Boy (8) dies after dog attack

ShatterAlan

frillyleaf wrote: »

This idea of ‘breaking a dog’ does not sound good. A dog should be trained from an early age without being fearful of owner. It is good they trained their dog but hopefully they did it in a way that didn’t involve aversive methods

OH FFS you can't use any language without someone chiming in being all "offended". I never said they thrashed the dog until it was a shivering, cowering wreck. I said they broke him of his bad habits. It's just a turn of phrase. Horse trainers "break" unruly horses all the time. They don't beat them or abuse them.

borderlinemeath

ShatterAlan wrote: »

I was taking the piss about poodles and dobermans

It doesn't read that way. Neither do the rest of your posts. You have outdated and stereotyped ideas of how dogs should be.

Dogs shouldn't be fed meat or scraps and slops everyday. They need proper dog food that keeps them healthy and nourished and focused.

On what planet should dogs not be fed meat? Whilst not an obligate carnivore like cats, dogs most certainly need meat, and as much of it as possible. There's absolutely nothing wrong with feeding dogs human food, leftovers such as meat/veg/potatoes. To me, "scraps and slops" are perhaps vegetable peelings and inedible foodstuffs, which no carnivore should eat. If you ever looked into what went into commercially produced dry food, a lot of it would be considered "scraps and slops" A hell of a lot of owners refuse to feed commercially made dog food to their dogs. A lot the brands you can buy in a supermarket or pet shop/agri store claim that their foods have "complete nutrition" "scientifically tested" or "vital protection" "naturally hypoallergenic" "perfect balance" and "performance". They are just some of the phrases bandied about at will by pet food companies in a bid to get gullible owners to buy their foods. There's still no law against what they claim on the packaging and what is in the bag. A lot of brands are full of fillers, additives and colourants, causing more and more dogs to have digestive issues and allergic skin reactions.

Plenty of owners feed their dogs raw meat, vegetables and supplements rather than fill them full of double cooked wheat/maize with a tiny percentage of meat.
I would hazard a guess that you're the type of person that wouldn't feed raw meat to a dog because then they would have a "taste for blood":rolleyes:

suicide_circus

JC01 wrote: »

That’s exactly the kind of rubbish people who know nothing about dogs routinely spout. Have you any dogs yourself?

Poodles are airheads is almost as ridiculous a comment as Rottweilers and pit bulls are thugs.

why is there such a thing as "restricted breeds"?

Iscreamkone

ShatterAlan wrote: »

If that was the case then every parent would be inside doing a stretch for criminal negligence.

Every person who causes the death of another person through negligence should be prosecuted for manslaughter. These parents should see hard time 100%.

Deebles McBeebles

suicide_circus wrote: »

why is there such a thing as "restricted breeds"?

Mainly because of the kind of person who buys a rottie in a pub car park and leaves it in the backyard, expects it to be a plaything for the kids and then beats it when it doesn't comply to rules it was never taught.

That and the inherent fear some people have for larger breeds.

Taxuser1

this weekend family of 4, dad mom, kid, maybe 8, other kid in buggy but running around playing football withe their young pitbull terrier in my local busy park. all laughing, kicking a football to one other as the dog chased the ball and them. l watched as the dog finally got to a ball and he went to town on it, shaking it. the owner put his hand down to break the ball free but the dog wasnt giving it up, actively was tugging it, refusing to obey the dad. the ball was his. in my head, that dog is actively being made aggressive by the action and inaction of that father. shaking my head and just angry leaving the park, unmuzzled dog one thing, callous ignorance scared me though. ticking timebomb

borderlinemeath

Taxuser1 wrote: »

this weekend family of 4, dad mom, kid, maybe 8, other kid in buggy but running around playing football withe their young pitbull terrier in my local busy park. all laughing, kicking a football to one other as the dog chased the ball and them. l watched as the dog finally got to a ball and he went to town on it, shaking it. the owner put his hand down to break the ball free but the dog wasnt giving it up, actively was tugging it, refusing to obey the dad. the ball was his. in my head, that dog is actively being made aggressive by the action and inaction of that father. shaking my head and just angry leaving the park, unmuzzled dog one thing, callous ignorance scared me though. ticking timebomb

Do you have a dog?
You do know that playing tug is a game to pretty much every dog? It's featured in ad campaigns, tug toys are used as enrichment exercises and if you ever watched working dogs or agility dogs, they are usually rewarded at the end of their "work" with a game of tug on a rope. Plenty of dogs will play tug with a ball if they can get their mouth around it. One of my gundogs loves playing tug with his towel when I'm drying him down with it. There's countless burst footballs in my garden from the dogs playing with them.

I can just picture you though, startled look, shaking your head at the "callous ignorance". But TBH, from your description above, the ignorance is on your part. Given that you describe what sounds like a game and a typical scenario of the dog robbing the ball, I wouldn't be confident that you got the breed right either. (Hint, lab crosses, shepherd crosses, lurchers, bulldog crosses and pretty much every staffy are described as a pit bull by people who have never had any experience of a pit bull other than the stock file media pictures)

Taxuser1

borderlinemeath wrote: »

Do you have a dog?
You do know that playing tug is a game to pretty much every dog? It's featured in ad campaigns, tug toys are used as enrichment exercises and if you ever watched working dogs or agility dogs, they are usually rewarded at the end of their "work" with a game of tug on a rope. Plenty of dogs will play tug with a ball if they can get their mouth around it. One of my gundogs loves playing tug with his towel when I'm drying him down with it. There's countless burst footballs in my garden from the dogs playing with them.

I can just picture you though, startled look, shaking your head at the "callous ignorance". But TBH, from your description above, the ignorance is on your part. Given that you describe what sounds like a game and a typical scenario of the dog robbing the ball, I wouldn't be confident that you got the breed right either. (Hint, lab crosses, shepherd crosses, lurchers, bulldog crosses and pretty much every staffy are described as a pit bull by people who have never had any experience of a pit bull other than the stock file media pictures)

I owned two terriers. Had trainers for them. Grew up with dogs, hunted with dogs myself. When asked to, they did what they were told. Your gun dogs will also presumably drop your (pheasant/duck/child) when told. Generally there are rules to games with dogs but you will know that. This dog wouldn’t drop ball despite being repeatedly asked by owner. That was enough for me.

Regardless of what look I gave, an unmuzzled terrier within feet of me and my daughter is something I can comment on with the law on my side. What they want to do in their home or backyard is none of my concern.

borderlinemeath

Taxuser1 wrote: »

I owned two terriers. Had trainers for them. Grew up with dogs, hunted with dogs myself. When asked to, they did what they were told. Your gun dogs will also presumably drop your (pheasant/duck/child) when told. Generally there are rules to games with dogs but you will know that. This dog wouldn’t drop ball despite being repeatedly asked by owner. That was enough for me.

Regardless of what look I gave, an unmuzzled terrier within feet of me and my daughter is something I can comment on with the law on my side. What they want to do in their home or backyard is none of my concern.

Because the dog obviously thought he was part of the game. If he was allowed off lead to play and be involved, it's something that they are used to. And when dogs play tug, sometimes the best way to get them to give up the prize is to let go and stop the game or switch it for something better. But maybe they didn't know that. One of the most common questions people ask about their dogs is how to get them to give the ball back when playing throw.

And now it's gone from being a "pit bull" to a terrier?

And also, I see you signed in from another a/c and then deleted that reply, I still received it though, as did anybody else who subscribes to the thread so deleting your alter ego is a bit pointless.

Taxuser1

borderlinemeath wrote: »

Because the dog obviously thought he was part of the game. If he was allowed off lead to play and be involved, it's something that they are used to. And when dogs play tug, sometimes the best way to get them to give up the prize is to let go and stop the game or switch it for something better. But maybe they didn't know that. One of the most common questions people ask about their dogs is how to get them to give the ball back when playing throw.

And now it's gone from being a "pit bull" to a terrier?

And also, I see you signed in from another a/c and then deleted that reply, I still received it though, as did anybody else who subscribes to the thread so deleting your alter ego is a bit pointless.

sorry, don'y know what you mean about signing in from another account - i'm a regular poster from this account only. maybe correct yourself. there are no edits above.

the dog was a pit bull. it is a terrier. is my shortening of the dog description or referring to it in my own way a problem?

i think you're deliberately missing the point. i'm not questioning what the dog thought. of course he thought he was part of the game, unmuzzled in a busy park chasing children who were kicking the ball away from him. when he got the ball, he also thought it was his and what he did with it was go to town on it aggressively. then it wasn't just about tug. this wasn't led by the adult or chlild. it was in his mouth and dog was asked to drop the ball. he repeadedly did not and it became a game of tug. that was the dog dictating the game, not the other way around and you know, if you've experience in training or being involved in trained dogs, which from your post is becoming fairly obvious that you've been b.s'ing, you will know this is not on. but the base point remains from my opening, the pitbull was off a lead acting aggressively in a situation where there were children. so in my opinion that father/adult was being reckless and that dog, through no fault of his own, was not being brought up safely.

borderlinemeath

borderlinemeath wrote: »

Because the dog obviously thought he was part of the game. If he was allowed off lead to play and be involved, it's something that they are used to. And when dogs play tug, sometimes the best way to get them to give up the prize is to let go and stop the game or switch it for something better. But maybe they didn't know that. One of the most common questions people ask about their dogs is how to get them to give the ball back when playing throw.

And now it's gone from being a "pit bull" to a terrier?

And also, I see you signed in from another a/c and then deleted that reply, I still received it though, as did anybody else who subscribes to the thread so deleting your alter ego is a bit pointless.

Well, you’re wrong about one thing - it was me that replied but then thought “What’s the point of me providing my tuppence worth, when your mind is already made up”. Which it clearly is.

For what it’s worth, my point was that a well trained dog (and I have two retrievers) is not as common as it should be. If you can’t control your dog, train it. Too many people think the dog innately knows what to do. They don’t.

I can sympathise with Taxuser; the dog should be under control.

Gerry T

Taxuser1 wrote: »

sorry, don'y know what you mean about signing in from another account - i'm a regular poster from this account only. maybe correct yourself. there are no edits above.

the dog was a pit bull. it is a terrier. is my shortening of the dog description or referring to it in my own way a problem?

i think you're deliberately missing the point. i'm not questioning what the dog thought. of course he thought he was part of the game, unmuzzled in a busy park chasing children who were kicking the ball away from him. when he got the ball, he also thought it was his and what he did with it was go to town on it aggressively. then it wasn't just about tug. this wasn't led by the adult or chlild. it was in his mouth and dog was asked to drop the ball. he repeadedly did not and it became a game of tug. that was the dog dictating the game, not the other way around and you know, if you've experience in training or being involved in trained dogs, which from your post is becoming fairly obvious that you've been b.s'ing, you will know this is not on. but the base point remains from my opening, the pitbull was off a lead acting aggressively in a situation where there were children. so in my opinion that father/adult was being reckless and that dog, through no fault of his own, was not being brought up safely.

Your dead right, a restricted dog in a public place (I'm guessing a park) should be on a lead and muzzled. Also owning a powerful dog like that it's even more important it's well trained and when told to leave or sit it does it. I've a cockapoo and looks cute but still there's people frightened of him when he's bouncing about, and before people pounce yes I can recall him and get him to sit.... not much else tough !

borderlinemeath

Taxuser1 wrote: »

sorry, don'y know what you mean about signing in from another account - i'm a regular poster from this account only. maybe correct yourself. there are no edits above.

the dog was a pit bull. it is a terrier. is my shortening of the dog description or referring to it in my own way a problem?

i think you're deliberately missing the point. i'm not questioning what the dog thought. of course he thought he was part of the game, unmuzzled in a busy park chasing children who were kicking the ball away from him. when he got the ball, he also thought it was his and what he did with it was go to town on it aggressively. then it wasn't just about tug. this wasn't led by the adult or chlild. it was in his mouth and dog was asked to drop the ball. he repeadedly did not and it became a game of tug. that was the dog dictating the game, not the other way around and you know, if you've experience in training or being involved in trained dogs, which from your post is becoming fairly obvious that you've been b.s'ing, you will know this is not on. but the base point remains from my opening, the pitbull was off a lead acting aggressively in a situation where there were children. so in my opinion that father/adult was being reckless and that dog, through no fault of his own, was not being brought up safely.

Apologies re the double post. The other poster below managed to answer the question directed at you just before you, and then decided to delete their reply, but not before I got the notification for it. From every angle it looked like you posted from another a/c, - answering your question, and both replies to the question were 2 dogs.

It is a bit of a swing from identifying a dog clearly as a "pit bull" to giving it the far broader range of "terrier". Terriers are all encompassing from yorkies to fox terriers, to kerry blues to jack russells. But you know that. And you most likely know that dogs that are identified as "pit bulls" are most likely crosses of lab, bulldog or any other blocky headed dog. I once looked after a boxer/lab cross who looked quite like what people would describe as a pit bull. Stocky and muscly like a boxer, yet broad like a lab.

And I see you assume I know nothing about training. Or rather I b's about it. I actually have a training and behaviour qualification. I handle dogs every day, big, small, restricted breeds, non restricted breeds, dogs with behaviour issues, and plenty of dogs that have been damaged by people that call themselves "trainers". A lot will use force and fear in their training tactics and damage dogs.

I'm all for dogs being under control, I have 4 dogs of my own and a 4yr old, so a dog coming barrelling towards me and my dogs is not on. But your description above is you getting the hump because a family had an RB off lead and unmuzzled. You assume the dog is acting aggressively. Most dogs when playing tug have to use force to hold the toy and sometimes grunt and growl, they don't exactly roll over for belly rubs do they?? And terriers as a group are really fond of tug games. It's your assumption that the dog was acting aggressively while playing, yet it didn't bite anybody? Chase anybody? Chase any dogs and pin them down?

I and many others find the RB list arbitrary and know plenty of dogs that have inflicted a lot of damage on people and other dogs that aren't on the list. The RB list does nothing other than lure people into a false sense of security that because a certain breed isn't on it, then they are not aggressive. Yes the dogs on it can be powerful, but there's far more breeds that aren't on it, that are stronger and capable of a lot of damage. I would love to know if you would have bothered replying at all if it was a happy looking golden retriever refusing to give back the ball?

borderlinemeath

Deleted User wrote: »

Well, you’re wrong about one thing - it was me that replied but then thought “What’s the point of me providing my tuppence worth, when your mind is already made up”. Which it clearly is.

For what it’s worth, my point was that a well trained dog (and I have two retrievers) is not as common as it should be. If you can’t control your dog, train it. Too many people think the dog innately knows what to do. They don’t.

I can sympathise with Taxuser; the dog should be under control.

Why would you answer a question that was clearly directed (as quoted) at another poster?

There's lots of dogs out there that aren't trained well, anecdotally, from my experience, a lot of them are smaller dogs, and actually dogs that are in a family environment where there's a lot of people for the dog to have to listen to. It's all well and good training a dog, but everybody in the household needs to be on the same page with commands, timing and rewards. That's hard in a family of Mammy, Daddy and maybe 2 or 3 kids who all want to be the trainer but they're not all on the same wavelength, with kids slipping treats and dinner under the table and perhaps the parents giving out to each other for letting the dog do different things. I certainly see dogs that respond better to the kids in the household - sometimes because the kids have unwittingly found the motivation that trains the dog, usually treats or playing with a toy, but also because the parents generation may sometimes have harked back to how their parents trained and treated dogs - there's still plenty of people who rub dogs noses in accidents, slap them with a newspaper and give them a kick when they don't behave as they want them to. One thing dogs do know, stay away from the person shouting angrily at them to come back - because they know they'll be punished.

walshb

average_runner wrote: »

All dogs are vicious if brought up that way

Yes, but some dogs can do a hell of a lot more damage if they turn...

Rottweilers are powerful breeds. A man would stand little chance against one, never mind an 8 year old against two.

Poor little kid..Devastating! And someone is to blame..