Dog has a bite, owner watches

Akira · 19 Mar 2006 at 23:00

A dog, like a child, is what you make it. Also like a child, owners should be responsible, but they're not. Found a bad dog/child? You've found a bad owner/parent.

Blackstar · 19 Mar 2006 at 23:14

My sister has a staff/collie cross and he's very good natured because he's been trained to be. When i was younger i was attacked by a dog on a lead outside a caravan withthe owners sitting inside looking out at me screaming and hitting the dog who had it's jaws clamped round the top of my leg and who wasnt letting go. They had the nerve to tell me off for hitting their dog. If i hadn't been wearing jeans i'd have part of my thigh missing i still have marks but not scars.

Chaos · 19 Mar 2006 at 23:14

Staffs/Pitbulls always seem to get a bad rep when in fact they are great dogs, its not the dogs fault its so aggressive its the owners.

Amp34 · 20 Mar 2006 at 00:54

Chaos said:
Staffs/Pitbulls always seem to get a bad rep when in fact they are great dogs, its not the dogs fault its so aggressive its the owners.

I have to disagree a little with that, as i said before staffs are fine but pitbulls are inherently rough and violent dogs, even if you treated it perfectly it could still turn one day.

^TANK^ · 20 Mar 2006 at 01:01

richyfingers said:
This really annoys me, you can’t really blame the dog, its the cruddy owners who don’t train and discipline there dogs properly that generally cause these types of attacks. Like Mason64 if you can’t take care of a dog properly don’t have one.

what he said ^^^

LizardKing · 20 Mar 2006 at 01:15

The owners make the dog what they want to be (with the exeption of rescue dogs as your never really sure what your getting).

I've seen labradors that are more dangerous than the typical stereotypical dangerous dog

Pitbulls/staffs are very loyal animals, there taught to be the way they are, its certainly not in there nature

NokkonWud · 20 Mar 2006 at 09:02

the owner was described as black and around 6ft.

That narrows it down then.

dirtydog · 20 Mar 2006 at 09:05

LizardKing said:
Pitbulls/Staffs are very loyal animals, they're taught to be the way they are, it's certainly not in their nature

LOL if you say so. I agree with Amp34. Ban all dogs like that as far as I'm concerned, they're ticking time bombs.

dirtydog · 20 Mar 2006 at 09:06

Akira said:
A dog, like a child, is what you make it. Also like a child, owners should be responsible, but they're not. Found a bad dog/child? You've found a bad owner/parent.

It's not that simple.

NokkonWud · 20 Mar 2006 at 09:12

dirtydog said:
LOL if you say so. I agree with Amp34. Ban all dogs like that as far as I'm concerned, they're ticking time bombs.

Why stop at just dogs?

dirtydog · 20 Mar 2006 at 09:16

NokkonWud said:
Why stop at just dogs?

What else have you got in mind.

elroberto · 20 Mar 2006 at 10:19

Chaos said:
Staffs/Pitbulls always seem to get a bad rep when in fact they are great dogs, its not the dogs fault its so aggressive its the owners.

Well, my experience of Staffs are they are very well behaved dogs and are good with children but obviously if the owner is antagonising them and encouraging them to be aggressive without correcting their behaviour then there'll be trouble. I thought Pitbull's had been banned? I know some people who got around this by claiming that their dog was a cross breed.

And dirtydog, where would you draw the line on banning breeds? I've got a boxer, he's much bigger than a staff, exceptionally strong for his size and if he was aggressive could probably inflict even more damage than a staff could. Despite the fact that he's the friendliest dog you're ever likely to meet and only gets rough when he's wrestling me for his ball as it's just not in his nature, you'd want him banned?

dirtydog · 20 Mar 2006 at 10:31

elroberto said:
Well, my experience of Staffs are they are very well behaved dogs and are good with children but obviously if the owner is antagonising them and encouraging them to be aggressive without correcting their behaviour then there'll be trouble. I thought Pitbull's had been banned? I know some people who got around this by claiming that their dog was a cross breed.

And dirtydog, where would you draw the line on banning breeds? I've got a boxer, he's much bigger than a staff, exceptionally strong for his size and if he was aggressive could probably inflict even more damage than a staff could. Despite the fact that he's the friendliest dog you're ever likely to meet and only gets rough when he's wrestling me for his ball as it's just not in his nature, you'd want him banned?

Yep. All dog owners say that about their dogs. "Ooh he's so placid and he wouldn't hurt a fly" - until one day it rips their daughter's face off.

elroberto · 20 Mar 2006 at 10:56

Most owners bring up their dogs responsibly and things like that don't happen. My 1st neice/nephew is due to be born any day now and the dog will be slowly introduced to him/her so that he gets used to it. He won't be left alone with the child but he'll learn that it's part of his family and will adjust accordingly. Dogs that are hostile tend to be that way because they can get away with it. A well trained dog knows that aggression is not tolerated and adjusts his behaviour. Boxers are a highly intelligent breed so he should adapt quite quickly, and if his previous behaviour around babies and young children are anything to go by, he'll be fine.

dirtydog · 20 Mar 2006 at 10:58

elroberto said:
Most owners bring up their dogs responsibly and things like that don't happen. My 1st neice/nephew is due to be born any day now and the dog will be slowly introduced to him/her so that he gets used to it. He won't be left alone with the child but he'll learn that it's part of his family and will adjust accordingly. Dogs that are hostile tend to be that way because they can get away with it. A well trained dog knows that aggression is not tolerated and adjusts his behaviour. Boxers are a highly intelligent breed so he should adapt quite quickly, and if his previous behaviour around babies and young children are anything to go by, he'll be fine.

Why take the risk.

semi-pro waster · 20 Mar 2006 at 11:07

dirtydog said:
Why take the risk.

Because it is a minute percentage of cases that a dog will attack anyone, let alone a child and in most of the cases it is because the owner hasn't taken enough care with the dog(or indeed has let the child abuse the dog). The advantages in my view far outweigh the risks, the child gets the benefit of caring for a pet, not having a child that is nervous around dogs, also having pets around from an early age can I believe lead to a reduced instance of asthma(not sure about this part though) and then the intangibles like companionship that the dog can give to the child. You can then weight that against the very slim chance that the dog will attack someone.

I have been around dogs all my life and found that as long as you treat them with respect then the chances are you will be treated with respect, there are some basics like don't invade its territory or force it into a corner where it has no options but then those apply with any animal(and most humans as well). I've actually been physically hurt far more by the cat we used to have but I wouldn't have traded him for the world.

dirtydog · 20 Mar 2006 at 11:19

So letting very powerful dogs around your little kids is a very low risk. But not letting them anywhere near your kids is zero risk. Oh well. Just tell your son/daughter not to look at it the wrong way or do the 'wrong' thing and he/she'll be fine I'm sure.

semi-pro waster · 20 Mar 2006 at 11:32

dirtydog said:
So letting very powerful dogs around your little kids is a very low risk. But not letting them anywhere near your kids is zero risk. Oh well. Just tell your son/daughter not to look at it the wrong way or do the 'wrong' thing and he/she'll be fine I'm sure.

That isn't quite what I am saying or implying, there is a risk to everything in life so you take a chance based on an educated guess before you do things. It does come down to responsible parenting as well as responsible dog ownership. A very young child should be under supervision anyway so it is unlikely that the dog would have any chance to attack them(in the somewhat unlikely event of a totally unprovoked attack). It can happen but it is rare, compare the amount of dog owners and families then see how many attacks there are reported, paradoxically I'd bet it only makes the news due to the rarity of such instances.

To flip the question how do you propose to keep your (potential) child away from all risks such as dogs, cars, life itself?

dirtydog · 20 Mar 2006 at 11:39

semi-pro waster said:
To flip the question how do you propose to keep your (potential) child away from all risks such as dogs, cars, life itself?

I thought someone would say that

Well yes life is full of risks but sensible people minimse them and don't expose themselves, much less their little children, to unnecessary risks. A child needs to learn to cross the road and so on, but it is not essential to have a powerful dog as a pet.

semi-pro waster · 20 Mar 2006 at 11:50

dirtydog said:
I thought someone would say that

It is the obvious retort so apologies for the lack of imagination

dirtydog said:
Well yes life is full of risks but sensible people minimse them and don't expose themselves, much less their little children, to unnecessary risks. A child needs to learn to cross the road and so on, but it is not essential to have a powerful dog as a pet.

It isn't essential but then nor are a lot of things in life that we do or that we own. If as a sensible person you consider the benefits to outweigh the risks then you will go ahead with the decision, I'd consider myself relatively sensible - I've not yet set myself on fire, I haven't fallen off any bridges and I can more or less cook for myself but if I was in a situation where I going to have children and my house/commitments were such that I could also own a dog then I would*. I view that the benefits outweigh the risks so that is why I consider a dog to be worthwhile around even small children, I know that my nieces love dogs and that is due to socialisation with them from a young age(under supervision of course).

*not necessarily a big one although in my experience they are more docile than little dogs. They also seem to be easier to guage in terms of emotions.