Dog hit by car in finglas Saturday 20/01/18

d7guy

I hope the girl whose dog was knocked down on the finglas side of the new railway bridge in finglas got home all right and is OK. I did nt get her name as she was very upset. In fairness the driver involved in the accident stopped and came back to offer his assistance

Fighting Tao

I’m trying to find a point to this post. Maybe you should knock on doors in Finglas to find her and ask.

me_irl

Facebook is two tabs over.

Son0vagun

I’ve Puppies for sale!

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Dead badger spotted on the N52.

anewme

me_irl wrote: »

Facebook is two tabs over.

The Poster is only trying to help a distressed pet and it’s owner.

Shove your sneering condescending attitudes up your high holes.

me_irl

Dayana Juicy Battalion wrote: »

Dead badger spotted on the N52.

Dinner sorted! Thanks a mil.

Fighting Tao

anewme wrote: »

The Poster is only trying to help a distressed pet and it’s owner.

Shove your sneering condescending attitudes up your high holes.

How is posting here helping?

Collie D

Dayana Juicy Battalion wrote: »

Dead badger spotted on the N52.

Another gangland hit? Where do the newspapers get these silly names from?

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

anewme wrote: »

The Poster is only trying to help a distressed pet and it’s owner.

Shove your sneering condescending attitudes up your high holes.

Really? How???

Dakota Dan

d7guy wrote: »

I hope the girl whose dog was knocked down on the finglas side of the new railway bridge in finglas got home all right and is OK. I did nt get her name as she was very upset. In fairness the driver involved in the accident stopped and came back to offer his assistance

She was lucky that he wasn't claiming for damage to his car.

uck51js9zml2yt

I knocked down a dog in Finglas about a year ago.
Slipped it's lead and ran under my wheel. The owner was lucky it didn't cause my car any damage.

The alternate version....I stopped and the owner has the dog on the grass verge where it died. Nothing I could do except commiserate with the owner , Had kids in the car so I had to keep going.

My Son asked if they'd put it in a box and bring it to the church like happened his granny a week previous.

KERSPLAT!

anewme wrote: »

The Poster is only trying to help a distressed pet and it’s owner.

Shove your sneering condescending attitudes up your high holes.

My hole is neither high nor low, just middling.

koumi

Might get better response in Finglas forum op, I think it's a sub of Dublin. Sorry to hear all the same and hope she is alright.

Collie D

Dakota Dan wrote: »

She was lucky that he wasn't claiming for damage to his car.

Jesus, if some heartless bastard ran my dog over and then said he was suing me I don't know what my response would be but doubtful it would be pleasant.

Fighting Tao

Collie D wrote: »

Jesus, if some heartless bastard ran my dog over and then said he was suing me I don't know what my response would be but doubtful it would be pleasant.

It wouldn’t matter as it would be your fault.

amcalester

Collie D wrote: »

Jesus, if some heartless bastard ran my dog over and then said he was suing me I don't know what my response would be but doubtful it would be pleasant.

What should the motorist be out of pocket cause you can’t control your dog?

Collie D

Fighting Tao wrote: »

It wouldn’t matter as it would be your fault.

And in a hypothetical situation how have you come to that conclusion?

I've had one near miss with a ****ing clown while walking my leashed dog across a pedestrian crossing on a green man. Some plank not paying attention comes around corner and almost hits her. How, in this situation would that have been my fault if his brakes weren't as good and I hadn't nearly strangled the poor dog with the yank on the lead I gave her?

Fighting Tao

Collie D wrote: »

And in a hypothetical situation how have you come to that conclusion?

I've had one near miss with a ****ing clown while walking my leashed dog across a pedestrian crossing on a green man. Some plank not paying attention comes around corner and almost hits her. How, in this situation would that have been my fault if his brakes weren't as good and I hadn't nearly strangled the poor dog with the yank on the lead I gave her?

Quite obviously In the situation that you were weren’t controlling your dog.

Collie D

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Quite obviously In the situation that you were weren’t controlling your dog.

The dog that was on a lead with us crossing at a green man? Give over!

Fighting Tao

Collie D wrote: »

The dog that was on a lead with us crossing at a green man? Give over!

You asked what hypothetical situation and I gave you one.

Dakota Dan

Collie D wrote: »

Jesus, if some heartless bastard ran my dog over and then said he was suing me I don't know what my response would be but doubtful it would be pleasant.

You do know it's the law?

Noveight

Car hit by dog.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Collie D wrote: »

The dog that was on a lead with us crossing at a green man? Give over!

And that's how it is for 93% of all dogs killed on the road. :rolleyes:

Collie D

Fighting Tao wrote: »

You asked what hypothetical situation and I gave you one.

I was referring to the hypothetical I gave where I said I'd be pissed off at someone hitting my dog and looking for damages. You assumed it would be my fault.

I then gave an actual example.

Fighting Tao

Collie D wrote: »

I was referring to the hypothetical I gave where I said I'd be pissed off at someone hitting my dog and looking for damages. You assumed it would be my fault.

I then gave an actual example.

All these hypotheticals are confusing you. Try re-reading the thread to help you keep up.

Collie D

Dayana Juicy Battalion wrote: »

And that's how it is for 93% of all dogs killed on the road. :rolleyes:

Believe what you like. Or do you think everyone in a car stops at red lights?

Dakota Dan

Dayana Juicy Battalion wrote: »

And that's how it is for 93% of all dogs killed on the road. :rolleyes:

He seems to be making it up as he goes along to suit his argument.

Collie D

Dakota Dan wrote: »

He seems to be making it up as he goes along to suit his argument.

Why would I make a story up about someone ignoring a red light? I probably see it at least once a week at the same junction.

amcalester

Collie D wrote: »

Believe what you like. Or do you think everyone in a car stops at red lights?

We believe that in your particular example the motorist was fault.

But in cases where the motorist is not at fault and the dog is not under control of its owner, the owner is liable for any damage to the vehicle.

These type of collisions will account for the vast majority of motor v dog collisions.

Collie D

Fighting Tao wrote: »

All these hypotheticals are confusing you. Try re-reading the thread to help you keep up.

Oh, condescension. You quoted my posts so I presumed you read them.

anewme

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

My hole is neither high nor low, just middling.

Because as a moderator, it’s obviously mandatory to sneer at someones expression of concern,.

Agree to post to Finglas forum OP ....people might have a bit more savvy there..sorry you had to witness a dog being run down, not sure about the mentality of anyone mocking a dog being run down, I hope they are ok too.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Collie D wrote: »

Believe what you like. Or do you think everyone in a car stops at red lights?

You have your own wee story made up for this incident. Let's be straight and honest for a moment. Much as I love dogs, most dogs are hit by cars because the dogs wandered onto the road. Very few have been hit while on a lead. I'm sure it has happened somewhere at some time but it's a rarity.

Collie D

Dayana Juicy Battalion wrote: »

You have your own wee story made up for this incident. Let's be straight and honest for a moment. Much as I love dogs, most dogs are hit by cars because the dogs wandered onto the road. Very few have been hit while on a lead. I'm sure it has happened somewhere at some time but it's a rarity.

As I said believe what you like. I've no doubt that most dogs hit by cars are unleashed.

Mine was, I'd never walk a dog by a road without one. Plenty of dickheads on the roads trying to save a few seconds by breaking lights, not sure what's so unbelievable about it in this case.

Fighting Tao

Collie D wrote: »

Oh, condescension. You quoted my posts so I presumed you read them.

I did. But you asked the question about what hypothetical situation I was thinking of before you gave me a hypothetical situation. Why didn’t you ask the question after and directly in relation to your hypothetical situation? Most logical thinking people would take the question and your story to be separate.

amcalester

Collie D wrote: »

As I said believe what you like. I've no doubt that most dogs hit by cars are unleashed.

Mine was, I'd never walk a dog by a road without one. Plenty of dickheads on the roads trying to save a few seconds by breaking lights, not sure what's so unbelievable about it in this case.

But your dog wasn’t hit so it’s a poor example of owners not being liable for damages.

ct5amr2ig1nfhp

Most drivers who hit dogs are heartless bastards. Did you not know that? It's on page 47 of the rules of the road. :rolleyes:

Or perhaps the majority of incidents are accidents and most drivers feel terrible for hitting any animal with their car.

Collie D wrote: »

Jesus, if some heartless bastard ran my dog over and then said he was suing me I don't know what my response would be but doubtful it would be pleasant.

Collie D

Fighting Tao wrote: »

I did. But you asked the question about what hypothetical situation I was thinking of before you gave me a hypothetical situation. Why didn’t you ask the question after and directly in relation to your hypothetical situation? Most logical thinking people would take the question and your story to be separate.

But the hypothetical was in my first post.

Ah, never mind.

amcalester

Collie D wrote: »

But the hypothetical was in my first post.

Ah, never mind.

It’s nit hypothetical if it actually happened.

Collie D

amcalester wrote: »

It’s nit hypothetical if it actually happened.

My first post was a hypothetical where I said "if my dog was hit" and then I gave an actual example in the second of where she almost was.

Fighting Tao

Collie D wrote: »

But the hypothetical was in my first post.

Ah, never mind.

You mean hypothetically your first post?
It was actually your 3rd post that you mentioned hypothetical but sure never mind.

I've knocked down a couple of dogs. Felt sorry for the dogs, little sympathy for the owners who left the dogs wander about...

ct5amr2ig1nfhp

I'm quoting myself here but wonder what your thoughts are on this hypothetical situation Collie D...

Taxi hits a dog (not on a lead). Taxi feels terrible. Owner obviously distraught. Taximan sends his car for repair. It's a costly repair. Unable to work for a week or two. Only the one income in the house. Two kids etc. Should the owner of the dog compensate the taximan?

Raegan Dry Ketchup wrote: »

Most drivers who hit dogs are heartless bastards. Did you not know that? It's on page 47 of the rules of the road. :rolleyes:

Or perhaps the majority of incidents are accidents and most drivers feel terrible for hitting any animal with their car.

Collie D

Fighting Tao wrote: »

You mean hypothetically your first post?
It was actually your 3rd post that you mentioned hypothetical but sure never mind.

The hypothetical was the first and then I pointed out to you in the second (or third as you say, I'm not going to split hairs with you on that) that it was a hypothetical.

Generally if a post starts with "IF..." it's a hypothetical without the need for that to be stated.

But yes, never mind...all this hypothetical makes me feel like I'm back in Junior Cert Maths.

And it must be boring to read so feel free to PM.

Fighting Tao

Collie D wrote: »

The hypothetical was the first and then I pointed out to you in the second (or third as you say, I'm not going to split hairs with you on that) that it was a hypothetical.

Generally if a post starts with "IF..." it's a hypothetical without the need for that to be stated.

But yes, never mind...all this hypothetical makes me feel like I'm back in Junior Cert Maths.

And it must be boring to read so feel free to PM.

You have a strange way of trying to pick up guys and I’ll kindly decline your offer.

KERSPLAT!

anewme wrote: »

Because as a moderator, it’s obviously mandatory to sneer at someones expression of concern,.

Agree to post to Finglas forum OP ....people might have a bit more savvy there..sorry you had to witness a dog being run down, not sure about the mentality of anyone mocking a dog being run down, I hope they are ok too.

Not mandatory, I do it of my own accord.

Collie D

Raegan Dry Ketchup wrote: »

I'm quoting myself here but wonder what your thoughts are on this hypothetical situation Collie D...

Taxi hits a dog (not on a lead). Taxi feels terrible. Owner obviously distraught. Taximan sends his car for repair. It's a costly repair. Unable to work for a week or two. Only the one income in the house. Two kids. Should the owner of the dog compensate the taximan?

Don't really know, don't really care. In my case my dog is always leashed. I wouldn't be in that scenario.

I missed your first post btw. Just to clarify I didn't mean anyone who hits a dog is a heartless bastard but I'd find an instant demand for compensation a bit harsh. I had an idea someone would pick up on that as I hit "post" but didn't bother amending.

Collie D

Fighting Tao wrote: »

You have a strange way of trying to pick up guys and I’ll kindly decline your offer.

Well I was going to say "you're like a dog with a bone" but thought better of it

Fighting Tao

Collie D wrote: »

Well I was going to say "you're like a dog with a bone" but thought better of it

You’re the one holding on (to hope that I say yes) not me!

uck51js9zml2yt

Collie D wrote: »

Don't really know, don't really care. In my case my dog is always leashed. I wouldn't be in that scenario.

I missed your first post btw. Just to clarify I didn't mean anyone who hits a dog is a heartless bastard but I'd find an instant demand for compensation a bit harsh. I had an idea someone would pick up on that as I hit "post" but didn't bother amending.

So would the taxi driver Project Moose referred to also be a bit harsh in demanding someone pay him to repair his car and put food on the table for his family while he can't work due to someone not being in control of their animal?

Collie D

Xavier Kind Snowball wrote: »

So would the taxi driver Project Moose referred to also be a bit harsh in demanding someone pay him to repair his car and put food on the table for his family while he can't work due to someone not being in control of their animal?

As I said I don't know. I've only been posting from my own perspective. What does the law say?