Yet another kid mauled by dog

Red_in_SE8

Dog Attack

How many more kids have to be mauled and killed before ownership of dangerous breeds of dogs is made illegal and every single such dog in the coumtry is put down? If I obtained a license I believe I could own a gun. But I am sure it is against the law to walk around the streets with it. Ownership of such dogs is like carrying a lethal weapon in public and there is absolutely no justification for it.

Dazzler21

Depends what breed of dog it is and what the child was doing to it!

I blame the owners of the dogs rather than the dogs themselves.

Red_in_SE8

[cite]Posted By: Dazzler21[/cite]Depends what breed of dog it is and what the child was doing to it!

I blame the owners of the dogs rather than the dogs themselves.

That is the defence used by the gun lobby in the USA. 'Guns don't kill people, people kill people.' I really do not think that argument has any merit whatsoever.

WSS

Very sad but what do you consider a "dangerous breed" of dogs. I know a couple of people with PB Terriers and Rottweillers and the dogs are the most placid, friendly things ever. Unlike those annoying little Yorkshire Terriers - devil dogs.


(I thought it was, "Guns don't kill people, rappers do, can I get a whoop whoop")

Dazzler21

lol agree with the last bit WSS

Steve Dowman

Short of banning all dogs, not a lot you can do really, you don't know what type of dog or as mentioned what the kid was doing. I have seen my 18 month old jab his finger in his grandparents dogs eyes. He knows no better and nor does the dog. Young children and dogs don't mix, though a dog jumping a fence to get a kiddie is not something you can do much about tbh. Parents and owners need to keep kids and dogs apart.

WSS

According to the BBC the dog was black, 1ft tall and had a collar.

That should narrow it down.

blackheathaddick

I agree with Dazzler. Its the owners that need to keep their dogs under control. It's not 100% guaranteed but Id guess its more dangerous to walk across the road than to own a dog but I cant see them banning cars!

aliwibble

I've got a friend who has a rottweiller that is generally renowned to be the soppiest dog you'll ever meet. I suspect the only way she'd ever cause anyone serious injury is by sitting on her owner's head when he's asleep and causing him to suffocate. It's irresponsible owners that are the main problem.

BlackForestReds

[cite]Posted By: aliwibble[/cite]I've got a friend who has a rottweiller that is generally renowned to be the soppiest dog you'll ever meet. I suspect the only way she'd ever cause anyone serious injury is by sitting on her owner's head when he's asleep and causing him to suffocate. It's irresponsible owners that are the main problem.

It's a combination of both, some dogs just have a screw loose and are territorial/aggressive/possessive, other dogs are much more relaxed.

Dazzler21

[cite]Posted By: aliwibble[/cite]I've got a friend who has a rottweiller that is generally renowned to be the soppiest dog you'll ever meet. I suspect the only way she'd ever cause anyone serious injury is by sitting on her owner's head when he's asleep and causing him to suffocate. It's irresponsible owners that are the main problem.

Ha ha ha lol

Red_in_SE8

When they find the owner of that dog he should be charged and sentenced with attempted man slaughter (if there is such a charge) and jailed for at least 5 years. It should be treated no differently to someone leaving a loaded gun in public that a kid picks up and plays with and accidently shoots himself in the face.

Chris_from_Sidcup

[cite]Posted By: Steve Dowman[/cite] Parents and owners need to keep kids and dogs apart.

It says in the article that the dog was in next doors garden and ran and jumped a fence to attack the child. You can't really blame the owner for that.

colthe3rd

[cite]Posted By: aliwibble[/cite]I've got a friend who has a rottweiller that is generally renowned to be the soppiest dog you'll ever meet. I suspect the only way she'd ever cause anyone serious injury is by sitting on her owner's head when he's asleep and causing him to suffocate. It's irresponsible owners that are the main problem.

Most of the time we hear this about the dog's that are involved with attacking people, for some reason it seems in these types of dogs something just snaps and they go for someone when usually they are as calm and soppy as any other dog. For me I can't really see why the majority of people would want PB's, Staffs etc other than for the 'look' they have when you see them. Accuse me of stereotyping but the people that usually keep these dogs can be seen sporting a baseball cap, shirt and jogging bottoms.

Dazzler21

Dogs and Guns the same things lol Ok matey ;o)

Charlton Dan

[cite]Posted By: Red_in_SE8[/cite]

[cite]Posted By: Dazzler21[/cite]Depends what breed of dog it is and what the child was doing to it!

I blame the owners of the dogs rather than the dogs themselves.

That is the defence used by the gun lobby in the USA. 'Guns don't kill people, people kill people.' I really do not think that argument has any merit whatsoever.

In that case why can the Police use and handle attack dogs and have them living in their homes with their kids, yet a 16yr old with a Staff can be a problem.....

colthe3rd

[cite]Posted By: Charlton Dan[/cite]

[cite]Posted By: Red_in_SE8[/cite]

[cite]Posted By: Dazzler21[/cite]Depends what breed of dog it is and what the child was doing to it!

I blame the owners of the dogs rather than the dogs themselves.

That is the defence used by the gun lobby in the USA. 'Guns don't kill people, people kill people.' I really do not think that argument has any merit whatsoever.

In that case why can the Police use and handle attack dogs and have them living in their homes with their kids, yet a 16yr old with a Staff can be a problem.....

Trained dog and trained dog handler vs violent dog and chav. Hmm tough one that

Dazzler21

Exactly

Charlton Dan

[cite]Posted By: colthe3rd[/cite]

[cite]Posted By: Charlton Dan[/cite]

[cite]Posted By: Red_in_SE8[/cite]

[cite]Posted By: Dazzler21[/cite]Depends what breed of dog it is and what the child was doing to it!

I blame the owners of the dogs rather than the dogs themselves.

That is the defence used by the gun lobby in the USA. 'Guns don't kill people, people kill people.' I really do not think that argument has any merit whatsoever.

In that case why can the Police use and handle attack dogs and have them living in their homes with their kids, yet a 16yr old with a Staff can be a problem.....

Trained dog and trained dog handler vs violent dog and chav. Hmm tough one that

My point exactly. RiS is trying to suggest its dogs that are the problem not the people in charge of the dogs

colthe3rd

Surely it's both then

Charlton Dan

[cite]Posted By: colthe3rd[/cite]Surely it's both then

Not really. A staff is not an inherently vicious dog. A friend of mine has bred them for years and they're loyal, good family pets, great with his kids and very playful......... I've also had the misfortune of meeting a 16yr old chav with one who was winding his up to try and get it to go for my cat......

The problem is not the dog but the owner.

Leroy Ambrose

Its a bit of both. Some breeds (pit bulls especially, but also other dogs that were bred for fighting or as attack dogs, e.g. Dobermanns, Rottweilers) are certainly a lot more prone to spontaneously 'snap' and attack people. However, when trained properly and looked after this is far less likely to happen. The vast majority of incidences are from people either not looking after the dog properly (as appears to be the case here) or just being stupid chavs and thinking its 'cool' to own a vicious beast without having the first clue (or care) about being responsible with it.

The answer? Outlaw ownership of breeds that can be identified as having a propensity toward violence - but don't destroy currently living animals - licensing them instead and charging people a 'dangerous dogs act' fee if they want to keep them. That way you don't have to put down a load of animals that might be perfectly well-behaved - only people who genuinely want to look after the specific breed will pay the money, the rest of the chav scum won't bother. Of course that opens up another can of worms in that some of the toerags will just let the dogs loose, but no solution is perfect.

ShootersHillGuru

[cite]Posted By: Leroy Ambrose[/cite]Its a bit of both. Some breeds (pit bulls especially, but also other dogs that were bred for fighting or as attack dogs, e.g. Dobermanns, Rottweilers) are certainly a lot more prone to spontaneously 'snap' and attack people. However, when trained properly and looked after this is far less likely to happen. The vast majority of incidences are from people either not looking after the dog properly (as appears to be the case here) or just being stupid chavs and thinking its 'cool' to own a vicious beast without having the first clue (or care) about being responsible with it.

The answer? Outlaw ownership of breeds that can be identified as having a propensity toward violence - but don't destroy currently living animals - licensing them instead and charging people a 'dangerous dogs act' fee if they want to keep them. That way you don't have to put down a load of animals that might be perfectly well-behaved - only people who genuinely want to look after the specific breed will pay the money, the rest of the chav scum won't bother. Of course that opens up another can of worms in that some of the toerags will just let the dogs loose, but no solution is perfect.

100% agree

Red_in_SE8

[cite]Posted By: ShootersHillGuru[/cite]

[cite]Posted By: Leroy Ambrose[/cite]Its a bit of both. Some breeds (pit bulls especially, but also other dogs that were bred for fighting or as attack dogs, e.g. Dobermanns, Rottweilers) are certainly a lot more prone to spontaneously 'snap' and attack people. However, when trained properly and looked after this is far less likely to happen. The vast majority of incidences are from people either not looking after the dog properly (as appears to be the case here) or just being stupid chavs and thinking its 'cool' to own a vicious beast without having the first clue (or care) about being responsible with it.

The answer? Outlaw ownership of breeds that can be identified as having a propensity toward violence - but don't destroy currently living animals - licensing them instead and charging people a 'dangerous dogs act' fee if they want to keep them. That way you don't have to put down a load of animals that might be perfectly well-behaved - only people who genuinely want to look after the specific breed will pay the money, the rest of the chav scum won't bother. Of course that opens up another can of worms in that some of the toerags will just let the dogs loose, but no solution is perfect.

100% agree

Me too.

pilchard

Bring back the Dog License and to all those who use their dogs as weapons and tools of intimidation ban them from ever owning an animal again upon any offence like this,obviously a license doesn't prevent a bad owner being a bad owner but it would make them more accountable. Or you could just make being a chav illegal!

Red_in_SE8

'Between 2002 and 2006 the Met picked up 43 weapon dogs. In 2008 they seized 719. This year they are on target to remove more than 1,000 animals from London’s streets.'

Weapon Dogs Article in today's Times

Anglia Addick

its similar with all the scummy c*nts that walk the streets these days. why are they scummy c*nts? well, take a look at their parents and its PLAIN FCUKING OBVIOUS!!

any dog is potentially dangerous. its how they are brought up/trained by their parents/owners that generally dictates what kind of person/ dog they will grow into.

plenty of respectable people own staffs. plenty dont. but to suggest they should be rounded up and put down just in case is pretty fcuking stupid imo.

101

Well some dogs are natuarally bred for fighting some for hunting some as pets. So there are certain breeds that naturally will attack people with less encouragment than others however it all boils down to the owners not the dogs. If a dog comes from a loving family but has a natural habit to fight and attack people then chances are after a few years the dog will learn that is wrong (with the correct guidence) if a dog is treated violently then it will be a violent dog (generally). I have a staff/pitbull and she is the wimpiest dog you would ever see. Now Staff pitbulls fall into the so called dangerous dogs catergory so iam always worried the authorities will come down on me but as i say my dog would never even contimplate hurting a human because i have brought her up right and taught her if she does shes would be in the wrong.

Harry Gregory

Leroy Ambrose suggests the absolute route to go, the trouble is the authorites just have not go the will anymore to do anything remotedly sensible.

MrOneLung

Any dog no matter how well trained and loved can snap and attack a child.
Whether it's a Staff,Rottweiller,Labradoor or Poodle.
Therefore any parent who leaves a child in a room with ANY dog doesnt love their child and should be sterilised.
Some people may consider that opinion a bit harsh though....

IA

Swimming pools kill more children than guns do in the US. I'd imagine dogs are no more dangerous than guns.

The problem is the adults. Either the adults in charge of the dog or the guardian/parent of the child.