Yet another child savaged by dog

sharonlarkin

Hi, i just have to say I definitely agree with Peasant. I have kids, cats and a dog. And even the most docile dog would soon get fed up with a child tormenting it. Even though I trust my dog, she is never alone with the kids. Cause I know my 3 year old son would be trying to sit on her back, and pulling at her ears. Its just kids curiousity. So she just goes where I go. And just to say how soft my dog is, she gets bullied by the cat!!!.

mountainyman

There are always dog attacks.
In every generation there are dog breeds which people buy to feel tough.
At the moment most obviously it is the Pit Bull. It is also the Rotteweiler, the Ridgeback, the Dobermann and to a lesser extent the German Shepherd.

The owners will try to make their dog act tough, they will turn it into a vicious dog. Frankly any breed can be vicious but certain breeds can do real damage. All the above breeds (except the GSD) should be banned and that means the dogs should be detroyed. Ownership of a GSD should be contingent on attending a certain amount of training.

It is true that it isn't the dog it is the owner but only a55h0les buy pit bulls and to a (much) lesser extend this is true of Rottweilers and Dobermanns. I accept that old people cna be nervous etc. and want a dog to protect the home but a GSD can do this and is also a highly trainable animal.

MM

Ruu_Old

Dobermans are very easy to train, but has to be at a young age like most dogs but as mentioned if they are known to be an aggressive dog then precautions should be taken. The bulldog would be a favourite in England and has been for many years because of its status and mentality, used in logos and such.

6th

My brother got the Rotties not because they look tough but I think he might feel they are misunderstood. His are lovely, gentle dogs but its what they are capable of due to their size and strenght I worry about. He has had them trained and is very responsible - the ideal big dog owner in my opinion and I'm sure if kids came along he'd find a new home for them (dogs not kids).

fits

6th wrote:

I'm sure if kids came along he'd find a new home for them (dogs not kids).

I really dont agree with this. People seem to think that dogs are disposable once they decide to have kids. Its not right... Why did they bother getting a dog in the first place. If I were to have kids I certainly wouldnt get rid of the dogs, but I certainly wouldnt let the children pull, hang out of and play barbie with the dogs either.

'Ideal big dog owner' my bum! (If that is what he would do...)

coffee_cake

6th wrote:

the ideal big dog owner in my opinion and I'm sure if kids came along he'd find a new home for them (dogs not kids).

How kind of him. Well, our dogs are part of our family. PUtting them somewhere else would be like putting kids somewhere else =/

Pyr0

Yeah I don't see how giving full grown Rottweilers to strangers is a very good idea. Also, I doubt he'd be able to give them up that easily I take it he's had them since they were pups ? I'd never be able to do that, even with the dog I have now which I've only had for about half a year, it would kill me.

sharonlarkin

People cant keep their eyes on kids 24 hours a day. Its impossible, I should know. Thats why if I have my dog in the house, she comes where I go. And I certainly never sit and watch my kids pull out of the dog, anyone who does that is just irresponsible. And I know a few of those aswell. My kids know better than to do anything to the dog, but they still give it a try. Its stopped immediately. I don't agree with people letting kids jump around any animal. Parents have to be responsible for both kids and animals.

I've been in other peoples houses where their son was jumping on the dogs back. It was a german shephard. I said it to the mum that the child shouldn't be doing that. Her reply was "its just a dog, he probably doesn't even feel it". I hate that kind of attitude towards animals.

Rb

Personally I've only ever witnessed complete knackers walking around with pitbulls/dobermans/rottweilers, completes their "hard man" look I suppose but I've always wondered how well these dogs are being trained. I'd say 99% of them aren't well trained, these are dogs that really need some investment of both time and money into their training, something which I can't see the majority of their owners doing. So I'm not surprised that there has been attacks, these are tempermental dogs and if they are indeed badly trained then its no shock that they turn on the person/object that is causing their frustration.

Sick to see dogs being terminated because of their owners lack of responsibility though. However, leaving a child around such a dog unsupervised is absolutely retarded, and both the childs parents and the dog owners should face punishment for putting the child in such a position.
I wouldn't leave any child around any dog. Dogs, like us, get pissed off and children have a known tendancy to pull tails/hair so leaving a child by itself is never a good idea.

Belle_Morte

bluewolf wrote:

How kind of him. Well, our dogs are part of our family. PUtting them somewhere else would be like putting kids somewhere else =/

Same here.

Surely random dog attacks occur, well, randomly; but has anyone else noticed that the media seems to pick up on the idea periodically and you see dog attack stories everywhere? Then they move onto another topic and you hear no more about it.

peasant

PyrO wrote:

I was scared to death when my cocker spaniel started barking and going for a Rottweiler when I was walking him, fortunatly for the dog and me he trotted on beside his owner (who was a few feet away) I don't even think it had a leash, definatly didn't have a muzzle.

ahemmm:D

So you're complaining that a perfectly behaved dog didn't have a muzzle (a lead would have been desirable, though) but yet you're own little mutt went for the other dog ??

Had anything nasty resulted out out of this, I presume in your opinion the Rottweiler would have had to shoulder the blame?

Hmmm ... so it's ok to have a yappy, snappy dog as long as it's called "Cocker Spaniel" but when it comes under the name tag "Rottweiler" it needs to be muzzled, no matter how well it's behaved?

Strange double standards, methinks


And yes, I am aware that the Rottweiler by law should have been muzzled.
But just because something is law it doesn't always make complete sense, does it ...

Pyr0

peasant wrote:

ahemmm:D

So you're complaining that a perfectly behaved dog didn't have a muzzle (a lead would have been desirable, though) but yet you're own little mutt went for the other dog ??

Had anything nasty resulted out out of this, I presume in your opinion the Rottweiler would have had to shoulder the blame?

Hmmm ... so it's ok to have a yappy, snappy dog as long as it's called "Cocker Spaniel" but when it comes under the name tag "Rottweiler" it needs to be muzzled, no matter how well it's behaved?

Strange double standards, methinks


And yes, I am aware that the Rottweiler by law should have been muzzled.
But just because something is law it doesn't always make complete sense, does it ...

Hmmm I've noticed I didn't make it very clear when I said "went for". You know when a dog passes another dog and they try pull you over to them ? Well thats what happend, my dog is very active outside anyway and gets excited when another dog comes by, which leads to him barking.

peasant

Pyr0 wrote:

Hmmm I've noticed I didn't make it very clear when I said "went for". You know when a dog passes another dog and they try pull you over to them ? Well thats what happend, my dog is very active outside anyway and gets excited when another dog comes by, which leads to him barking.

I know perfectly well what you mean ...but still, in a case like that your dog would be the misbehaver ...yet the Rottweiler has to wear a muzzle by law, just because it's a Rottweiler. Not really fair, is it?


As an aside:
You might want to work on that excited barking thingy. Not all dogs react as calmly as that particularly cool Rottweiler when they're being "shouted at" by another dog. You might find yourself with a punctured cocker sooner or later.

iguana

fits wrote:

Also when will people ever learn to keep their dogs on the lead or under control or locked in at all times??

To be fair dogs absolutely need to have time out and off their leads. Unless you have a football pitch of a garden dogs do need some time to run free. Obviously they need to be well trained before doing this, but if they don't get a regular chance to burn off steam your only storing up trouble and making them unhappy.

nando

I'm not sure where I stand on this - I don't think it is actually that easy to define which breeds "deserve" an automatic ban. Far too many grey areas...

What I do know is that while working as a vet 5 of my 7 dog bites have been from Westies. The other 2 were from a Yorkie and a Cocker Spaniel. I will add that I have met in total 4 well behaved Westies that did not try to take my hand off - and considering they are consistently in the top 3 most popular breeds in Ireland that is a very small number for the amount I met day in day out!

Again I never came across a poorly behaved Rottie or Dobie - I know they exist but I never had to deal with them (thank god!). And whoever said Rotties tend to belong to complete knackers - I find they're very popular with the wealthy who have a bit of land and nice jeep.... usually as a companion to a Lab and a Bernese Mountain Dog for some reason

mountainyman

peasant wrote:

I know perfectly well what you mean ...but still, in a case like that your dog would be the misbehaver ...yet the Rottweiler has to wear a muzzle by law, just because it's a Rottweiler. Not really fair, is it?

It is fair, the Rottweiler can do alot more damage. The Rottweiler is a dangerous dog required by law to be muzzled in public. Frankly they should all be destroyed.
If an unmuzzled Rottweiler bit my dog I would make certain that it was destroyed.

MM

Fratton Fred

I'm surprised no ne has mentioned breeding. There is so much interbreeding going on with pedigrees, they end up head cases and this can lead to them being nasty savage dogs.

The Rottie gets a lot of bad press. It is no more agressive than any other breed, but it is a huge dog and if it is mistreated, badly bred etc it can endup nasty. A lot of aggressive Rotties are owned by people who need to compensate for something (The same reason blokes drive big cars;) ) raised properly they are great dogs, but I would never leave one alone with a young child.

mountainyman

Fratton Fred wrote:

The Rottie gets a lot of bad press. It is no more agressive than any other breed, but it is a huge dog and if it is mistreated, badly bred etc it can endup nasty. A lot of aggressive Rotties are owned by people who need to compensate for something ...

There is no reason to own a huge potentially dangerous dog. At the very least a special license should be required. Also Rottweilers are more aggressive than some other breeds. They are more aggressive than Old English Sheepdogs, Labradors and Bearded Collies for example; they are no more aggressive than a terrier but a terrier can't do the same damage.

MM

WizZard

mountainyman wrote:

There is no reason to own a huge potentially dangerous dog.

Every dog is potentially dangerous. :rolleyes:

mountainyman wrote:

they are no more aggressive than a terrier but a terrier can't do the same damage.

I think to a young child a terrier can do just as much damage as a rottweiler

peasant

mountainyman wrote:

There is no reason to own a huge potentially dangerous dog. At the very least a special license should be required. Also Rottweilers are more aggressive than some other breeds. They are more aggressive than Old English Sheepdogs, Labradors and Bearded Collies for example; they are no more aggressive than a terrier but a terrier can't do the same damage.

MM

Sorry mountainyman ...but that's rubbish.

Out of your sample group there, especially the Old English Sheepdog has massive aggression issues. (I know that, because I own an OES mix and have had quite some insights into OES circles)

OES for the last few years have been bred with massive focus on their appearance. They now have twice as much fur than they had 10-20 years ago. Their coat also is longer and fluffier than ever. One side effect of this is that, other than pure show dogs, you hardly see unshorn OES any more. Their coat has become unmanageable for the average owner.

But much more frighteningly, because of focussing on appearance only, OES breeders have left all health and character screening by the wayside, with the end result that the OES now is one of the most stubborn, unpredictable and potentially aggressive breeds out there.
They also have grown in size. Male dogs now come in at a shade unter 70 cms at the withers and weights of 40+ kgs.

Yet the "Dulux Dog" continues to have a reputation as a placid, friendly clown and the ideal minder of children.

Nothing could be further form the truth.

This is just one example of how breeders can spoil a whole breed.

But generally speaking, classification (and in some cases sweeping condemnation) of dogs' behaviour and character by breed does not work.

Dogs are individuals and circumstances are individual ...and so are their owners.

The only way to assess a dog is to look at each single one, the conditions it is kept in and the way its owner trains and handles it.

The really unfortunate thing about this all is the fact that undesireable and incapable dog owners seem to focus in on certain breeds, thus tarnishing their names.

But this is not the dogs' fault.

oRlyYaRly

I feel sorry for the dog and the girl, and hope the dog's owner is f*cking ashamed of his/herself. :mad:

fits

iguana wrote:

To be fair dogs absolutely need to have time out and off their leads. Unless you have a football pitch of a garden dogs do need some time to run free. Obviously they need to be well trained before doing this, but if they don't get a regular chance to burn off steam your only storing up trouble and making them unhappy.

I think you missed my point slightly, I agree with what you are saying. I own lurchers and exercise them off lead all the time, which some people seem to think is irresponsible. I was talking about people keeping their dogs loose in the garden free to run out on the road and accost pedestrians, other pets, cyclists etc... or run off whenever they're feeling like a little loving. Whenever I have my dogs off lead I always call them back to me when I see other dogs or kids around.
I dont think theres anything inherently wrong with rottweilers or dobermanns, but there is a certain responsibility by owners to train any breed of dog. I wouldnt particularly like to see these breeds controlled any more than they are at present but mandatory puppy training courses could be a good idea.

dawballz

mountainyman wrote:

There are always dog attacks.
In every generation there are dog breeds which people buy to feel tough.
At the moment most obviously it is the Pit Bull. It is also the Rotteweiler, the Ridgeback, the Dobermann and to a lesser extent the German Shepherd.

The owners will try to make their dog act tough, they will turn it into a vicious dog. Frankly any breed can be vicious but certain breeds can do real damage. All the above breeds (except the GSD) should be banned and that means the dogs should be detroyed. Ownership of a GSD should be contingent on attending a certain amount of training.

It is true that it isn't the dog it is the owner but only a55h0les buy pit bulls and to a (much) lesser extend this is true of Rottweilers and Dobermanns. I accept that old people cna be nervous etc. and want a dog to protect the home but a GSD can do this and is also a highly trainable animal.

MM

You're full of sh1t.

meepins

peasant wrote:

Sorry mountainyman ...but that's rubbish.

Out of your sample group there, especially the Old English Sheepdog has massive aggression issues. (I know that, because I own an OES mix and have had quite some insights into OES circles)

This is just one example of how breeders can spoil a whole breed.

But generally speaking, classification (and in some cases sweeping condemnation) of dogs' behaviour and character by breed does not work.

Dogs are individuals and circumstances are individual ...and so are their owners.

The only way to assess a dog is to look at each single one, the conditions it is kept in and the way its owner trains and handles it.

The really unfortunate thing about this all is the fact that undesireable and incapable dog owners seem to focus in on certain breeds, thus tarnishing their names.

But this is not the dogs' fault.

Exactly what I was going to say.
I own German Shepard, two years old . He's a gentle giant , extremely playful and loving.Absolutely loves to play. My previous G Shepard was pretty much the same.When I'm out with him he likes to interact and play with other dogs although because he is so big the smaller dogs tend to get aggressive and snap at him.He pretty much ignores it, the only times he becomes defensive is if it's a GS as big as himself being aggressive/defensive.
The nature of a dog is very specific so generalising and saying such and such needs to be banned and so and so is more dangerous, very ill informed opinions and lacking understanding of dog behaviour and nature.
It's this lack of understanding among dog owners who leave children unsupervised with dogs that causes these incidents.
The aggressive tendancies of these big dogs have for the most part should have been bred out except for certain people specifically breeding dangerous dogs and training them to be vicious. I'd be all for rooting out these dogs but getting rid of every single one regardless is just absurd.
A case by case basis really is the way to solve the problem.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_attack