Self Defence from dog

facehugger99

It's better 100 dogs get kicked in the head unnecessarily than one child get savaged by a dog.

You should always kick a dog in the head if he runs aggressively toward a small child.

I know I would anyway.

nachouser

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996475#Comment_120996475

I'd add the caveat 'unless wearing flip-flops."

RurtBeynolds

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996475#Comment_120996475

How do you distinguish aggressively running from just running?

callaway92

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996414#Comment_120996414

Come off it. What if the one-in-fifty happened and the dog genuinely did hop on the child/bite him etc.

You can't arse about in situations like it. Dog running towards a child - Father's instinct was good here.

Imagine the regret if he chanced 'ah ya the dog won't bite', and something bad happened?

Stop working off hindsight and being re-active. Think more of being pro-active if you were in that situation. You don't have time to think about it. Good on the father.

nelly17

The Control of Dogs Act 1986

Control of dogs. 9.—(1) The owner or any other person in charge of a dog shall not permit the dog to be in any place other than—

(a) the premises of the owner, or

(b) the premises of such other person in charge of the dog, or (c)

the premises of any other person, with the consent of that person, unless such owner or such other person in charge of the dog accompanies it and keeps it under effectual control.

(2) If a dog worries livestock, the owner or any other person in charge of the dog shall be guilty of an offence unless it is established that at the material time the dog worried the livestock for the purpose of removing trespassing livestock and that having regard to all the circumstances the action was reasonable and necessary.

(3) A person who is guilty of an offence under subsection (2) of this section shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £500, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding one month, or, at the discretion of the court, to both such fine and such imprisonment

facehugger99

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996510#Comment_120996510

I use my brain - how do you do it?

suvigirl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996143#Comment_120996143

The dog was 6 metres away from the child!

Not saying the father was wrong in trying to protect his son from some potential danger, picking him up would probably have been enough.

But the child falling off a bike because there was a dog 6 metres away is probably just an over anxious child.

I.R.Y.E.D

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120994485#Comment_120994485

Unless it is one of the restricted breeds, you are correct in both cases, the dog does not to be on a lead but under effective control of the owner, which it does not appear to be the case from reading the OP

boetstark

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996475#Comment_120996475

Ridiculous statement.

If that dog did not touch the child , dad had child in his arms and then kicked the dog he is 100% wrong.

If dog had physically knocked the that's different.

I promise if the above happened to me he would not kick my dog again.

Ginger83

If a dog attacked my child I would have kicked it around the park and if no apology was forthcoming I'd kick the owner around the park to remind them of their responsibilities.

Danzy

Dog owner completely in the wrong, an uncontrolled animal caused an accident and then had interaction with a child, possibly even attacked it.

Owner hasn't a leg to stand on and is lucky not to be facing legal action.

I personally would have finished the dog off in that circumstances and would also be in my legal right to do so and I'd feel a moral obligation to prevent it attacking another child.

The father would also be on legally sound footing to go to the guards asking that the dog be put down.

Danzy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996414#Comment_120996414

That is not the father's fault, it was the negligent owner who forced the father in to that position.

This is not an unusual case or occurrence. The law is long decided.

suvigirl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996611#Comment_120996611

Dog didnt attack the.child though

event

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996475#Comment_120996475

I'd say its better that 100 children get savaged by a dog than one dog gets kicked in the head but there we are

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996611#Comment_120996611

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say both of these statements are absolute fabrication

event

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996614#Comment_120996614

You'd have kicked a dog to death in a park 😂

We've got a live one here folks

Ginger83

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996625#Comment_120996625

Where did I say it did? I am a dog owner and would never dream of letting her loose in public

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996599#Comment_120996599

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996625#Comment_120996625

So both of you think a parent should do nothing until their child is actually being bitten / attacked. FFS. The sense of entitlement of some dog owners is off the fecking scale, zero cop-on.

Danzy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996634#Comment_120996634

If it was threatening my child.

Of course I would.

Why on earth wouldn't I?

I'd prefer not to, 20 years ago I wouldn't have thought anything of it, shot more than a few that went after sheep or Cattle but I'd prefer not to.

I had a pup chase sheep recently, a neighborhood dog, I told the owner that i would have no choice but to destroy it if it did so again and hadn't because he had not frighted them, he would have been destroyed immediately otherwise. I'm getting out of sheep which saved him as well.

I wasn't angry just honest with them.

suvigirl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996659#Comment_120996659

I have already said that possibly lifting the child up, as the father did, was enough.

I don't own a dog

Homelander

Dog owner in the wrong primarily given the dog was technically not under their control.

But personally I absolutely wouldn't go booting a loose dog just because it was approaching me or kids unless it was obviously aggressive or showing some sign of same.

If I took that approach I'd be assaulting dogs all day long in the local park.

It's not realistic. We have yet to be mauled despite being approached by 100's of dogs. I don't think it's healthy to assume that every approaching dog is a trained heat-seeking child-slayer unless there are actual signs.

It also depends on the dog breed. I can at least somewhat understand a father kicking a staffie or similar breed bounding towards their child even if the dog isn't displaying any aggression.

Sending a Bichon or West Highland into the stratosphere far less so.

Context and actually witnessing the event are important and we have neither here so people are just inventing scenarios basically.

reniwren

Better to have the dog kicked and sent packing than go to court and have it destroyed?

Control of Dogs Act 1986:

Dangerous dogs.

22.—(1) Where—

(a) on a complaint being made to the District Court by any interested person that a dog is dangerous and not kept under proper control, or

(b) on the conviction of any person for an offence under section 9 (2) of this Act,

it appears to the Court that the dog is dangerous and not kept under proper control, the Court may, in addition to any other penalty which it may impose, order that the dog be kept under proper control or be destroyed.

(2) Whenever the Court orders the destruction of a dog pursuant to subsection (1) of this section, the Court may—

(a) direct that the dog be delivered to a dog warden or any suitable person to be destroyed, and

(b) direct that the expenses of the destruction of the dog be paid by the owner of the dog.

CR 7

A dog being under control or not isn't dependant on whether it's running over to the child to "be friendly/playful" or running over to attack. If it's not on the lead in a public place the owner should prevent it running over at all, otherwise it's not under control.

Ger Roe

The OP says that the dog was off lead in a National Park (possibly Wicklow)

Regulations state dogs must be on a lead : "All dogs must be on a lead at all times within the National Park.

We ask you not to bring your dog to the National Park at busy times (10 am to 5 pm)."

https://www.nationalparks.ie/wicklow/dogs-in-the-national-park/#:~:text=All%20dogs%20must%20be%20on,involving%20dogs%20on%20our%20sites.

Homelander

A court isn't going to order a dog destroyed because it bounded in the direction of a man and child.

The whole topic is about the justification of preventative action in this specific case where the dog literally didn't do anything and already have hard-men talking about beating up the owner, kicking the dog to death, etc.

As well as a scenario where the dog was apparently actually an out of control rabid predator and about to tear the childs face off before Dad stepped in.

It is equally as possible that the dad completely over-reacted and was a complete AH booting a harmless terrier happily and obviously coming over to play.

Danzy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996581#Comment_120996581

There is truth here also but a court would still find the owner culpable.

Ezeoul

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120994410#Comment_120994410

Many parks have "off lead" times within their bye laws.

nachouser

Op is like, well, my work here is done.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996659#Comment_120996659

Let's be clear. The dog ran towards the child.

It also appears that the dog was not in range of the child until the child was up in the father's arms whereupon the dog was attacked.

Not condoning the dog owner, certainly not condoning the father who kicked the dog, but the only victim was the dog who ended up being kicked. The dog owner wasn't harmed, the child wasn't harmed and the father wasn't harmed.