I heard that Marjorie Noeller was standing beside her neighbor watching her get attacked for 2 MINUTES while she did nothing,I think its great that they are in so much trouble, but I do believe its going to cause problems for anyone who has a dog or does bite training, but maybe that isnt such a bad thing to have more regulations on sports & the people that have these dogs,there are some wackos out there who use their dogs for the wrong reasons & maybe with more rules it would help deter them?

That is the sad part Kimberly, Most (and I say most, not all) the people in biting sports are not the people that need to have more regulations. The Knoellers were a$$holes taking care of dogs for a SICKO criminal who was raising the dogs to be killers. Sport Trained dogs are not Killers! More regulations on biting sports will NOT stop people from being idiots and is addressing the wrong crowd.

The person they were keeping the dogs for was a white supremisist that had the dogs as a replacement for the set of balls he was born without. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> :rolleyes:

States differ on the burden of proof. However, malice is not a requisite for 2nd degree murder in most states. Perhaps the most damaging element to the idiots that owned the dogs was:" an unintentional killing constitutes murder in the second degree where the death rasults from a consciously unlawful act done intentionally and with the knowledge of the perpetrator that the act was directly perilous to humam life." Circumstantial evidence can be used to substantiate a claim of 2nd degree murder. The string of witnesses (30 I believe) that testified the dogs were aggressive and threatening, with one subject testifying they had been bitten, convinced the jury that the subject, knew or should have known the dogs were a danger. Fortunately, I can't speak for all states, but in my state, the dog is not considered as a "use of deadly force" (in the law enforcement arena). The nay sayers however will continue to argue that it is, which to me, proves the absolute necessity that the dogs we use be well trained and any police agency that uses dogs should strive to meet the most exacting standards.

David C. Frost

Unfortunately, these events will only have a very negative effect on all of us. Suppose your dog bites someone while protecting you. If there are no witnesses. A dog trained to bite - schutzhund or otherwise. Even if the dog is provoked, we better have good control with witnesses. Many people are frightened by just a bigger dog. Good thing my Ramsey is one of those fluffy cute GSD.

Originally posted by VVG:
Unfortunately, these events will only have a very negative effect on all of us. I agree - following that story they released the stats in Canada on the news last nite - 1200 dog bites a year being treated (who knows how many that don't get treated) and that they are mostly known dogs of friends/family/neighbors, and those bitten are mostly kids under 10yrs old. GSDs were #1, cockers #2, and Rotties #3.

I'm glad she was convicted on all the charges. Too many dog owners feel no need to exercise adequate control over their dogs. I see these jerks all the time, walking their dogs off lead in busy city parks, or letting the dogs pull them down the sidewalk all the way out on their 26' flexis, allowing them to greet every person within range. They have this attitude that since they love their dogs so much, everyone else should too. They don't understand that strangers do not know whether their dog is friendly or not, and that some people are afraid of dogs, and that to a parent, the sight of a large dog running up to their child is very alarming. They impose their dogs on the rest of society, and as a dog owner, it makes me very angry, because it is due to people like this that there are so many leash laws and places where dogs are not allowed. It reflects poorly on ALL dog owners, because the responsible ones don't stand out, while the irresponsible ones get noticed.

Maybe this will send a message to people that they'd better control their dogs, or they will be held liable.

As for protection training, I do see it as a negative for folks who do so responsibly. The general public already thinks that such dogs are "attack" trained, and do not understand what it's really all about, when done properly. Idiots like Marjorie Knoller need to be held accountable, no question, but it would be beneficial to responsible protection trainers to mount a PR campaign, just to educate the general public about what responsible bite training is really all about. There are too many misconceptions already, and this case does not help that.

I once had the opportunity to defend Schutzhund to a couple of radio shock jocks who had maligned Schutzhund as "attack dog training."

Three things that can be pointed out--and should be pointed out--when arguing the case for Schutzhund:

1) Schutzhund-trained dogs are almost never implicated in attacks on humans (sound temperament + handler control), so therefore the vast, vast majority of dogs that attack humans are NOT Schutzhund-trained;

2) Reputable Schutzhund clubs welcome visitors and those who think Schutzhund is the same as attack training should be invited to visit a club, meet the dogs personally, and see for themselves how social the dogs are;

3) NEVER neglect to say, "Many working police dogs and search-and-rescue dogs have Schutzhund titles." This is quite true. Even though it has been pointed out (on this board and elsewhere) that many SchH-titled dogs are not suitable for street patrol work, for the uninformed this is a moot point. The public LOVES police dogs and associates them with show-and-tell at kindergarten, DARE seminars, etc. etc. etc. And the truth of the matter is that dogs that do this kind of PR work frequently HAVE BEEN Schutzhund-titled. They are the dogs with the good solid nerves that are safe to bring around people and obnoxious little kids.

Pete Felknor

The public LOVES police dogs and associates them with show-and-tell at kindergarten, DARE seminars, etc. etc. etc. And the truth of the matter is that dogs that do this kind of PR work frequently HAVE BEEN Schutzhund-titled. They are the dogs with the good solid nerves that are safe to bring around people and obnoxious little kids.

This mayy be the single most important factor in creating an informed public about the temperment and training involved in the classic modern working dog. All K-9 programs should include a large dose of demonstrations of social well controlled dogs (this doesn't necessarily mean a dog mugging session by all the people in attendance). It is imperative that schutzhund, ring, S&R, people as well as detector and patrol dogs get out there and promote their vocation!
For police service dogs it should be a top priority of the program. there is nothing like being out in the public and interacting with them in such a fashion. Too often we work nights, out of sight until some controversy, usually ignited by a plaintifs attorney and carried into sensationalizm by the ratings driven news media brings us into public view. As few really understand, LEO's are all but prohibited from defending themselves in a public format, so a good public relations program can help offset such issues. Sport people can learn from this.

Pete,

Good for you. Glad to hear that you took on those DJ's on that show. That is a tough spot to be in, it's you versus them and most of their ignorant audience. Plus the fact that they control the whole conversation and can hit the button to shut you up anytime. Real good posts everyone.