Another childs life taken

[old rooster]

As the owners got the dog from a rescue centre were they were assured by staff the dog was just fine with kids, I think there is only two persons at fault here. 1. the original owner who perhaps dumped it for temperament issues? 2. the stupid member of staff who made that statement. If either of these did the right thing the dog would never have been re-homed.

 

People diddle about with dodgy dogs these days, they want permanently removing from the gene pool, let face it our ancestors gave us this legacy of large predatory animals we could keep in the home by their selection of good stock. It wont take many generations to mess it up. Namby- pamby liberalism towards unsound animals in unsustainable and you cant legislate for idiots we have too many laws as it is - what is required in good old common sense (which seems far from common these days)

 

Human aggression issues are best handled by the dog being PTS not re-socialisation. Here lies the consequences of the modern way going wrong! My deepest sympathy to the parents of the child

 

Common sense would suggest that it was stupid to leave an animal of that type alone with a child. It really is that simple.

 

If somebody shot and killed another person we wouldn't be blaming the gun manufacturer or the people who put the ammunition together?

[grrclark]

cant see another solution expecting responsibility from some dog owners isnt going to happen in my life time i expect to see more problems not less. so im in favor of muzzles i have 2 dogs and would quite happily muzzle them on walks if in general a) it helped prevent deaths and i could walk the dogs without ***** with uncontrolled dogs off the lead charging at mine

have yet to hear anyone come up with a easier solution but as i said before something easy to enforce and inexpensive would be to easy.so fear not i doubt it will happen. the only reason a dog needs to be able to bite while on a walk is to defend its self if they are all muzzled theres no worries of attacks. any un muzzled dogs you see photo of to old bill shop easy proof

 

The point is though that this isn't a solution. If you were to put that legislation in place then the majority of already responsible dog owners will follow the rules, so not changing anything. Some already responsible people will take the hump and not bother muzzling their dogs as they are not problematic, so we now criminalise people, but still with no beneficial outcome.

 

The irresponsible folk will still be irresponsible, there are already rules that say you're not allowed to let your dog bite other dogs or people.

 

Taking photos of unmuzzled dogs to send to the rozzers is all well and good, but how do they know who that dogs belongs to in order to enforce anything? Fair enough if you know who the owner is and where they live, you can give that detail to the police, but you could do that now if you thought the dog was aggressive as there are rules already in place.

 

I can understand the sentiment behind the argument, but the ultimate outcome is all you would serve to do is place an additional burden on the police and courts by putting in place legislation that would be hideously time consuming, you would criminalise a larger percentage of the population and people/animals would still get bitten.

 

A more extreme example, it has always been illegal to murder someone with a gun and murder always carries a mandatory life sentence, so does the threat of also been caught in possession of an illegal firearm make any difference to criminals carrying guns and shooting people? Firearms laws just made it harder to get a gun and placed a more onerous burden on those that were already responsible. The dafties that want to shoot people still do.

 

The truth is that idiots will always be idiots, whether it is with mad dogs, guns, cars, broken bottles, etc. Despite that they are still in a tiny minority and we need to be very careful not to negatively impact on the majority by putting in place more and more rules that bring no benefit.

Edited November 7, 2013 by grrclark

[overandunder2012]

 

The point is though that this isn't a solution. If you were to put that legislation in place then the majority of already responsible dog owners will follow the rules, so not changing anything. Some already responsible people will take the hump and not bother muzzling their dogs as they are not problematic, so we now criminalise people, but still with no beneficial outcome.

 

The irresponsible folk will still be irresponsible, there are already rules that say you're not allowed to let your dog bite other dogs or people.

 

Taking photos of unmuzzled dogs to send to the rozzers is all well and good, but how do they know who that dogs belongs to in order to enforce anything? Fair enough if you know who the owner is and where they live, you can give that detail to the police, but you could do that now if you thought the dog was aggressive as there are rules already in place.

 

I can understand the sentiment behind the argument, but the ultimate outcome is all you would serve to do is place an additional burden on the police and courts by putting in place legislation that would be hideously time consuming, you would criminalise a larger percentage of the population and people/animals would still get bitten.

 

A more extreme example, it has always been illegal to murder someone with a gun and murder always carries a mandatory life sentence, so does the threat of also been caught in possession of an illegal firearm make any difference to criminals carrying guns and shooting people? Firearms laws just made it harder to get a gun and placed a more onerous burden on those that were already responsible. The dafties that want to shoot people still do.

 

The truth is that idiots will always be idiots, whether it is with mad dogs, guns, cars, broken bottles, etc. Despite that they are still in a tiny minority and we need to be very careful not to negatively impact on the majority by putting in place more and more rules that bring no benefit.

fair enough but i still thinks muzzles in public places are a step in the right direction if it saves lives and injury's to people and other dogs in the long run . think seat belts they wer'nt popular at 1st but saved a lot of people in the long run. its just my take on it and although i accept its not the perfect solution to everything and i dont expect others to necessarily agree.

[Matty7247]

Muzzling dogs in public areas wont change anything, the majority of these incidents occour in private residences?? So would you muzzle your dog all the time. Or for example, you beat and work your dogs, and theres young children around? Do we A. Stop young kids coming into the sport until they are 16, or B. Muzzle working dogs??

 

The whole muzzling dogs in public places is the same as licencing, its unenforcable, and far to expensive to police. And do you think the yobs with dangerous dogs will muzzle their animals?? Not likely really.

 

People will always break the law, you not supposed to drive without a seat belt, own a gun without a licence, drive without insurance, but people still do.

 

Responsibility comes down to the ****** that own dangerous dogs, and they should be held accountable for any deaths, regardless of wheter or not it was your child.

[overandunder2012]

 

The whole muzzling dogs in public places is the same as licencing, its unenforcable, and far to expensive to police. And do you think the yobs with dangerous dogs will muzzle their animals?? Not likely really.

 

 

i would go with 1st offence fine £250 2nd offence £5000 3rd lose dog banned for life with revenue like that you'd think the council would jump on it, better than parking tickets . failure to pay fines = prison time for none payment like with most other offences. im going to bow out now i can see my view is not in the majority and know when to quit

[Matty7247]

If it could be properly enforced, yes it would work. But it's the same for dogs messing in public? Big fines, but they still have to catch you, prove it? And that can and could cost a lot more than the fines worth??

[old rooster]

Sorry, muzzling all dogs that are out in public is just ludicrous and unnecessary.

 

We have to get away from battering the reasonable people in the hope of controlling the tiny minority of unreasonable people. It has been shown that it doesn't work, time and time again.

 

It only needs tough laws brought in and enforced to deal with the minority, leave the majority to enjoy the freedoms they deserve.

[bicykillgaz]

Kent- I totally agree with the previous owner and rescue centre been responsible I've said previously my self but the mother is equally at fault.

 

She chose the dog even though she thought it had been abused, she chose to get the dog without the correct permit for her tenancy agreement, she chose a dog that was too big to handle and too big for her living arrangements and she chose to leave put her daughter in that situation.

 

There's only one victim here that poor little girl.you could even argue the dog is a victim as it should never have been abused, never of been homed with that woman and never been left with that little girl.

[VikingRebel]

 

Sadly another child has had its life ended by a Dog attack.

When are people going to realise that Dogs and unsupervised children just don’t mix especially those which are potentially stronger and more powerful than their owners and cannot be restrained.

We will now have the inquest, more postulating and rhetoric, sympathy and remorse but nothing seems to get done about it.

Surely its time for a serious and radical root and branch overhaul of dog ownership regulations in this country.

In my opinion all dogs should be licenced and micro chipped at Birth.

Indiscriminate breeding should be banned and applications made through an appropriate authority to do so. This would stop breeding just for financial gain.

Owners should apply to have a dog, be vetted and their reasons for wanting a dog should be considered as well as their personal circumstances, age of any children they may have and the environment they live in.

The rehoming centres are crammed full of dogs abandoned by people who shouldn’t have had access to them in the first instance, many have been indiscriminately bred and many are of the same breed variety.

All dogs whatever their size should be muzzled in public places and finally it’s time to stop this cross breeding which has become fashionable it’s a ridiculous state of affairs currently..

I was looking for a dog recently in the national adds and had to troll through a endless list of dogs of the breeds..... cockapoos, springadoodles, labadoodles, jackapoodles, springadors, cavawhippet, yorkarussel, patterdoodle, weimerspringer, colliedoodle, etc etc etc….what are these stupid people doing….."I know lets cross our staffy with a spaniel call it a springastaffy and sell the pups for £600 quid “ ......WHY ??

I don't believe any of the above measures would deter or prevent serious and conscientious owners from getting a dog and looking after it properly.

We owe it to that poor girl and others of her like before her to do something about it. Such a waste....

And please no " but my 8 stone Rottweiler loves our three toddlers and wouldn't hurt a fly even if they beat it over the head with a rolling pin " type of replies..

rant over

 

 

Sometimes I am astounded by the things some people say on this website. I would have thought that shooters of all people would know better than to advocate such a draconian, knee-jerk response.

 

I don't mean to sound insensitive, I am truly sorry that a child has died, but sometimes that's just life. Life is risky and kids die all the time. They die in car accidents, fires, ponds, rivers, swimming pools, falling out of windows, falling down stairs, drinking chemicals. Are we to impose ridiculous restrictions and bans on all of those things too, and then some?

 

It seems that many people these days have got it into their heads that they can somehow eliminate all of life's risks through legislation. I'm sorry but you can't, it is just not possible, and the pursuit of this unobtainable goal will only serve to make life so bland, restrictive and difficult that life won't even be worth living in the first place.

[al4x]

Sometimes tragic things happen, after all do we know that the re homing center were told it was off to live in a poky one bed flat and possibly not exercised at all? Was it the dogs past or was it the fact the child was used to crawling all over dogs and wasn't told not to with their new dog. This could have been a dog fine with people and children but faced with not being able to have its own space snapped we just don't know.

It highlights one thing that bugs me on here and that is the twaddle talked about some animal charities putting down dogs that aren't suitable for re homing and then the same people getting on their high horse in this kind of thread.

Ultimately most people with children and dogs make it work fine the accident stats back this up very well when you consider how many dogs live in homes.

Breed apart you have to educate both dog and child and supervise both. My dog is spot on with children but she has always had a lot of them round her and I know she takes herself away if she has one that does anything she doesn't like. I would however always expect to watch her and make very sure she. Wasn't trapped with one that wouldn't leave her alone and the same goes for our puppy I'll let her have a certain amount of contact but be very careful how she is treated its a two way thing.

[overandunder2012]

its just sad this stuff has to happen before anybody looks at safety issues

Edited November 10, 2013 by overandunder2012

[bobt]

wont someone think of the children..............

[-Mongrel-]

Generally that should be their families job. I don't want to sound mean spirited, but you can't look out for every child out there, all of the time.