 Re: Dog/Baby picture that needs sane comments.
[Re: Ana Kozlowsky ]
#269590 - 03/17/2010 06:23 AM |
Webboard User
Reg: 01-25-2009
Posts: 1082
Loc: Columbus, Ohio
 Offline |
|
Wow. I honestly thought the first was some stupid Photoshopping. Now I wonder if that poor kid made it to kindergarten.
Ripley & his Precious
|
 Top
|
|
Re: Dog/Baby picture that needs sane comments.
[Re: Jenni Williams ]
#269605 - 03/17/2010 09:22 AM |
Webboard User
Reg: 09-22-2007
Posts: 2531
Loc: S. Florida
| Offline |
|
I hadn't read the board in quite a while, until someone alerted me to that awful photo again. Then I was re-alerted that my sig had been compared.
Guess I don't see the similarity at all, other than they each have a dog and a baby. I'm struggling here to try to explain the differences because I don't even see the similarity.
One, we have a baby quite obviously too young to move on its own (also swaddled, so even if he could move...he can't) placed against a dog (a quite content and stable dog w/a lovely and calm expression, though he is admittedly waiting for the child to be removed and a release command to be uttered so he can get up) for a photo.
Two, we have a crawling-age baby UNDER a molosser, displaying clear signs of dominance and possession. I make no apologies- anyone who lets their dog wrap a leg around their infant is a dumb@$$. The rest of the series of these pics was worse. If there is any doubt as to the dog's intentions in this pic, you won't have any when you see the rest.
These morons should be sterilized.
http://www.sonnyradio.com/hugababy.htm
Jenni, there is absolutely no similarity between your sig and the mastiff pic.(I know I don't need to tell you that, but I couldn't not say anything.)
Having a molosser mix, I recogized that body language immediately (the leg grip and very noticeable head-leaning, gripping the baby like a toy)
Couldn't agree more re the sterilization...
|
|
Top
|
|
Re: Dog/Baby picture that needs sane comments.
[Re: Lynne Barrows ]
#269615 - 03/17/2010 11:37 AM |
Webboard User
Reg: 01-15-2009
Posts: 5090
Loc: Lanexa Virginia
| Offline |
|
I hadn't read the board in quite a while, until someone alerted me to that awful photo again. Then I was re-alerted that my sig had been compared.
Guess I don't see the similarity at all, other than they each have a dog and a baby. I'm struggling here to try to explain the differences because I don't even see the similarity.
One, we have a baby quite obviously too young to move on its own (also swaddled, so even if he could move...he can't) placed against a dog (a quite content and stable dog w/a lovely and calm expression, though he is admittedly waiting for the child to be removed and a release command to be uttered so he can get up) for a photo.
Two, we have a crawling-age baby UNDER a molosser, displaying clear signs of dominance and possession. I make no apologies- anyone who lets their dog wrap a leg around their infant is a dumb@$$. The rest of the series of these pics was worse. If there is any doubt as to the dog's intentions in this pic, you won't have any when you see the rest.
These morons should be sterilized.
http://www.sonnyradio.com/hugababy.htm
Jenni, there is absolutely no similarity between your sig and the mastiff pic.(I know I don't need to tell you that, but I couldn't not say anything.)
Having a molosser mix, I recogized that body language immediately (the leg grip and very noticeable head-leaning, gripping the baby like a toy)
Couldn't agree more re the sterilization...
Perhaps my post was phrased incorrectly... I was NOT saying Jenni's photo and the other pic are similar, I meant to get a discussion going on what signals dogs give off which are potentially dangerous. It is a topic which comes up fairly often - people missing the obvious communication being given off by dogs about
"My bad" if it came across as saying the two were similar.
|
|
Top
|
|
Re: Dog/Baby picture that needs sane comments.
[Re: Barbara Schuler ]
#269617 - 03/17/2010 11:45 AM |
Webboard User
Reg: 09-22-2007
Posts: 2531
Loc: S. Florida
| Offline |
|
Perhaps my post was phrased incorrectly... I was NOT saying Jenni's photo and the other pic are similar, I meant to get a discussion going on what signals dogs give off which are potentially dangerous. It is a topic which comes up fairly often - people missing the obvious communication being given off by dogs about
"My bad" if it came across as saying the two were similar.
You didn't, and your post was a good one. 
I actually hadn't read your post before I responded to Jenni's, but I think your post was clear in asking Jenni to point out the differences of the 2 situations, for those that might have thought they were similar...
|
|
Top
|
|
Re: Dog/Baby picture that needs sane comments.
[Re: Lynne Barrows ]
#269620 - 03/17/2010 12:57 PM |
Webboard User
Reg: 12-23-2008
Posts: 252
Loc: Toronto, ON, Canada
| Offline |
|
Your dog is under control and command and in the photo could not be paying less attention to the child, so clearly not claiming the child as his. the other series of photo's there obviously show a dog who is claiming possession of an infant. that's pretty scary if you ask me.
|
|
Top
|
|
Re: Dog/Baby picture that needs sane comments.
[Re: Robert Kirkwood ]
#269632 - 03/17/2010 03:24 PM |
Webboard User
Reg: 02-12-2010
Posts: 328
Loc: Upstate NY
| Offline |
|
The mastiff pict somehow reminds me of a friends story as a park ranger in yellowstone. He walked up to a crowd formed around.....a sleeping bear and some idiot had just set his infant child on it's back to take a picture....yes, he really had. The friend said he doesn't remember doing it but he sprinted to them, vaulted over the bear and grabbed the child just as the bear was waking. He had the man ticketed for EVERYTHING he could think of from endangering a child to littering.
Or while docenting at SLC Zoo and having people comment about how the big cats would perk right up and "say Hello" to the littler kids.....Yes, that "Hello" is an invitation to lunch........
Some people truly do not have brains.
|
|
Top
|
|
Re: Dog/Baby picture that needs sane comments.
[Re: Sonya Gilmore ]
#269638 - 03/17/2010 05:14 PM |
Webboard User
Reg: 12-16-2007
Posts: 2851
Loc: oklahoma
| Offline |
|
OMG Sonya that is one of the scariest things I have ever read.
|
|
Top
|
|
Re: Dog/Baby picture that needs sane comments.
[Re: Jennifer Lee ]
#269661 - 03/17/2010 09:15 PM |
Webboard User
Reg: 02-12-2010
Posts: 328
Loc: Upstate NY
| Offline |
|
the bear thing? Yeah, he said that folks would figure that because the bears came and took human food that they were "tame" I think it goes with the saying "Common sense isn't common" Seems people are so 'sheltered' from wild things and from some realitys that they really are clueless.
I really think that is the trouble with people and dogs.....how many people have never kept an intact dog or bred dogs or had a dog with drive or that actually was a working working dog? (why I LOVE this forum) So many generic dogs that when they get a 'real' dog they think the dog is at fault. And, unfortunately they think molossers are all just doopy goofs because they are so subtle to the untrained eye. When we had our Bullmastiffs they were therapy dogs and went everywhere with us....I had so many people see them and say they wanted one....great dogs, well behaved...yeah, after the work and training and time put into them all dogs have that potential.
|
|
Top
|
|
Re: Dog/Baby picture that needs sane comments.
[Re: Sonya Gilmore ]
#269671 - 03/17/2010 11:53 PM |
Moderator
Reg: 06-14-2002
Posts: 7417
Loc: St. Louis Mo
| Offline |
|
Even if that was the sweetest dog on the planet the position it and the child are in could get the baby's neck snapped in a heartbeat if the dog moved wrong.
It's an accident waiting to happen.
old dogs LOVE to learn new tricks |
|
Top
|
|
Re: Dog/Baby picture that needs sane comments.
[Re: Kristel Smart ]
#269674 - 03/18/2010 12:51 AM |
Webboard User
Reg: 08-23-2007
Posts: 1196
Loc: Centralia, Missouri
| Offline |
|
Kristel
Thanks for commenting. You don't have to sign up for anything to see the comments, just click on the "see all 13 comments" link under the picture. My first comment wasn't posted until it was approved by a moderator. My second comment was up immediately.
The majority of the comments are from clueless people who think it's "cute". Oh, and I'm "silly and paranoid". 
|
|
Top
|
When purchasing any product from Leerburg Enterprises, Inc. it is understood
that any and all products sold by Leerburg Enterprises, Inc. are sold in Dunn
County Wisconsin, USA. Any and all legal action taken against Leerburg Enterprises,
Inc. concerning the purchase or use of these products must take place in Dunn
County, Wisconsin. If customers do not agree with this policy they should not
purchase Leerburg Ent. Inc. products.
Dog Training is never without risk of injury. Do not use any of the products
sold by Leerburg Enterprises, Inc. without consulting a local professional.
The training methods shown in the Leerburg Ent. Inc. DVD’s are meant
to be used with a local instructor or trainer. Leerburg Enterprises, Inc. cannot
be held responsible for accidents or injuries to humans and/or animals.
Copyright 2010 Leerburg® Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved. All photos and content on leerburg.com are part of a registered copyright owned by Leerburg Enterprise, Inc.
By accessing any information within Leerburg.com, you agree to abide by the
Leerburg.com Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Previous Topic
Index
Next Topic
