Don't leave babies alone with dogs

pickarooney wrote: »

Not all pitbulls are lovely dogs.

Yes, particularly the ones raised by obviously irresponsible owners who want an image instead of a companion animal.

Pitbulls were used as family dogs for centuries in North America particularly. They're bred to be quite loving towards humans, and very protective. Irresponsible people decide they want one and abuse their protective nature massively, leading to reports like this one.

Not all golden retrievers are lovely dogs, either, but overall they're a well-mannered breed (like the pitbull) so I fail to see your point.

pickarooney wrote: »

Not all pitbulls are lovely dogs.

Thank you.

Nice to see a dissenter amongst the defend-the-dog-at-all-costs brigade.

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

what makes it disgusting?

i can't answer for osu, but for me, the part about the childs balls being attacked is fairly disgusting.

Voodu Child wrote: »

I don't think any family with young children should have dogs in the household, regardless of the breed.

Sorry, what?

If the parents were responsible in any way having a dog in the household should not be an issue.

I grew up with dogs, German Shepherds mostly but a few different ones. A lot of my dearest memories are times spent in my childhood with my dogs. If I ever decided I wanted kids, there would most definitely be a family dog involved-- it's part of growing up.

Fault the damn parents for god's sake. Everyone's getting pissy about the dogs, what about the fact that the household was messed up enough to get the child removed from its mother's custody?

But yeah. Whatever. Blame the dogs. :rolleyes:

liah wrote: »

Sorry, what?

A dog should never be left alone with a young child, regardless of breed or temperament. That's how almost all of these attacks on children occur, when an adult is not present. Agreed?

And no matter how responsible the owner is, it's human nature to make mistakes. You can say you'll never leave the dog in the same room as the child, you'll always supervise them etc, but show me someone who is infallible and i'll show you a flying pig. Whether it's leaving a gate open by mistake, leaving the child unattended 'for just a second' to answer the phone etc, everybody makes mistakes, and that's how these cases happen. A few seconds is all it takes for an infant to maybe stand on a dogs tail or something and provoke an attack.

I know most dog owners will disagree, but that's my opinion. I've owned dogs and I would never have one in the same house as a young child.

Voodu Child wrote: »

A dog should never be left alone with a young child, regardless of breed or temperament. That's how almost all of these attacks on children occur, when an adult is not present. Agreed?

And no matter how responsible the owner is, it's human nature to make mistakes. You can say you'll never leave the dog in the same room as the child, you'll always supervise them etc, but show me someone who is infallible and i'll show you a flying pig. Whether it's leaving a gate open by mistake, leaving the child unattended 'for just a second' to answer the phone etc, everybody makes mistakes, and that's how these cases happen. A few seconds is all it takes for an infant to maybe stand on a dogs tail or something and provoke an attack.

I know most dog owners will disagree, but that's my opinion. I've owned dogs and I would never have one in the same house as a young child.

Anything-- literally anything-- can harm an unsupervised child. Shít happens, but I would say the numbers of happy families with young kids and dogs massively outweighs the number of attacks. It's the parents' responsibility to make sure the dog and child are never left alone together in the same room. All it takes is taking the dog or child with them when they leave the room. Any responsible parent would do this naturally. In this article the situation was bad enough to have custody of the child temporarily removed. Somehow, I don't think this was a responsible family. Hence why they own uncontrollable dogs.

There is no reason, absolutely NONE, to suggest children should be a certain age before they are allowed a dog in the family. I was raised by my dogs, I have no doubt I wouldn't've turned out as well without them, to be quite frank. Dogs are a good thing for kids, a very good thing, why take that away from them because of a few attack reports a year? There's billions of dogs out there and so few attack reports, the odds are pretty good yours will be okay if you raise it well.

Unless you're suggesting that irresponsible people shouldn't have dogs with young kids, in which case I agree-- they shouldn't have dogs or kids. Otherwise.. your statement is ridiculous to me.

OutlawPete wrote: »

maybe I just saved some After Hours frequenter's childs life.

Never fear, OutlawPete is here:D