because the uncle had been warned about his dogs behaviour and obviously did nothing about it , will that hold him accountable for the death of his niece and do you think he should face a murder charge or similar charge ??
2007-01-02 06:04:55 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Pets ➔ Other - Pets
I agree ... if i were the parent there would be no way my child would get to stay , and if i were the grandparent the dog wouldn`t even be in the house after the first incident .
2007-01-02 06:15:30 · update #1
Owning these dogs should come with a proviso that IF the dog attacks at all, he will be charged with offences of keeping a dnagerous dog.
IF it KILLS then he/she should be charged with involuntary manslaughter.
WHY do these people keep these animals?? To be different maybe?
All it shows is a lack of intelligence in owning these killers.
2007-01-02 07:02:34 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think he should face a murder charge or anything, as other people have said knowing your dog has killed your niece is a punishment in itself. At the end of the day its not the dogs fault, although these breeds can have an aggressive side to them it is only brought out if the training and upbringing of the dog hasn't been right, i think these cases have unfortunately given a bad name to rottweilers, they are very loyal loving pets and if brought up properly wouldn't dream of hurting anyone without reason. I have owned 2 rottie's and never had problems with aggression from either of them. I do think that any dog that attacks a person especially a child should be put down but i believe there is never a bad dog only bad owners and if people haven't got the time to bring up such a large animal properly then they shouldn't get one.
2007-01-02 17:22:53 · answer #2 · answered by Shorty 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The law only asks an owner to take responsibility of a dog in public.
I think the law should definately be tightened on certain breeds and protection extended to all members of the public in or outside the owners home.
Also, from the recent reports there is an obvious lack of education, all dogs are dangerous and musn't be left alone with small childre.
This needs to be made clear
2007-01-02 14:09:15 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes I think he should be given a harsh punishment he had been warned before and he did nothing about it. But why did the parents knowing that the dog was aggressive let her stay in her uncles house?.
2007-01-02 16:37:58 · answer #4 · answered by superstar68 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
he was aware that the dog was dangerous, that it had a violent temper, he knew that his niece was just a little girl, surely it must have occurred to him that the dog could harm her?
I do believe that he should be charged. However, can any legal punishment come close to knowing that your dog killed your niece and you knew it was dangerous? An example definately needs to be set.
It's like an alcoholic saying "i didn't kill my wife/husband, the alcohol made me do it" he was supposed to have control of the dog and he knew the dog was dangerous but did nothing about it.
2007-01-02 14:46:52 · answer #5 · answered by Nattelie 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There needs to be an investigation into why nothing was done previously. I think a murder charge is a bit harsh but something that shows he was responsible would send a message to other irresponsible dog owners.
2007-01-02 14:08:26 · answer #6 · answered by the dougal 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
thats a very good point.im not sure he will get charged with her death but he will certainly be prosecuted for keeping the dangerous animal.we could say about the childs parents though,why did they allow their child to stay in the home with such a dangerous animal?
2007-01-02 14:09:59 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Yes he should pay for his poor dog training. Just as if he took a gun and used it against her.
2007-01-02 14:12:09 · answer #8 · answered by bildymooner 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Stupid people like this deserve the harshest punishments you can recieve, or at least need to be put in MHMR facilities if they truely are that dumb.
2007-01-02 14:12:40 · answer #9 · answered by Jdeuel 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
All owners of this type of dog are inferior plank heads and should be held accountable for its behaviour.
2007-01-02 14:11:33 · answer #10 · answered by Piztaker 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋