Another baby killed

Kate1949

Dog lovers and non dig lovers will never agree. I rarely join in anything contentious on here as that's now what I joined for. However, I have had bad experiences so I won't post again.
Also GSM you have been lovely and kind to me on other threads. We must agree to differ.

I know what you mean. I rarely join in contentious threads, but we are faced here with a litany of children killed and maimed and it is very hard to stay silent.

Part of the problem lies in the fact that dog lovers really do believe that others should fit around them. That is a false mindset. And it is not about hating dogs - it is about being aware what a danger they are. Minimizing that is why we finish up with these tragedies.

Children should be free to roam and enjoy themselves without having to undergo training to take account of the needs of people who make the choice to own dogs. If you are sitting in a cafe with a dog (!?) it is your responsibility to be alert and make sure that your dog does no-one any harm.

I don't think children should be free to roam around in cafés and annoy other people, let alone dogs.
I've had nice coffee mornings in a local pub spoilt by out-of control children rushing up, getting in the way and generally being a nuisance. They should be controlled too.
However, I will say they didn't bite although they could have spilt scalding hot coffee.

We've owned about 30 dogs over the years. Pleased to say we've had no bites.

Children should be free to roam and enjoy themselves without having to undergo training to take account of the needs of people who make the choice to own dogs. There is no training involved. Just ensure that your children know not to go bouncing up to a strange dog who is enjoying a walk.

The benefits of children growing up with dogs are plenty. An autistic child neighbour of mine has come into his own now he has a dog.

Dogs do more good than harm.

They can be excellent friends to children, great fun and exercise giving for families, and marvellous friends for the elderly. How awful to think there are people who would like to deny this.

Happily it will never happen.

Study after study confirms that having a dog doesn't just keep you alive longer; it also improves your mental health, lowers your rate of heart disease, and increases your overall level of joy. This is, in part, because having a pet boosts your levels of oxytocin, the bonding hormone.

The only problem I have with dogs is the their lives are short.

Kate1949

Agreed. It's very odd.

It's not odd at all.

No sensible, caring parent will introduce a dog or dogs from a dubious background into a household with a small child.

It is the fault of the breeders, some of who have stolen dogs, the fault of the stupid parents and the fault of anyone who is that irresponsible to buy a dog without first checking its background and lineage.

People - not dogs.

I am happy for all those dog owners whose oxytocin is being raised and they are going to live longer - that's great.

But they still have an absolute responsibility to make sure that their dog does harm to no-one and that even a child behaving unpredictably is safe.

I do not want to deny anyone the chance to own a dog if that is what they want and it is right for them. No-one has said this.

But dog owners have total responsibility for what their dog does and there is 100% no wriggling out of that responsibility for any reason at all. None at all.

"It wasn't me, it was him" simply does not cut it in this situation. Nothing anyone, young or old, might do to your dog justifies allowing it to do harm to a human being.

But they still have an absolute responsibility to make sure that their dog does harm to no-one and that even a child behaving unpredictably is safe.

So a dog which retaliated when a child was terrorising it was at fault?
One of our dogs once bit a visiting small child (quite gently) on the thumb because she had him cornered and was growling at him and 'playing witches' at him, trying to scare him.
I blame myself for assuming that a child knew how to behave with a dog, as mine all did.
He was a soppy thing but she terrified him.

I don't own a dog but I like dogs. I would always prioritise children's needs over a dog's but that would not mean letting a child tease, hurt or otherwise annoy one. Children need to know how to behave in a socially acceptable way. I.e be aware of other people/ dogs etc feelings!,

But dog owners have total responsibility for what their dog does and there is 100% no wriggling out of that responsibility for any reason at all. None at all

But they do have to take responsibility. It's always been this way. If a dog bites it is usually euthanised and the owners are fined.

I've never heard anyone say, "It wasn't me, it was him!

And most dogs do not do harm to a human being. Plenty of ghastly human beings do harm to dogs though, but that's a different thread.

Look at the Ukranian refugees carrying their dogs as they flee to safety. They love their dogs. And cats. In fact there's a picture of a woman carrying 2 cats and walking a dog as she trudges to safety. Plenty of people are working to save dogs and other animals from Ukraine.

The lovely Doris Day ended her days surrounded by her beloved dogs, said this ...

"I have found that when you are deeply troubled, there are things you get from the silent devoted companionship of a dog that you can get from no other source."

And I totally agree with her.

Oh for heaven's sake - so people shouldn't be responsible for their children? If you're in a cafe with your child, as in your example, surely you need to be responsible for that child's actions? Teaching your child not to approach a strange dog is no different from teaching them not to run around wildly in a cafe in case they cause an accident - for example, bumping into a waiter/waitress carrying hot food or drinks.

Luckygirl3

I am happy for all those dog owners whose oxytocin is being raised and they are going to live longer - that's great.

But they still have an absolute responsibility to make sure that their dog does harm to no-one and that even a child behaving unpredictably is safe.

I do not want to deny anyone the chance to own a dog if that is what they want and it is right for them. No-one has said this.

But dog owners have total responsibility for what their dog does and there is 100% no wriggling out of that responsibility for any reason at all. None at all.

"It wasn't me, it was him" simply does not cut it in this situation. Nothing anyone, young or old, might do to your dog justifies allowing it to do harm to a human being.

I'm sorry, but that final paragraph absolutely beggars belief! So nothing anyone does to a dog justifies that animal reacting or trying to defend itself? That is 100% condoning cruelty to animals. If, for example, a child is allowed to pull a dog's tail or ears or poke the animal with a stick, how could you not expect the poor creature to react? What about children who torture animals for fun - and yes, that does happen (in fact, there is a proven link between children who do that and those who go on to become killers in later life). I cannot believe anyone could make such a statement.

Having dogs or having children is a matter of choice (mostly).

Being a part of society means taking responsibility for yourself, your dog and your child.

Most people do this easily and with diligence and it would be a shame if we couldn't all find a way to live happily and safely together.

The dog owners on here are all saying they want better legislation and licencing. I don't hear anyone being anything less than 100% responsible and stressing the importance of training a dog.

Sensible parents will caution and supervise children around dogs as they do on a busy road or near a BBQ or river. Why wouldn't they? Why shouldn't they?

I don't agree with the point Nothing anyone, young or old, might do to your dog justifies allowing it to do harm to a human being.

All creatures have a breaking point and I happily include myself and my dog in that. I once caught an acquaintance taking great delight in teasing my dog. My poor dog, taught through many years of regular training to be a good girl was trying to endure with good grace, but if she had snapped then it would have blooming well served him right. I snapped on her behalf!

Ideally no child should do anything to a dog that might provoke it - but if it does the owner, and only the owner, is responsible for preventing injury to that child.

There is no question that the carers/parents should tell the child not to do it; but the ultimate responsibility for the dog's behaviour is the owner's and no-one else's.

Sensible parents will caution and supervise children around dogs as they do on a busy road or near a BBQ or river. Why wouldn't they? Why shouldn't they? .... busy roads and rivers are a given - they simply exist - dog ownership is a choice. And the owner has total responsibility.

When I was a child I was taught to approach a strange dog quietly (I always wanted to) and offer it the back of my hand to sniff, if the dog appeared pleased to see me, a wagging tail, then it was safe to pat, if the dog turned away or displayed displeasure, then leave it strictly alone. My children were taught the same and I still do it to this day. None of us have ever been bitten, although rejected from time to time. All animals will react badly if they're frightened and confused by over zealous shows of affection by strangers, woken up suddenly from a deep sleep, (let sleeping dogs lie) a crying baby, a boisterous child, and yes children and adults should behave with respect and calmness around any animal. You wouldn't allow a child to torment a baby, so why allow it to torment a dog or cat, rabbit or any animal come to that?

Dogs simply exist and are a given too Luckygirl3. All around the World man has lived and worked alongside dogs since we were in caves.

Nothing - just nothing justifies this:

Separate dog attacks in the West Midlands have left two children in a critical condition in hospital.

A two-year-old boy was seriously hurt at a property in Egdon, Worcestershire, on Monday.

It followed Saturday's attack on an eight-year-old boy in Cannock, Staffordshire.

The maulings come just weeks after separate and fatal attacks on two infant girls.

Earlier this month, Bella-Rae Birch died after being mauled by her family's pet dog in St Helens and Kyra Leanne King died after a dog attack at a Lincolnshire beauty spot.

Sorry but dogs shouldn’t be in cafes I do not want to sit at a table next to a dog eating off their owners plate (a totally true happening ) and another sitting on the seat at the table being given tea in the saucer Lick lick slurp dribble dribble shake my head so the dribble can fly round a bit
It is unhygienic and a few years ago it would not be allowed nor would dogs be allowed in any shops but people want to take their pooches everywhere now including shopping (why can’t they leave them at home I never took my dog shopping she had two good walks a day not a mooch round shops)

Sorry but dogs shouldn’t be in cafes I do not want to sit at a table next to a dog eating off their owners plate (a totally true happening )

Yes I've seen that too and, although I have had dogs I find that totally unacceptable.

There was a thread a while ago about this and, as far as I remember, those who disagreed with dogs being around people eating in cafés are not true dog lovers.

I like most dogs, not all, but think they should know their place and it's not on an owner's lap licking a plate in a café, pub or restaurant.

These posts all confirm what I already said. There are too many people and therefore too many dogs in a small crowded country. Legislation is required and strict controls on dog keeping. Children and dogs should not be bumping into each other every time they go out.

Dogs can be very unpredictable and territorial as well as protective and jealous, there are many reason why a dog may cause injury. The “postman” or any delivery person is a regular target for a territorial dog, my terrier was awful, no amount of training would change it, given the chance she would have bitten someone.
With family visiting no problem, just over affectionate but never trusted her with small children

The truth is that some people aren't fit to look after animals properly. They are unlikely to listen if forced to attend a course on dog behaviour. Unfortunately they seem drawn to the tough fierce looking dogs. Perhaps we should licence owners and remove dogs from unlicensed owners. But could that be instigated properly, doubtful.

I meant implemented.

Lots of excuses why dogs attack children. Obviously a child should not be allowed to tease or torment any animal but a child, especially, a toddler, should be able to run round in a park, older children play games and jump around without having to be trained to known from the moment they take their first step that if they see a dog they should freeze and creep back to their parent for protection until it goes away.

In every other situation, if something could be dangerous, it is the danger that is controlled, not the user. I have been climbing ladders most of my life and never fallen off one. Nevertheless I know that people do and for that reason there are lots of rules governing the use of ladders and how they can be made safe to use. The same should apply to dogs.

I do think some of these problems can arise from people who think dogs are human.

A car is a potential killing machine in the wrong hands and so is a dog. We need a driving licence, road tax and insurance to be allowed the use of a car. Maybe there should be the same for ownership of a dog, especially as it is a living creature which requires care (unlike a car). That makes it even more important to ensure the dog is licenced and the owner has passed a doggy driving test.

Again how would you enforce it? Getting a driving licence entails a ministerial department devoted to just that, with a minister having overall responsibility. I really can't see any government creating the equivalent of the DVLA to cover the ownership of dogs, all the work involved would be a full time job, time consuming and expensive. Also dog wardens , like a traffic warden would have to be employed both in public and house to house to spot check that insurance and licences were in place. What would the punishment be for non compliance? The removal of the dog, a fine, prison? Would it be a civil offence, a criminal one? I really can't see it happening!