Another 'It's the owner not the dog' thread
 

Yeah, this happened about 3 blocks from where I live give or take...I actually didn't hear about it for almost a week after it happened, but my kids take our dogs (min schnauzer and chihuahua maltese crose) out walking in the field behind our place, where this nice doggy has been hanging out for the two weeks since the attack. Must be more bad owners, since this breed of dog is notorious for being the gentlest most harmless dog on planet Earth. So sad it got 'euthanized' by the police....or not.

http://www.dailyheraldtribune.com/20...till-not-found

And such shocking spin, to call this dog vicious! Horror.....although in fairness, looking at the picture of the lady who got chewed, it does seem like it didn't miss her jugular by much.

http://www.dailyheraldtribune.com/20...ad-by-mounties

Defenders, commence to defend this harmless breed.

Hopefully the victim sues the owners for a considerable amount.

Blood sport dogs doing blood sport things. Go figure.

Ban all dogs.

That the best you've got?

Ban assault dogs?

Better. I'll tell you upfront though that my wife's sister was brutally mauled to death by dogs a couple days before Christmas 2016, so I kind of have a bias. But it's probably just bad owners, not bad assault breeds.

There were more graphic pics on Facebook. The one on top of her head looked like it went the skull. I'm glad the police found the dog and put it down.

Glad they found it and put it down. Maybe they should give the flat brimmed hat and hoodie wearing owners a boot in their sagging pants.

If we could ban irresponsible dog owners, we wouldn't have to.

Grizz

But honestly, I don’t think certain breeds should be banned.
But I do think that the dog owners should be held accountable for the dogs actions.
Charge the registered owner with assault or manslaughter. Or public urination.

I can agree with that. I would go further though, and suggest that some people have no business owning some breeds. We don't let any old asshat have access (legally) to firearms, maybe some folks shouldn't have access to certain dogs. Arguably, dogs have a much higher probability of inflicting harm than a firearm, as they are not inanimate objects, and they do have...free will? Genetic predisposition? Whatever you want to call it. But they can act without human agency, and have the capacity, strength, and sometimes motivation, to kill.

Holding the owner 'accountable' after someone you love is killed is pretty hollow, just for the record.

I believe that.

Hearing stuff like this makes my heart sink. I'm a dog owner. Love dogs, always have, always will. I'm also not much of a fan of the government putting their hands into everything. But some days while reading stories like this, I wish you had to pass some sort of dog ownership and training course before being allowed to have a dog. Freely allowing any moron to own an animal that is potentially capable of causing great harm/death to others is pretty negligent. Similar to how we don't freely allow any moron to drive a large motorized vehicle that is capable of causing great harm/death without passing a driver's license exam (despite how pathetically easy it is), nor do we freely allow any moron to own a firearm without having them go through a firearms training course and exam.

As well, might save a lot of poor dogs a lot of suffering at the hands of owners who do not know better and explain all the work and effort dog ownership is. Give a run down of training tips and tricks, how to properly care for your new pet, etc. Maybe even give tips on which breeds to buy depending on lifestyle. Don't buy an energetic dog breed that is bred to run if you're going to keep it locked up in the house or small backyard all day. Don't buy a hound dog and then put a bark zap collar on when it tries to do what it is bred to do because your neighbours complain. Don't get a typically hard to train and potentially dangerous breed if you're inexperienced. Don't buy a dog because it's the cool and trendy thing to do and then neglect and ignore it when it gets in the way of your social life.

And then really hit home, dogs are NOT fashion statements. If your main reason for buying a dog is so you can post about it on social media, get a stuffed animal. Dogs, as much as we love humanizing them, are unintelligent animals who require excessive amounts of time, care and effort. Nothing worse than being at the dog park, and seeing some person (usually a girl, no offence, although there are plenty of ignorant male dog owners too) busy on their phone while their dog runs wild, and then they're shocked that their "sweet angel" attacked another dog/person. This is where my issue with larger breed dogs comes to play as well, at least if the negligent owner gets a shih-tzu, it's unlikely to do much more than bite some ankles, however when it's a large breed dog and a negligent owner, people get seriously hurt.

How well has the ban worked out for Ontario? Dog bites haven’t dropped at all really

Same argument that the antis have. I don’t have one, I don’t want one, I don’t think people should have them, ban them

If only they'd been trendy dogs and sporting muzzle brakes.

I'd have zero issue with an outright banning of certain breeds. That includes 98% of purse dogs based purely on their looks and their spazz owners attitudes.

If your dog can be mauled by a ground squirrel it isn't really a dog is it?

Would it be out of line to charge owners of dogs that have attacked humans with aggravated assault?

Sure, if you can prove the owner used the dog to attack someone and intended to cause them harm

The only suggestion to ban them on this thread was by Dewey, and he was pretty obviously not seriously suggesting it. But good reaction.

Just the folding ones...

So, the owner should only be held responsible if he actually set his dogs on the victim? Otherwise he has no responsibility to properly control/muzzle/curb his animal? Brilliant.

Larger more agressive breeds shouldn't be confined to urban environments penned up or chained up in a backyard or in the hands of some random person who fell in love at the rescue kennel period. Keep em away from trouble and on the farm or put them to work in security or what ever they're bred for and lots of these situations could be avoided.

In all honesty, this probably the answer. Make owners financially responsible for their decisions. A few big sueings will hopefully get the attention of those that think they need one of these inbred wonders. Would be pretty easy to make a case that these breeds are predisposition-ed to do crap like this.

Could be that there are more dogs and dog owners every year.

So...... we take a course and get license for car and gun.

Course and license for dog makes a lot of sense really.

No?

Yes. And really expensive liability insurance.

I agree on training. On the insurance side where does this go? For all dogs or only certain breeds?

I have no use for pit bulls but where is the line on this? Shepherds, Dobberman's, Standard Poodles, Bull Mastiff's or the breed with the most bites to its credit on an annual basis -- labs?

Always surprises me how many city people own a dog or three and they're never home.the dogs spend the entire day cooped up in the house. :confused:

Grizz

Yup my neighbour is a single hairstylist with 5!!! Pump your brakes lady!! Lmao

I agree with this 100%

We have a off leash park close by that I stopped going to as there was a group of people with American Staffordshire Terrier's that stayed in the centre of the part and were interested in toughest dog contests. Dog fights were a regular occurrence. After a year's absence I went back to the park. I was concerned on what days this group would be showing up. The park had put volunteer marshal in and I was informed that a number of people and certain dogs were banned.

This breed can be very gentle when brought up as a pup with the right training and socialisation or it is a breed that with training to be aggressive is scary to run across when it is off leash. So where did these problem people and their dogs go? Time bombs.