What is it with some people and their dogs?

[lclark0621]

"socialization" be damned it was not worth it for another child to be hurt. Our Akita also viewed other dogs, especially smalls ones, as snacks. We loved our dog but when we walked her she was always on a short leash and I was always ready to step between her and the child or another dog who was wandering around off-leash. As long as the alpha (me) stepped in my Akita would hang back. When children would run up I would put my leash behind my back and step in front of the dog telling the kids that my dog was not friendly. When a dog would run up I would do the same thing but yell "No!" at the other dog and then holler for the owner body blocking the other dog if need be.

If you have an aggressive dog it is your responsibility to make sure the dog does not hurt someone or something.

I 100% agree with you!

We have sent one of our dogs through protection training. Given the right commands, the dog would attack someone, and I must STRESS the fact that he would attack if given commands by his owners. Not just go off & attack someone.

He would never attack for no reason. And he loves kids. He lets DS (now 3) & his friends just crawl all over him, pull on him, play with him, whatever...The dog takes it & loves it.

He is not at all aggressive. He is a completely safe animal. And yet, when we take him out, he is on a leash. For him to "run free" he is either in our backyard or a proper dog run park. I would never let any of my dogs just runu free. Even though I know my dogs & I know they are safe, you can never be 100% sure what will have in an UNpredicatable situation. That is why they are unpredictable.

And as an animal owner, it is your responsibilty to protect your animal & ensure they dont hurt anyone.

And the fact is, if a dog bites anyone, especially a kid, it wont matter who was "at fault". The dog will be the "criminal" & the owner & dog will pay the price. Is it really worth the chance?

 

[SadieDog]

Wow. Like everyone else on this thread, I consider myself a responsible dog owner. I put the dog in another room when strange children are coming in the house, or keep her on a short leash while they get aquainted. I keep my dog on a short leash in public and keep her away from crowds. I haven't seen anyone here say they do otherwise. Neither has anyone said that aggressive dogs should be allowed in public.

While my dog doesn't accompany me everywhere, we do take her camping. At those times she is with us on the beach, walking around the campground, etc. She is always on a leash. If we went to a ball game during our travels, she would be with us off to the side away from the crowds.

She has never bitten but will bark menacingly (if you've seen a miniature schauzer you know what I mean) if she feels we are being threatened or our territory is being invaded. Now, according to this thread, I can't take her in a public area (like a campground or the beach) because a disabled child who is not under the control of his/her parents could run up to her?


I haven't seen ANYONE here say it is okay to let an agressive dog be around children. What I am seeing is many people saying that dogs can't be allowed in public - despite the fact that they are leashed and well behaved. I don't get it.

I am the first to be upset by dogs off leashes and in crowds. I'm astounded, however, by the attitude that no dogs should be allowed out of their own backyard.

Thank you for this post. Well said.

 

[twinmomplus2new]

As I said not to anyone specifically.... am I sensetive on this subject you bet...

No dogs don't belong at my kids T-ball game. Just as my kids don't belong at a dog park.
Dogs don't belong on the playground equipment at the tot lot. Dogs do not have the right to be anywhere humans are.Just because you love them and think they are cute, Does not make them Human.


My Main point with this whole thread. Is NOONe can ever say your dog will not bite. Dogs are animals. I can say I don't think My dog would EVER ever, bite. But I simply do not know that for certain. Because she is a animal first , my pet second.

 

[disykat]

Dogs don't belong on the playground equipment at the tot lot. Dogs do not have the right to be anywhere humans are.Just because you love them and think they are cute, Does not make them Human.


My Main point with this whole thread. Is NOONe can ever say your dog will not bite. Dogs are animals. I can say I don't think My dog would EVER ever, bite. But I simply do not know that for certain. Because she is a animal first , my pet second.

Yes, some people have talked about taking dogs to ball games. Everyone that has said that says they sit apart from the group with their dog on a short leash. No one here has said dogs belong on the tot lot. I think if you reread the thread you will find that everyone is in agreement that it is very unfortunate when bad dog owners do not keep their dogs away from strange children.

 

[snickerharley]

I too have a dog that HATES children and pretty much anyone she does not know. She does get agressive and shows a fair amount of stress and anxiety. For this reason children are not allowed over at our house, for thier own saftey and our liability. We often have to say that out house if off limits to many people, unfortunately unless they have been around since Snicker was born/ brought into our home we cannot take the risk in allowing them to come over.

 

[simpilotswife]

She has never bitten but will bark menacingly (if you've seen a miniature schauzer you know what I mean) if she feels we are being threatened or our territory is being invaded. Now, according to this thread, I can't take her in a public area (like a campground or the beach) because a disabled child who is not under the control of his/her parents could run up to her?

Where did I say that?

I pointed out to a poster that not all children can be controlled through no fault of their parents.

 

[taximomfor4]

What I don't understand is why there has to be this division. Why the kids camp vs the dog camp?

I'm confident that most of us would do the responsible thing regarding our children and dogs. Yes, I've seen examples of people doing what I would consider the wrong thing with their dogs, as I described in an earlier post. My guess is that this is an example of 10% of the dog owners being guilty of 90% of the offenses, with most dog owners being responsible.

I was wondering the same thing. I don't own a dog, but don't necessarily love other people's dogs. I have seen pet owners not foisting their dogs on the people in the bleachers, and I have seen a pet owner who let their dog wrap around peoples legs in the bleachers, jump up on people, lick people, etc.

Most dog owners I see around here are quite courteous in keeping their dogs directly by their side in public places. The well-controlled dogs are definitely cuter to me!!!!!

 

[snickerharley]

You shouldn't take a dog that you know wants to bite a kid to any place where a kid would run up to it. I tell you, if a dog ever bites one of my kids, that dog is not long for this world. If animal control won't take care of it, I will.

Does anyone remember a story that happened a year or so ago about a dog that bit a kid at a neighborhood park. The kid then went home and the kid's dad, who was a policeman, went back and shot the dog. I didn't blame that dad one bit.

If you truly feel this way then I hope beyond all hope that you never get a dog, and no one allows you to adopt/rescue/ or purchase a dog. That is the wrong way to go about a poor situation,there are always other options that killing an animal.

 

[DVC Sadie]

Where did I say that?

I pointed out to a poster that not all children can be controlled through no fault of their parents.

I still stand by what I previously posted. A parent is still responsible for their children no matter where they happen to be.

Dog owners are also responsible for their dogs at all times, even around children who are not always properly supervised and if a dog owner knows their dog is not socialized or is aggresive then they have no business letting their dog around anyone, be it child or adult.


Edited for spelling....once again.

 

[simpilotswife]

I still stand by what I previously posted. A parent is still responsible for their children no matter where they happen to be.

You're entitled to but until you've walked in the shoes of a parent with a severely autistic child, you shouldn't judge.

 

[momof2inPA]

I haven't seen ANYONE here say it is okay to let an agressive dog be around children. What I am seeing is many people saying that dogs can't be allowed in public - despite the fact that they are leashed, well behaved, and kept away from crowds. I don't get it.

Did you miss this quote:

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.

and mking agrees.

 

[DVC Sadie]

You're entitled to but until you've walked in the shoes of a parent with a severely autistic child, you shouldn't judge.

Excuse me but I haven't judged anyone. I stated an opinion just like you and because our opinions happen to differ does not make me unkind, judgemental or anything else other than having a different point of view. Sheeshhhhhh.....

 

[momof2inPA]

I still stand by what I previously posted. A parent is still responsible for their children no matter where they happen to be.

Dog owners are also responsible for their dogs at all times, even around children who are not always properly supervised and if a dog owner knows their dog is not socialized or is aggresive then they have no business letting their dog around anyone, be it child or adult.


Edited for spelling....once again.

I'll agree with this for the most part. The problem with our ballpark is the atmosphere isn't conducive for a dog, period. Kids are running around everywhere, throwing balls, playing in the dirt, playing tag. It isn't a bunch of adults sitting still in the bleachers. It's a safe, fun environment; well, it wasn't fun for the kid with the dog bite, that's for sure. After the dog bit the kid, the gradma said, "We'll go home after the game and tie (insert dog's name) up in the yard so you can play and have fun in the house." A dog that has to be tied in the yard when the grandkids come over shouldn't be at a ballfield full of other people's grandchildren.

 

[momof2inPA]

If you truly feel this way then I hope beyond all hope that you never get a dog, and no one allows you to adopt/rescue/ or purchase a dog. That is the wrong way to go about a poor situation,there are always other options that killing an animal.

Always? When the mastiffs in San Francisco attacked a neighbor girl and the dogs couldn't be pulled off by their owner, was there another good option?

When those hybrid wolf/dogs attacked their owner and ate her last week, was there another good option?

You are so wrong.

 

[maddiemouse]

My kids stay away from strange dogs, period. If they want to pet the dog, I ask the owner first, but they rarely do. Actually, my friend's cat bit my son on the nose once when he was really little, he was de-clawed so who could have seen that coming. It even drew blood. She asked if my son might have done something to hurt the cat, but I was standing right there, and he hadn't even touched the cat. The only other times he had petted the cat, I made sure he did it gently and left the tail and face alone. Let's just say that cat doesn't live there anymore.

So what happened? Did you go back and shoot the cat?

 

[mking624]

Did you miss this quote:



and mking agrees.

Me agreeing with the fact that not every dog who has bitten some time in their life is not a dangerous or aggressive dog or that they can be taken to the local park doesn't mean I am saying to mix aggressive dogs and children.

Always? When the mastiffs in San Francisco attacked a neighbor girl and the dogs couldn't be pulled off by their owner, was there another good option?

When those hybrid wolf/dogs attacked their owner and ate her last week, was there another good option?

You are so wrong.

I agree that there isn't ALWAYS another option, but more times than not, there is another option. Does that make her "so wrong"? I don't think so. Wrong in the sense that there's not ALWAYS another option but not wrong in the sense that she knows there are options out there without having to always resort to putting an animal down.
Your examples are rare examples. As for the wolf/dog hybrid, it should be common sense that those shouldn't be pets anyway. In that case, I don't blame the animal for following it's wild animal instinct but rather the owner who lacked the common sense in keeping the animal.

 

[mking624]

Yes, it is different because one is a dog and one is a human. It is very possible that the child doesn't know the clear difference between right and wrong because of poor parenting. Just like a dog may be biting because of owners who are not doing their job.

Not knowing the difference between what's right and wrong depends on the age of the child. I have a hard time believing that children 7, 8, and older don't know that biting people is wrong.

Even so, a child's bite can hardly be compared to a dog bite. There is no ways that a child can inflict as much pain and damage as a dog. The child also does not have the same instincts of survival that a dog has and would rely on when feeling threatened.

I've been bitten by a child and a dog...the child's bite was more painful to me because the child's teeth were more blunt so it took way more force for it to be able to break through the skin. I honestly didn't feel much pani when I was bitten by the dog because of how quick the bite was and how sharp the teeth were. The sight of it scared me more than anything (but keep in mind I was like 8 or 9 years old when it happened...so any sight of blood freaked me out). But you just confirmed my earlier points...that a dog would do that out of provocation or the feeling of being threatened (in my case, I was rough housing with my cousin and she was "screaming" in jest...it provoked the dog to think I was seriously harming her owner). Dogs don't bite just for the sake of biting. And yet a human being can and does perform actions just for the sake of performing them...without any reason needed. So which species is more dangerous? The animal or the human? I'm not saying humans are worse...I'm really just trying to put things into perspective, that's all.

It is surprising to me (shouldn't be I guess) that people feel dogs who have bitten have more rights that children.

Well for my part I know I never said or implied that a dog had more rights than a child. I've really just been out to show that there's typically more behind the scenes of a given situation with an animal that we see right at first glance.

 

[JerseyJanice]

Dogs don't bite just for the sake of biting. And yet a human being can and does perform actions just for the sake of performing them...without any reason needed. So which species is more dangerous? The animal or the human? I'm not saying humans are worse...I'm really just trying to put things into perspective, that's all.

I need to debate pretty much every thing you wrote above.

For one thing, dogs DO bite for no reason. They should not bite people and that should be the goal of anybody raising a puppy.

My 120 lb. lab mix will bite plastic toys, balls, and leather gloves all he can--for fun and without any provocation. Yet I haven't witnessed any human being running around biting anything other than food (and fingernails on occasion).

And as far as keeping things in perspective goes, true there are dangerous people in the world, but I haven't heard about a lot of kid's faces being mauled and permanently disfigured from other humans biting them.

I've really just been out to show that there's typically more behind the scenes of a given situation with an animal that we see right at first glance.

Yes, you are correct to say that dogs can attack for any number of reasons and not because they are vicious, but the fact of the matter is that until dogs are speaking English, nobody ever really knows what provokes one.

People who genuinely care about their dogs won't "test" their dogs by putting them in situations where they could do harm.

 

[snickerharley]

Always? When the mastiffs in San Francisco attacked a neighbor girl and the dogs couldn't be pulled off by their owner, was there another good option?

When those hybrid wolf/dogs attacked their owner and ate her last week, was there another good option?

You are so wrong.

In your opnion I am wrong, that is fine that is your opinion and you are entitled to it. I was unaware of the case regarding the wolf hybrids, that is unfortunate and no one should own a wolf hybrid, that is not a DOG. I should of stated that I always think there is a alternative for a DOG. Dog owners need to make responsible choices, maybe mastiffs for that person was a poor choice however I am also unfamiliar with that case. I was making a comment regarding a domestic dog biting a child, and the parents reaction to the possiblility of thier child being bit.

 

[momof2inPA]

In your opnion I am wrong, that is fine that is your opinion and you are entitled to it. I was unaware of the case regarding the wolf hybrids, that is unfortunate and no one should own a wolf hybrid, that is not a DOG. I should of stated that I always think there is a alternative for a DOG. Dog owners need to make responsible choices, maybe mastiffs for that person was a poor choice however I am also unfamiliar with that case. I was making a comment regarding a domestic dog biting a child, and the parents reaction to the possiblility of thier child being bit.

Why don't you like my dog bite examples? The laws in most states recognize that there are reasons for putting dogs down. In my state, it's two bites or one severe bite. In mking's state, someone can put a dog down on the spot if it bites. The law represents the reasonable prevailing opinion of the public, and the public.

The San Francisco attack was a famous case. You should google it.