Should dogs be blamed for their attacks or should it be a matter for the parents or the owner??

Question

I just want to know other peoples opinions.

Although very unfortunate, the little girl killed on New Years Day has been spread all over the news. Lots of protests about "dangerous dogs" have been raised.

Is it the dogs fault? Or are owners to blame? How about the parents irresponsibilty?

The dog killing that girl was a "Pit bull type". It had been given an official warning from a dog warden, and had attacked another dog. If so WHY did the Aunthorities NOT recognise it as a a "pit bull".
And why was the child left unsupervised with a dog known to have attacked before?

Tiny children and dogs don't mix. Children don't know how to act around dogs, it's not the fault of the dog in my opinion.

What do you think??

Answer 1

The fault is with all concerned, the parents, the owners and the breeder. Too many times, the breeders and owners of pit bulls value the aggressive, nasty behavior that gets plastered all over the media. In my area, they specifically breed for that type of personality. Any dog that turns out nice and sweet is either dumped or used for bait.

Then the dogs are placed in the community where stupid people take charge of them. These idiots don't know what they have and encourage the aggression and unpredictable behavior. They don't socialize the animals and keep them locked in a cage outside so they have no idea how to relate to the world at large. They don't neuter the males, so that their barely controlled dog hits its hormonal high at about two years and becomes a slavering aggressive dog-eating people-attacking monster. The end result is a forgone conclusion.

I'm not saying that all pit bulls are bad. I have seen some very nice ones. But in my area, you cannot trust any of them since so very many are bred for fighting and to be some wimpy dude's mark of masculinity. (As in: "I have a dangerous dog. Aren't I a tough guy?" It's the same reason men with low masculine self esteem buy expensive cars.... over compensating.)

If you want to own a pit bull, it is your responsibility to select one that is bred for even temperment and tractability with no sign of dog or people aggression. Once you have it, it is your responsibility to completely train it so that you can trust it.

And furthermore, if you have a small child, it is your responsibility AS THE PARENT to never leave that child alone with a dog of any kind. Chichuahuas are notorious biters and they can do damage to small child. It doesn't have to be a pit bull.

It's sad when a child dies because of some idiot's fashion statement. But it is totally predictable.

Answer 2

A dog is NEVER born agressive. And a BREED is not to blame. It is by far the way they are brought up. I blame the owners 100%. A dog will only do what it is taught or told. A dog will do anything to impress its owner, and if impressing its owner means fighting other dogs or chasing people then thats what it will do.
I also blame the parents. As some dogs simply DO NOT like children. They find them intimidating. I went to pick my little brother up from school one day and outside the gates i heard a little girl shouting and running towards a dog, thankfully the dog was on a lead. Now am sure if any child ran towards a dog screaming and shouting the dog would do its best to defend itself.
And the latest story that has been all over the headlines about little Ellie and the Pit Bull. Well i read that the fireworks had provoked the dog. Am sorry but i refuse to believe any dog will just turn for no reason. It must either be provoked or disturbed.
Many dogs have had a rough past and find it hard to trust people and strangers.
I do voluntary work in Dogs Trust, and there is one dog, a greyhound called Bryer who will only let 2 of the staff walk him because he is so scared of strangers. Therefore causing him to be agressive if one approaches him.
Once i got to know him i started to give him treats, he will gently take it from my hand then walk away. If i didn't have a treat he would bite me in a second, because to him he just thinks i am going to hurt him.
People should do their research on these animals before throwing horrible headlines at them such as MONSTER, BEAST, and SAVAGE. They are far from this. If they recieved the right care, love and attention am sure a lot of these dogs would turn out amazingly gentle.

Answer 3

If you own a dog that you know to be aggressive to other animals or to people, it is your responsibility as the owner to take the proper precautions concerning your dog. A dog like this should never be left unsupervised with any child or animal.

As a parent, no matter what dog is involved, even a chihuahua, children should NOT be left unsupervised with it. This is for the safety of the dog and child. Most of the time, dog bites are not "unprovoked," people just don't recognize the warnings the dog gives out before biting.

These incidents are not the fault of the dog. A dog only knows how to act/behave around others as it has been taught and directed. Dogs are dogs and not people...they have instincts and thought processes much different from our own.

In these situations, both the parent and the owner should be held liable. Unfortunately, it is the dog that will suffer for the actions of people.

http://www.libertydogtraining.com

Answer 4

It is NEVER the dogs fault. The personality and behavior of a dog is shaped by the person in charge of it. People MAKE dogs the way they are whether it be by bad breeding or bad training or lack of training. It is never the dogs fault, a dog is a dog and they aim to PLEASE. They never tell you the whole story with these articles, all they want to get across is "pits are DANGEROUS" or "Ban the dog!" and it is ridiculously one sided it is sickening. We don't know how this dog was treated, what kind of people they were (probably not good ones to leave a child unattended with ANY dog), and whether or not the child was provoking the dog in anyway, either deliberately or unintentionally. I, personally, do not want strange or bratty children around my dog and definitely not unsupervised because what happens when the kid hurts the dog (either accident or not)? I've seen some pretty mean kids and sorry but I don't want the media and ignorant public blaming me because some kid poked my dog in the eye or something and she snapped at them just because my dog happens to be a rottie and I'd feel the same way no matter what breed I have. I ALWAYS supervise, but it only takes one second for something to happen if parents arent watching their kids.

Answer 5

We Brits are world-reknown for our love of pets, so whenever there's a story about a child being killed by a pet it always seems to take us by surprise! And, as always, leave it to whichever Government's in power to make a knee-jerk reaction!

It's tragic about the little girl killed on New Years Day, plus there was another story earlier last year when 2 rottweilers savaged a baby. The fault lies firnly between the dog's owner and the child's parents. The owner KNEW they had a dangerous dog, so either they told this child's parents (and they thought it was OK), or the owners didn't tell the parents. Either way, in my opinion, they are both culpable.

Most breeds of dogs and kids don't mix well, even breeds that, like labradors, are known for their gentle nature. I will NEVER understand how parents can think it's OK to leave their child around a dangerous dog.

Answer 6

The dog should never be to blame. The owner has the influence on both how a dog grows to behave and the circumstances the dog is put in. I've had dogs (Staffordshire bull terrier) around newborn children, toddlers and infants. The owner has the responsibility to control the situation. If a child is left alone with a dog who's to say who starts the trouble? If an owner raises a dog to be vicious or even protective/guarding then it will be little surprise if a child is attacked when the dog perceives it's being attacked or threatened. If in doubt never leave a child alone with a dog even if it hasn't displayed agression before.

Answer 7

Questioner wrote: >> When talking about the dog attacking/biting, I don't mean when they are provoked. Provoking a dog is you just asking to be bitten, I am talking about when for no apparent reason a dog will take it upon itself to do someone serious damage.<< This reminds me of the story of a guy who was hailing a cab and got bitten by a dog -- totally 'unprovoked'. Later on it turned out that the guy was holding and waving a rolled up newspaper while hailing the taxi driver. After more investigation, it was also discovered that the dog had been beaten with a rolled up newspaper by its owner -- in the name of 'training'. The sight of the rolled up newspaper became the trigger for the dog's pre-emptive strike. It appears that from the dog's point of view, he wasn't gonna take this crap (i.e. beating) from a total stranger and acted in self-defense, even though he's taken it from its owner many times before From a human's point of view, is this any different than say, a cop shooting a person who suddenly pulls out a screw driver? Anyway, if a particularly nasty dog attack occurs, from the pespective of a human -- especially a family member or close friend -- there is NEVER a reason for the attack. However, from a dog's point of view, there is ALWAYS a reason (unless there's a true case of psychosis, which is extremely rare). Whether or not people accept that reason as a valid reason is another thing. The bulk of all people think that all training is training and it's all the same. It's NOT. There's a huge difference between positive reinforcement and negative reinforcement. There's a huge difference between positive punishment and negative punishment. Now, who would have thought that beating a dog is a form of positive punishment? In a world population of some 3 billion people, there are a lot of folks who attempt to beat 'bad' behaviours out of animals (or fellow humans for that matter) in the name of discipline or training. By doing so, you just don't know what crap you build up into the animals mind and when (if ever) it will come out and in what sort of violent way. THAT'S the real unpredictable part of using poor 'training' methods and THAT is the #1 reason why so many animals (and humans) are unpredictable. And it isn't just the owner -- ANY person or other animal who interacts with the dog in a less than friendly way may 'teach' a dog to bite, unintentionally or otherwise. E.g. it only takes a few moments for some kid (or adult) to throw rocks at your dog or poke/beat it with a stick. For instance, while you're hanging out the laundry in the backyard, while you're dog is minding it's own business in the front yard. Or it may only take one occasion where your dog is attacked by another dog, and after this it has learned to snap/growl/lunch at other approaching dogs in an attempt to keep them at bay. Not the owners fault, but attempting to punish it out of the dog seldom works -- in fact, mostly makes it gradually worse.

Answer 8

Owners fault each time. regardless of the breed. i have a jack Russel terrier and got him for my 10th birthday present. everyone warned my mum not to let me have this breed as they have a rep of being snappy. however, 10 years on he is still the best dog i have ever had and has not ever thought of snapping. he is the biggest softy ever and very loyal. this is coz this is all he has been taught and ever known. he has never been encouraged or shown otherwise, except to love and be loved.

This is the major key in dog owning i think. i see many people who get a staff or a rotti because of their reps and they want to look hard, then they play fight and push and torment the dog, so no wonder the dog bites or fights or gets nasty. the dog isn't doing it maliciously, just what it knows and have been taught. so when it 'play fights' with a young child or someone who doesn't play back it ends up mauling the victim.

as for the pitbull on new years incident - i agree - why on earth was a child left to play with the dog if it was known to have been violent before. That's not just the owners fault, that was the parents neglect too.

i think people should be 'vetted' or have a system set up somehow to prove how they are going to treat the dog before they are allowed to purchase one. or attend dog care courses or something like that.

x

Answer 9

I just said this a moment ago and I will say it again. People would much rather turn a deaf ear on something that they want and be so blinded that they cannot see the real problems facing them.

There will be many questions left unanswered that wet never will know. I cannot think for the authorities and why they did what they did. I don't know the whole story.

My belief is that people buy these dogs for protection. And my understanding is that Pitbulls were bred to be fighter dogs which seems to make them appealing to these people that want protection. I think sometimes a breed can be overbred--which appears to be the case of the Pitbull--so much that they are no longer good for families. PitbulIs seem to have an agression descrepancy problem. They don't seem to know when it is good to be aggressive and when not to be. Because of this problem they have, I would not consider them very good protection. When a person needs the protection the most, the Pitbull may let them down because their mind may not be in the aggressive state. I am very certain Pitbulls can be good in certain places, but not with the families. No. It's not the dog's fault for having such a nasty gene, it's man's fault for playing with such a hot gene that he/she is now getting burned by the affects it has left on society.

I'm not sure if there is a solvable issue to this problem. People will always blind themselves to the danger saying that it will never happen to them--until it does. As long as we have so many people--gangs/individuals--that are determined to kill others for whatever reason, these dogs will be very appealing to people seeking protection. The sweet loving nature side of these dogs are going to continue to deceive people. And innocent lives will be continuously lost.

Answer 10

I think there is some confusion here between people who see dangerous dogs as those who will growl at or fight another dominant dog (not attack indiscriminatley) and those that attack people (unless the dog is defending its owner or property).

Dogs who have shown a history of unpredictability with people should be put down before they bite anyone. Dogs who have a scrap with another dog or try to attack other animals should not be destroyed they should be trained to a standard where they can be trusted when their owned is around not to attack other animals(you can never fully trust any dog and as soon as people start treating dogs like animals and not children the less of these tragedies we will see.

I had a dog who was wonderfull with people never barked in anger towards a person, would fight other dogs at the drop of a hat, and often killed and ate birds rabbits mink hedgehogs and various other wee beasts. I thought he did it because he was hungry but he was not he just had the killer instinct. The owner is always to blame, he/ she has the power of life and death over any dog they own and as such should take the correct decision when they own a potentially dangerous animal ie any dog. I qoute this from a dog bite expert

"Mixed breeds and not pure bred dogs are the type of dog most often involved in inflicting bites to people. The pure-bred dogs most often involved are German shepherds and Chow chows."

oh and by the way my dog was not a pitbull or staffie or rottie he was a lab pointer cross, so any dog can be aggressive