add more or clarify. I just wanted to contrast our American views, with those of another culture who also love dogs.
I feel the same way. I had originally hoped the malamutes in my case would be spared ( I am dog lover), but not given back to the owner, but then I realized that wasn't possible. I now fear for my own life and my dog's life should I ever walk her alone. They have no way of ensuring this woman will keep her dogs locked up/muzzled and she's already proven how irresponsible she is!!!
P.S. I am outraged about the healthy giraffe that was put down. He caused no harm, yet these vicious dogs are allowed to survive!!!
 
  • #42
I mostly agree with you. However, there are some animals (just like there are some people) who cannot be rehabilitated. It isn't all "nurture"; some of it is genetic.
Agreed SayD. That's what I came to realize about the malamutes that attacked my dog.
 
  • #43
I do not believe a dog ever develops a taste for humans.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ummm, the malamutes that attacked my dog, attacked a human 10 days later- both attacks were unprovoked, so obviously they did develop a taste for blood!
 
  • #44
A dog is as smart or as stupid as it's owner. A lot of people who own pit bulls keep them tied to a tree 24/7 and they never receive human contact. They don't have any direction, and then people are shocked when they get bite. My dog just got accused of biting the mail lady when we told her he doesn't bite, she changed her story and said he jumped on her, hugh difference. He is part lab/pit mix.
 
  • #45
It would be interesting to know from a legal point of view who is "100%" at fault here. For example, in my state, if I have a swimming pool which is not fenced and someone's child enters my yard, falls in the pool, and drowns, I cannot claim that the fault lies with the child's guardian/caregiver for not properly supervising him (even though that is certainly the case). I would be liable for not making my "attractive nuisance" inaccessible (i.e. with a fence and locked gate).

In this instance, the child apparently trespassed onto the dog owner's property and attempted to take an object belonging to the dog away. If it turns out this owner's property was not fenced and access to a known aggressive dog was not prevented, is all that a moot point in that city because the caregiver did not properly supervise the child? I'm curious about this in my own city, so I need to try to find out.
 
  • #46
I am an animal lover no doubt but this dog needs to be put down IMO.
 
  • #47
Ummm, the malamutes that attacked my dog, attacked a human 10 days later- both attacks were unprovoked, so obviously they did develop a taste for blood!


I don't think so. Its a myth.

I believe the dogs in your case were indeed vicious & they were owned by complete and total idiots. They shouldn't have been roaming or anywhere near your dog and if the owners were aware their dogs were roaming at large and had attacked your dog, steps should have been taken to insure those dogs were secured.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • #48
I feel the same way. I had originally hoped the malamutes in my case would be spared ( I am dog lover), but not given back to the owner, but then I realized that wasn't possible. I now fear for my own life and my dog's life should I ever walk her alone. They have no way of ensuring this woman will keep her dogs locked up/muzzled and she's already proven how irresponsible she is!!!
P.S. I am outrage about the healthy giraffe that was put down. He caused no harm, yet these vicious dogs are allowed to survive!!!


I'm ordering one of these... For when I walk or at dog park with my current dog. ( greyhound) he and I both need protection in the event something gets ugly. I'm pretty good and removing us from a situation that isn't safe.... But I'll feel much better with one of these. Only problem... They are illegal in NJ so I have to have it shipped to a friend out of state and suffer whatever consequences arise if god forbid I have to use it.

Walking Cane /Stun Gun (BLACK):Amazon:Health & Personal Care

Btw they come is pink zebra strips too!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • #49
It would be interesting to know from a legal point of view who is "100%" at fault here. For example, in my state, if I have a swimming pool which is not fenced and someone's child enters my yard, falls in the pool, and drowns, I cannot claim that the fault lies with the child's guardian/caregiver for not properly supervising him (even though that is certainly the case). I would be liable for not making my "attractive nuisance" inaccessible (i.e. with a fence and locked gate).

In this instance, the child apparently trespassed onto the dog owner's property and attempted to take an object belonging to the dog away. If it turns out this owner's property was not fenced and access to a known aggressive dog was not prevented, is all that a moot point in that city because the caregiver did not properly supervise the child? I'm curious about this in my own city, so I need to try to find out.


In NJ it would be on the homeowner whose property it happened on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • #50
I can't for the life of me figure out how a babysitter lets a four year old get that close to a chained dog. Number one, chaining a dog like that creates a problem already; add to that, the dog doesn't look too nourished from what I saw in it's picture. It's an unsocialized, hungry dog...and you let a four year old out and to get CLOSE TO THE DOG!!!

I don't know how I feel about the dog being euthanized. It's a shame but I wouldn't want to take the risk of allowing him around other people. He may be fine in a home without children and some dogs can be rehabilitated.

What I do know is that I would definitely place some type of charge on the babysitter. It was her responsibility to keep this little boy safe. This was preventable. She was either ignorant or not paying attention to the child. Possibly both.

I have a pit bull and a German Shepherd mix in my home. I haven't had children around either one but I think I would trust the pit around them than I would the Shepherd. It's all about how the dog has been socialized and treated, not their breed.

You are right. The dog reacted out of instinct and the kid wasn't supervised. Terrible combination but it is wrong to totally blame the dog. My city passed an ordinance last year that makes it illegal to chain a dog for more than 20 minutes because unsupervised children have a tendency to provoke chained dogs and it makes them more aggressive.
 
  • #51
I don't think so. Its a myth.

I believe the dogs in your case were indeed vicious & they were owned by complete and total idiots. They shouldn't have been roaming or anywhere near your dog and if the owners were aware their dogs were roaming at large and had attacked your dog, steps should have been taken to insure those dogs were secured.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
She claimed it was all her "gardener's fault"!!! I'll be taking her to small claims court to recover my vet costs. If I hadn't pulled the larger male off her neck, it would have been much worse. She was bitten in more than one place, but she could've been killed/they could've gone after me.
By- the-way, for those who defend the dog defending it's property- the pool lady attack did happen on the owner's property. Those dogs weren't chained. They can't use that defense in my case!
 
  • #52
IMO this is not a bad dog.
He was in his own yard, eating a bone. He did what lots of dogs would do. This dog had the strength and power that other breeds don't.

Where was the babysitter??? That's who is ultimately responsible. IMO

I have nothing against pit bulls, mastiffs and the like. I don't own one and never did because I have a child and I'm not confident I could physically control one if anything were to ever go wrong.

I did however always own well trained & obedient Dobermans. I could control them, physically.
Would I EVER trust a 4 year kid outside alone with a dog? NO! Regardless of breed.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ITA. The girlfriend of the dog's owner knew the dog was aggressive and had a duty to keep the child safe. She didn't do it and blames the dog rather than herself. I have to wonder why the owner wanted such an aggressive dog but it seems to be intentional. The dog should be evaluated by an expert to see if it can be socialized.
 
  • #53
It would be interesting to know from a legal point of view who is "100%" at fault here. For example, in my state, if I have a swimming pool which is not fenced and someone's child enters my yard, falls in the pool, and drowns, I cannot claim that the fault lies with the child's guardian/caregiver for not properly supervising him (even though that is certainly the case). I would be liable for not making my "attractive nuisance" inaccessible (i.e. with a fence and locked gate).

In this instance, the child apparently trespassed onto the dog owner's property and attempted to take an object belonging to the dog away. If it turns out this owner's property was not fenced and access to a known aggressive dog was not prevented, is all that a moot point in that city because the caregiver did not properly supervise the child? I'm curious about this in my own city, so I need to try to find out.

In this instance, the child was on the property with permission. In any state the property owner is liable for any accident that happens on your property whether it is fenced or not. That's why there is homeowner's insurance. Try getting homeowner's insurance if you do not have a fence around your pool.
Many homeowner's policies also address dogs.
 
  • #54
^^^^I've never examine my homeowner's insurance with respect to dogs. Do you know how this usually addressed by the insurance company?
 
  • #55
She claimed it was all her "gardener's fault"!!! I'll be taking her to small claims court to recover my vet costs. If I hadn't pulled the larger male off her neck, it would have been much worse. She was bitten in more than one place, but she could've been killed/they could've gone after me.
By- the-way, for those who defend the dog defending it's property- the pool lady attack did happen on the owner's property. Those dogs weren't chained. They can't use that defense in my case!

Many owners do have guard dogs. They are still liable for their dog's actions. There really is no defense just as there is no defense if your kid causes damage to someone else. The owner/parent is responsible.

JMO
 
  • #56
^^^^I've never examine my homeowner's insurance with respect to dogs. Do you know how this usually addressed by the insurance company?

It depends on the policy. Our homeowner's policy will pay if our dog injures someone on our property but not if she injures someone while off our property. Our neighbor's little boy rode his bike right at our old dog in our front yard and she nipped his knee. These things happen.

Our neighbor had a large weimaraner. She'd take him for long runs. He was a beautiful, dolcile pet who loved to play frisbie. One day he darted from her after another dog running loose and a car hit him and killed him. The owner of the car tried to collect from her homeowner's insurance and it was denied. So he sued her in small claims court and won his car repair bill. Why she went to court baffled us. There was no way for her to win.
 
  • #57
^^^^I've never examine my homeowner's insurance with respect to dogs. Do you know how this usually addressed by the insurance company?


In NJ there a more than a few that will not issue insurance if the homeowner owns specific breeds they've deemed dangerous.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • #58
She claimed it was all her "gardener's fault"!!! I'll be taking her to small claims court to recover my vet costs. If I hadn't pulled the larger male off her neck, it would have been much worse. She was bitten in more than one place, but she could've been killed/they could've gone after me.
By- the-way, for those who defend the dog defending it's property- the pool lady attack did happen on the owner's property. Those dogs weren't chained. They can't use that defense in my case!


She clearly has more money than brains. IMO
I hope you're dog recovered completely. So sad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • #59
^^^^I've never examine my homeowner's insurance with respect to dogs. Do you know how this usually addressed by the insurance company?
I've been told by someone else that the dog owner in my case will have her homeowner's insurance policy raised substantially. The city did declare the dogs vicious.
 
  • #60
It depends on the policy. Our homeowner's policy will pay if our dog injures someone on our property but not if she injures someone while off our property. Our neighbor's little boy rode his bike right at our old dog in our front yard and she nipped his knee. These things happen.

Our neighbor had a large weimaraner. She'd take him for long runs. He was a beautiful, dolcile pet who loved to play frisbie. One day he darted from her after another dog running loose and a car hit him and killed him. The owner of the car tried to collect from her homeowner's insurance and it was denied. So he sued her in small claims court and won his car repair bill. Why she went to court baffled us. There was no way for her to win.
Subpeona, that's why. We will have the owner in our case served by the sheriff, hopefully at her work, which is a local elementary school! Everyone there will know about it and talk about it, wish I could be there to see it happen!
 

Guardians Monthly Goal

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
45
Guests online
1,622
Total visitors
1,667

Forum statistics

Threads
635,380
Messages
18,674,718
Members
243,188
Latest member
MudkipLover
Back
Top