What is it with some people and their dogs?

[RitaZ.]

My point is that you can't label something (or someONE for that matter) dangerous after even just one incident if you don't know what the real and full situation is or the history behind it.

Sure you can. If a person kills or beats another person (one time), then I think it's safe to say that they are dangerous. Their history may explain their behavior, but it doesn't change nor justify the act. Let's say that your child is viciously attacked by a dog. In the end, does the dog's history make any difference? Will it change anything?

You may not agree, but Animal Control (in my county) does label a dog a dangerous animal after one reported incident.

 

[bettyann29]

 

[RitaZ.]

Can I have some?

 

[mking624]

Sure you can. If a person kills or beats another person (one time), then I think it's safe to say that they are dangerous. Their history may explain their behavior, but it doesn't change nor justify the act. Let's say that your child is viciously attacked by a dog. In the end, does the dog's history make any difference? Will it change anything?

I wasn't referring to murder or an brutal beating. I made the example of a physical bite (because we're discussing dogs biting) done by a child. Would you label the child dangerous?
I don't have a child who has been viciously attacked, but I have been attacked by a dog as a child (a family member's dog nonetheless) and it left a physical scar on my face. So my parents were in the position that you're asking me if I was in. But ultimately we didn't view the dog to be dangerous...we knew the reasoning behind the attack. As someone else said much earlier in this thread, not everything is always so black and white.

I can appreciate where people are coming from and I respect that...but depending on the dog and the situation itself, I just don't agree with everything.

 

[crazee4mickey]

Just tiptoeing through to sit and watch the show....

 

[RitaZ.]

I wasn't referring to murder or an brutal beating. I made the example of a physical bite (because we're discussing dogs biting) done by a child. Would you label the child dangerous?
I don't have a child who has been viciously attacked, but I have been attacked by a dog as a child (a family member's dog nonetheless) and it left a physical scar on my face. So my parents were in the position that you're asking me if I was in. But ultimately we didn't view the dog to be dangerous...we knew the reasoning behind the attack. As someone else said much earlier in this thread, not everything is always so black and white.

I can appreciate where people are coming from and I respect that...but depending on the dog and the situation itself, I just don't agree with everything.

Your statement was rather general, that's why I compared it to killing/beating. I got it now.

I was bit by a dog a few months ago, I still have the teeth marks on my arm. Unlike your situation, I do view this dog as dangerous, since I did nothing to provoke him. I did report the bite and the owners were fined. The dog is a white german shepherd.

Your question~ Would I label the child dangerous? For me, human beings come before animals. I don't equate a child's bite to an animal's bite, so I can't answer your question.

I know that many others feel as you do. I respect your point of view, but I don't agree with your stance.

 

[MushyMushy]

I know that many others feel as you do. I respect your point of view, but I don't agree with your stance.

For me, that's what it boils down to -- being able to see and respect another's viewpoint, even if we don't agree with it.

This is a little unrelated to the whole topic, but I want to admit something without being offensive to anyone here. I used to think people with the attitude that animals are more important than people were complete whack jobs. Sorry, but I did.

Anyway, a while back I watched this documentary called Shelter Dogs which followed the life of a shelter owner who devoted her life towards the well being of dogs. After watching this movie, I had this minor ephiphany where I became so grateful towards men and women like the owner of this kennel. Humans have a responsibility towards these animals that we've made so dependent on us, and we (as a society) often fail them so miserably. We need those "whack jobs" ( ) to pick up the pieces and help make right what irresponsible dog owners do wrong.

At any rate, it was a good movie. Pretty controversial, though, because the shelter owner in this movie, while she did everything in her power to prevent it, she believed that euthanizing animals was sometimes the best decision, where I know a lot of other people don't believe that.

 

[momof2inPA]

I already expressed my point...reread the posts. And second, I'm not the one discounting people's views here...in fact I've agreed with some of them. And third, not everyone disagrees with me, but you seem to be the only one who gets so hostile at the fact that someone is disagreeing with you. Everyone else seems to be handling any disagreement fairly well. Just because I have a differening opinion (as do others who have responded) doesn't put me in the wrong. It means I have a differing opinion. Whether or not you choose to respect someone because they have a differing opinion isn't going to change my opinion.

OK, I see that you care more about people than dogs, I admit that I don't agree with that point of view, and I don't respect it. You live in Kentucky. According to Kentucky's laws, if someone on the street or at the ballfield is bitten by your dog, anyone can summarily shoot your dog right there on the spot. Isn't that enough reason to keep a biting dog home?

 

[DVC Sadie]

I've grown up with dogs all of my life and would never put my dog in a situation with little children (or anyone) if my dog was in any way aggressive.

I have also taken my dogs to baseball games and sat away from the bleachers with them on leads. I can't remember how many times I have had to ask little kids to please not run up to my dog and try to hug her.

I do not believe that a dog has more importance than a person but I do believe that my dog is more important to me than most other people. Right or wrong I still prefer my dogs over most people.

 

[momof2inPA]

I have also taken my dogs to baseball games and sat away from the bleachers with them on leads. I can't remember how many times I have had to ask little kids to please not run up to my dog and try to hug her.

Now, see, if you know this happens at baseball games, why take the dog?

I have every right to take my kids to the dog park, but I wouldn't do that and not expect dogs to run up to them.

 

[Tigger&Belle]

Now, see, if you know this happens at baseball games, why take the dog?

I have every right to take my kids to the dog park, but I wouldn't do that and not expect dogs to run up to them.

There's a big difference between going to a ballgame and sitting away from the people, with the dog on what I assume is a short lead and bringing a dog to a dog park. I'm assuming she is keeping a close eye on her dog, she is sitting away from people, her dog is under control (I'm assuming that's what the lead comment was about) and people should ask before petting. If she knows the dog will bite, I agree that it's not a good environment for the dog, but maybe she doesn't know that.

Like I stated earlier, personally, I wouldn't (and I don't) put myself through the aggravation of bringing a dog who I'd have to worry about. I want to go to the ballgames to watch my son play. I don't want to watch my dog like a hawk. I've done it twice--once was annoying and I had to sit far from the other parents and the second time was close to home and I just brought my dog back home.

I was at a recent ballgame where someone was there, right in the thick of things, with an unleashed dog who was chasing a 2yo sibling from our team as they were arriving to watch the game. Perhaps the owners of the dog knew the dog wasn't going to bite the boy, but the boy and his mother didn't know that. It frightened the boy, who was scared to leave his mother's side for the whole game. Of course the boy did exactly what a person is not supposed to do when coming across an unleashed dog--he ran. But that's a hard concept to get across to a child who was barely 2yo.

 

[Kimberly]

That dog should not be around young children. Growing up, we had two Chow Chows, which are a breed of Chinese guard dogs. Great around kids and family that they know, but you bring in anyone new, and they just went nuts. They either were too hyper (at 70 lbs, they were no small dogs) or too protective of their family. So we started to put them either outside or in one of the bedrooms when we had company, and they didn't seem to mind. Just some breeds you have to be careful of, they all have their own lttle quirks.

Have you said anything to their family? You should, just for their and your sake. Keep us updated!

 

[hiwaygal]

Now, see, if you know this happens at baseball games, why take the dog?

I have every right to take my kids to the dog park, but I wouldn't do that and not expect dogs to run up to them.

Actually, no you don't. Most dog parks EXPRESSLY state that children are NOT allowed in the dog parks. But, folks ignore that rule all the time.

 

[goofygirl]

Common sense tells me that:

A ballfield is certainly big enough for kids AND dogs to share. if you don't want your kid near a dog, then move away to another spot!

If you are invited into a home with a dog and the dog's got you nervous- then do not take your kids in there!

The world doesn't revolve around you and your kids. Don't expect everyone with a dog to cater to you.

 

[Tigger&Belle]

As to the ballfield, I think there are two issues and I've seen them both in the countless ball games that I've attended, having 3 boys who have played or are playing youth baseball.

There is a big difference between someone going to a game, sitting away from other people, with a dog on a short lead as opposed to someone sitting with all the other people, possibly not paying attention to the dog, maybe not leashed or on too long of a lead, allowed to run up to others, etc. I don't have a problem with a well behaved dog or a dog that is being socialized, but that is not close to the other families. We can really be talking about two very different situations when we talk about "dogs at ballfields" and of course there are all the grey areas inbetween.

 

[BuckNaked]

A ballfield is certainly big enough for kids AND dogs to share. if you don't want your kid near a dog, then move away to another spot!

Ballparks are primarily for the use of people, not dogs. I have no problem with people that want to bring dogs, but the dog/owner should accomodate the people, not the other way around.

Why should someone that is there to watch game have to move in order to avoid being bothered by a dog?

 

[taximomfor4]

As to the ballfield, I think there are two issues and I've seen them both in the countless ball games that I've attended, having 3 boys who have played or are playing youth baseball.

There is a big difference between someone going to a game, sitting away from other people, with a dog on a short lead as opposed to someone sitting with all the other people, possibly not paying attention to the dog, maybe not leashed or on too long of a lead, allowed to run up to others, etc. I don't have a problem with a well behaved dog or a dog that is being socialized, but that is not close to the other families. We can really be talking about two very different situations when we talk about "dogs at ballfields" and of course there are all the grey areas inbetween.

Definitely so. My point was that if there is only one set of bleachers, and all the families are sitting there, bringing a dog on a long leash to also sit in the bleachers, licking and nipping or whatever at other families, is kind of rude. When DH coached High School baseball, there was a family that often brought a dog. They brought a folding chair, and sat near (but not on) the bleachers. Other families got to know the dog, and often visited it by the folding chair + dog owner. Some families that are either not dog lovers or just wanted to watch the game stayed away from the dog. I thought that dog's owner had quite a good system worked out. The dog got socialized, but nobody was getting slobbered on that didn't want to be.

I think, like most other situations, a lot is at the owner's discretion. Some owners are pretty clueless, many do their best with what they know about their own doggies.

 

[RitaZ.]

The world doesn't revolve around you and your kids. Don't expect everyone with a dog to cater to you.

The world doesn't revolve around your pets. Don't expect other people to love and want to be around your pets the way that you do.

 

[BuckNaked]

The world doesn't revolve around your pets. Don't expect other people to love and want to be around your pets the way that you do.

Touche'

 

[Disney Doll]

I think that unless it's an area that expressly forbids it, dogs can go anywhere. Just because a dog has bitten in the past doesn't make it a "dangerous dog". Maybe the owner who took the dog to the ballfield was trying to socialize the dog. Not everything is black and white.

I am a dog owner and lover.

If my dog had a history of biting, I would not take it to a public place where there were a lot of children.

Children are naturally attracted to dogs and the chance that the dog would bite again would be too great a chance for me to take.

I also wouldn't allow my dog to behave aggressively toward a guest in my home. The dog would have been reprimanded and isolated the first time he growled.

Thankfully I have a dog who is great with kids and people and has never even seemed like he was going to bite someone.