Should these animals be destroyed?

[MA-Caver]

http://www.local6.com/news/3611395/detail.html 10 yr old bitten by dog

http://www.local6.com/news/3609240/detail.html 2 week old baby dragged by dog

I think yes. When dog bites man, I'll shrug and ask por que. What did he do? What were the circumstances?
But when dogs attack CHILDREN! .... If it had been my kid (if I had any), I'd kill it without thinking about it, even if it were a beloved family pet that had been around for years.

Thoughts? Comments?

 

[Flatlander]

Both animals should be put down immediately, and the people charged with their care at the time of the attack ought ot be charged. In my mind, a dog that attacks unprovoked is the same as a loaded firearm improperly stored. In both circumstances, a human is responsible for the fallout. That human should be charged with criminal negligence.

 

[Feisty Mouse]

Wow.

Generally I like to look at the entire situation - there have been cases of a dog biting a child when the child had the dog cornered and was taunting/poking/yanking at it.

But in each of these cases, the attacks seemed entirely unprovoked.

Destroyed or removed to non-child-containing homes.

 

[auxprix]

I once had a dog that bit a young cousin of mine, but she had it coming. The dog itself was a little older and cranky, but generally a good dog. The little girl was pulling the dog's (Sparky) tail and nudging it. She was trying to wake Sparky up to get her to play, and was ignoring her growls and attempts to find a more peaceful spot (away from my cousin). Eventually, Sparky spun around and bit her ONCE.

My aunt was very angry untill my mom calmed her down, telling her that the dog was older and that my cousin was bothering her. She eventually calmed down, and everyone went on with their day.

There is a reason I tell this story. Sparky was a cranky, sometimes unpleasent dog. But she did not tear my cousin apart for bugging her, which probably seemed alot like taunting in her mind. IMO, when a dog feels that it has to bite to get out of a situation, it will bite ONCE and leave right away.

But these stories feature a prolonged attack, with multiple bites. I would say that if a dog viciously attacks anyone, it should be put down. I think that it indicates abnormal behavior that could be dangerous.

 

[hkg]

I think in the two situations described then they should both be put down as they were unprovoked attacks. This may be a question for another thread but what gives man the right to decide if a livin animal should live or die amean we breed them so does that give us the right to kill them? Just a thot!

 

[hardheadjarhead]

I agree...in the case of unprovoked attacks, the animal needs to be put down.

Regards,


Steve

 

[michaeledward]

The dogs should probably be put down ... HOWEVER ... in each of these instances, we need to realize there are two animals involved. One Canine, On Primate.

I am currently re-reading 'The other end of the lease', a wonderful book about understanding both animals connected to the leash. The author posits a misunderstanding between primate behavior and canine behavior can lead to very challenging situations.

One quick example: the Greeting.

Primates walk toward each other directly, face-to-fact, locking eyes, showing teeth (smiling), when close enough, embracing chest to chest, a kiss on the cheek or lips. Each of these actions, in canine societies, are acts of dominance and / or aggression.

I think many of us (including me with my two dogs) don't understand all the nuances of canine society, and often behave poorly to our good natured companions.

Mike

 

[MA-Caver]

I think in the two situations described then they should both be put down as they were unprovoked attacks. This may be a question for another thread but what gives man the right to decide if a livin animal should live or die amean we breed them so does that give us the right to kill them? Just a thot!

Well for centuries mankind has been killing off predatory animals for the sake of self-preservation. Dogs, being off shoots of wolves became domesticated but still maintain the wild-traits buried deep inside their genes. The two dogs that attacked were probably acting upon base instinct on a level that we don't understand ... however, like I said in my initial post, if it were an adult man/woman then I'd want to know more about why the animal attacked (if possible) because it might've been provoked, but they (any dog) have been known to attack without cause or reason.
But we're talking children here and in one case a baby. Let a dog get away with attacking a smaller, weaker human and it'll do it again, maybe not today maybe not tomorrow or next week but given time and opportunity... I would not take that chance at all. Kill the animal(s) and be done with it. However on a single bite (with exceptions) then the dog is punished immediately and harshly (not beating it ) to drive home that biting is bad. The child might have inadvertedly hurt or scared the dog, and the dog was reacting (instinctively), the two week-old baby is the exception though. But both of these animals nearly mauled these children and most likely would've killed them had they not been stopped in time. Thus both of them are potentially dangerous in the future.

Feisty Mouse said Destroyed or removed to non-child-containing homes.

Moving the animal to a non-child containing home is merciful and humane I agree...but does anyone want to take the chance that a visitor with a child may come over? Or a child wandering around on the sidewalk in front of the home? :idunno: It's a risk, so who'd be willing to take it. :asian:

 

[loki09789]

On a nuts and bolts level, these animals are property not wards. Though there are humane laws that encourage humane treatment, these creatures are property in the end. It is a heartless sounding observation, but at any point I can take my dog out back and put a bullet through its head if I think I have to. If I am making a habit of doing this, then I should be reported to the police/SPCA and held accountable but if I am putting an animal out of misery because of an unsurvivable injury or that animal is posing a threat (and I really can distinguish between 'threat' and 'miscommunication' between human and animal) then it is just one of those hard choice decisions that has to be made.

That said, there is the emotional/life respecting issue of pet ownerships as well. I would NEVER do the above statement because of a whim.

My brother and his fiance run a dog rescue/rehabillitation/adoption program (www.angelpaws.com) and have had to put down the occasional dog that was either too sick/injured or has some behavioral issue that makes it impossible for them to be a healthy addition to a social group (loving human family OR as a new join to an already existing group of pets in that house). This may be because of abuse from their previous life or it might be genetic, who knows. I think that people should be responsible with their pets and remember that they are basically perpetual 'children' mentally and are subject to the same problems that will happen if you mistreat/neglect a child.

I would say that there are times when an animal does need to be put down. I don't relish the idea but I do think there are times when the tough call has to be made.

 

[michaeledward]

Well for centuries mankind has been killing off predatory animals for the sake of self-preservation. Dogs, being off shoots of wolves became domesticated but still maintain the wild-traits buried deep inside their genes. The two dogs that attacked were probably acting upon base instinct on a level that we don't understand ... however, like I said in my initial post, if it were an adult man/woman then I'd want to know more about why the animal attacked (if possible) because it might've been provoked, but they (any dog) have been known to attack without cause or reason.
But we're talking children here and in one case a baby. Let a dog get away with attacking a smaller, weaker human and it'll do it again, maybe not today maybe not tomorrow or next week but given time and opportunity... I would not take that chance at all. Kill the animal(s) and be done with it. However on a single bite (with exceptions) then the dog is punished immediately and harshly (not beating it ) to drive home that biting is bad. The child might have inadvertedly hurt or scared the dog, and the dog was reacting (instinctively), the two week-old baby is the exception though. But both of these animals nearly mauled these children and most likely would've killed them had they not been stopped in time. Thus both of them are potentially dangerous in the future.

Moving the animal to a non-child containing home is merciful and humane I agree...but does anyone want to take the chance that a visitor with a child may come over? Or a child wandering around on the sidewalk in front of the home? :idunno: It's a risk, so who'd be willing to take it. :asian:

Dogs are not wolves. They may have been acting on 'dog instinct', but they are not acting on 'wolf instinct'.

Concern the bite to the infant. I know when we buy a new toy for our dogs (as my wife pointed out last night, often the toys are people shaped), we wave the toy in front of the dogs face, encouraging the dog to bite the toy and play with it. So, then there is this infant, waving his arms and legs in front of the dog ... how do we expect the animal to behave?

Mike

 

[GAB]

In my opinion I have got to go with the post's by MACaver, very responsible attiude and very much to the point. G

 

[Kane]

To what degree of biting are we talking about? My dogs play bite me a lot, especially when I wrestler with them. It depends, because maybe the dog didn't mean to hurt the kids, and was merely "play biting". Dogs shouldn't be put down unless they were fighting unprovoked, and have a natural aggression towards humans and other animals.



But yes, it would be scary if some random dog came up to a child of my own and started to bite my child. Especially considering that random dog might have rabies .

 

[MA-Caver]

:asian: Mike, I didn't say dogs are wolves.. I said that dogs are "off-shoots" of wolves, belonging in the same family, being of the same species ... Cainine<sic>. You do an autopsy on a husky and a wolf and you'll see basically the same animal... do one on a wolf and a yorkie and you'll have the same results...only smaller.
Also I mentioned that it was (most likely) a DEEP base instinct that all domesticated animals have, because all domesticated animals were at one time wild and hunted by humans before someone got the bright idea of agriculture and eventually domesticating animals, this base is what caused the animals in question to attack. Wolves (eventually became dogs) were the first known recorded domesticated animal. All animals (including humans) have the base instinct of self-preservation and survival and if they're predatory animals they will have the base hunting instinct. It is through domestication and selective breeding that we have so many different breeds so that one will have a specific desirable trait over another, but they are all the same species as the wolf, coyote, fox, jackal and so forth.
That being said I will not ever leave a child unattended around a dog while babysitting or (eventually...some-day ) my own.

Kane: (respectfully) read the articles again and you'll see that the dogs were not play-biting these children. I've rough-housed with medium and large dogs before and have been "play-bit" and don't mind at all because the animal(s) are in play mode (body language). I know the difference. I've had dogs go "a bit too far" and break skin or at least leave teeth marks/deep indentations. They will get a good smack on the underside of the jaw (NEVER on top of the head...how are you going to pet it in the future?) and it's message enough that was a no-no.
Also disicpline can go further (if necessary) by immediately taking the dog to ground, flipping it on it's back, getting on top, holding one hand by the throat (squeezing gently) and going nose to nose with the animal. Again, base instinct will take over as this is pack behavior for the alpha-male/female to assert it's dominance over the pack-member and to remind it of it's place in the pack (your family, they view you as the alpha male and your wife as the alpha female and your kids as your pups).
The smack under the jaw is not a hard one but enough to snap it's jaws shut... it's enough to cow any dog and let it know it's place in the pack.
A friend of mine from years ago, who raised wolves (for re-introduction and cross-breeding purposes) tells me that yes, (all domesticated) dogs are perpetual puppies. They are socially and emotionally immature (as far as dogs go) because food is brought to them all the time.. they do not go out and hunt and that is the place for puppies. Dogs that are abandoned or lost or just homeless grow up a little more than their home-bound counterparts because they now have to "hunt" for food...even if it's rummaging through garbage cans behind resturants... it's still hunting/scavenging behavior. Hunting dogs that seriously "work" out in the field with their master rise above their "peers" in social and emotional maturity because they are participating in pack behavior by hunting with the "alpha-male".
It's a deep instinct, and while you can have a dog be totally the family friend/protector/bonded-member, totally trustworthy and loyal and bla bla bla. You can also get a dog that shows signs of the base instinct that is inherient in all of them. Like humans, some aggressive tendencies show more than others... Boxer Mike Tyson comes to mind.

:asian:

 

[drunken mistress]

Depends on the severity of the bite. My gran´s corgi bit me when I was a kid. It just scraped the skin slightly and I certainly wouldn´t have wanted to see it put down. If the kid needs treatment like stitches then the dog is probably too dangerous to be around.

 

[Nightingale]

I'd say about 99% of the time, its not a dog problem, its an owner problem.

 

[Flatlander]

Ontario's banning Pit Bulls, and increasing the penalties for owners of dangerous dogs that become violent.

Toronto — Ontario's planned ban on pit bulls would put owners of other dogs at risk of fines, jail terms and lawsuits if their pets were ruled dangerous or attacked someone, Attorney-General Michael Bryant said yesterday.

"Any dog could be a dangerous dog," Mr. Bryant said as he promised legislation to ban the breeding or sale of pit bulls and to force current owners of the dogs to have them neutered or spayed and to muzzle them in public.

If Ontario were to enact the plan announced yesterday, that would make it the first province or state in North America to put in place such a ban on pit bulls. Britain, France and Germany have such bans.

Owners of other breeds could face fines of up to $10,000 and jail sentences of up to six months if their dogs were to attack a person, another dog or a cat, or were found to be menacing.

Full story here.

 

[Phoenix44]

I never understood this "wrestling" and "play biting" with a dog, especially if your household has kids. How in the world is the dog supposed to understand the difference?

A friend of mine, who should have known better, was always "playing," "growling," and "wrestling" with his dog. I'd actually told him I thought it was a bad idea. One day the dog ripped a chunk of arm out of his kid. He didn't "wrestle" with his next dog.

 

[raedyn]

I'd say about 99% of the time, its not a dog problem, its an owner problem.

f'sure. There are exceptions of course. But there are many owners that teach their dogs to be agressive. Or they beat their dog, and the dog becomes viscious due to mistreatment.