and the parents???
I am disgusted with both for allowing this poor little girl near this dog! What do you think!!?
2007-01-02 06:07:59 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Media & Journalism
yes the owner of the dog should be
im sure the parents could not have realised the danger or they would never have left her there
a mistake to haunt them for the rest of their lives
what a tragedy for that little girl ..... god bless her
2007-01-02 07:28:56 · answer #1 · answered by ♥gigi♥ 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
These dogs do not make good family pets, they need discipline and a colossal amount of exersize. They are bought as status symbols by people who have no idea how to look after it. These dogs have special requirements that their owners must see to for their entire lifespans. It is criminal that someone can buy them and then not provide the necessary attention and time to train it properly. Animals have no sense of good or evil, but dogs learn right and wrong from their owners. They can be trained to behave in a particular way. The owner of this dog failed in his duty to ensure his dog behaved in a particular way. He has paid for it with the sad loss of a small child.
There are no (well very few) bad dogs...only bad owners. What surprises me most about this is how rarely this happens. Just think how many dogs (and not just pit bulls) come into contact with children. The only dog that ever bit me was a dalmatian...a classic family pet.
The owner should expect the full weight of the law to come crashing down on him, and rightly so. His neglect has killed.
2007-01-02 14:23:48 · answer #2 · answered by Finlay S 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
that's a tough one. Precedent has been set in other cases like the one in SF a few years back. The lady and her husband got convicted of manslaughter when their dogs attacked someone and killed her. I think in this case the owner should be charged with manslaughter. If you've ever owned a dog, you know that owners largely determine how a dog will behave. Abused or mistreated animals act out in many ways that are directly or indirectly a result of their owner. Of course some dogs just totally snap in rare situations, but owners can still be held accountable. People need to learn how to manhandle a dog, no matter the size. There are easy, easy ways to control even the most viscious, attacking dog.
2007-01-02 14:13:07 · answer #3 · answered by Rocky B 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Totally agree with you. The owner knew that the dog was a banned breed, and still kept it. Definitely a manslaughter charge.
A lot of the time it is not the animals fault - it is the owners because of the way they treat them. I sometimes believe the owners are the animals, not the other way round!
That poor little girl, what a waste of a precious life.
2007-01-02 14:19:50 · answer #4 · answered by Claire S 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There needs to be more done to protect the innocent but you can no more charge hthe owner with manslaughter than the owner of a car having failed the MOT and been repaired , fail again and plough into a school bus.
The dog was in the owners home, it is seen in law to be up to the parents to ensure the safety of their child.
I am sure all are devestated and I wish no blame on anyone, now it has been brought to our attention. Again ( iam am old enough to clearly remember the attacks that brought us the dangerous dogs act)
Time for strict legislation. I for one would not be sad to see the permenant exclusion of these animals from our shores.
2007-01-02 14:16:03 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Too much of this is happening these days, what with that baby and the roitweiller. Yes there should be stiffer penalties, it makes me sick to the stomach to think what that poor child went through. I'm not anti dogs, I have a GSD, but no children in the house. No way would I ever let a small child come near him in the house unsupervised or when when walking him. No dog can be trusted 100% regardless of what the owner says.
2007-01-02 14:14:19 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Any owner of any dog that harms anyone else is held accountable for the actions their dog took. Dogs are as mean as their owners allow them to be. The owners will have to pay for this one. Thank you and GOD bless.
2007-01-02 14:14:59 · answer #7 · answered by cookie 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
If it is found to be a "genuine,pure pit bull" yes according to the law.Morally this whole incident smacks of neglect by someone,somewhere along the line,a full investigation should be made!
2007-01-02 14:21:47 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
well it's not really the owners fault, i mean in the first place, pit bulls are pretty dangerous dogs. so the little girl shouldn't have gone near it if she knew that that dog was dangerous. the owner didn't even have anything to do with it.
2007-01-02 14:16:29 · answer #9 · answered by Aaliyah 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋
He should be charged for keeping a banned breed. As for charging any of them with manslaughter I think they will all suffer enough by their loss, what would be gained from this charge?
2007-01-02 14:17:38 · answer #10 · answered by forge close folks 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋