How odd.

But good point, Steven.

** Edited **

Amber,
Grabbing someone from behind and dragging them to the ground for what ever reason is assault.
And frankly if someone comes on to my property and is told clearly not get out of their vehicle and does anyway, why would I or any other dog owner feel or be responsible for what the animal may or may not do? Particularly if the person was a hired hand that is after all paid by me to do whatever I want (within reason of course). They get paid for sitting in the car or raking, I want them in the car at the moment. Why is there a mystery about where the fault lays?
They may have been early arriving 'invitees', but they were 'ordered' to stay in their car.
Randy

 Quote: randy allen

Amber,
Grabbing someone from behind and dragging them to the ground for what ever reason is assault.

I have never said otherwise. Regardless of his intent, it was f-ed up.

In a perfect world people would not come onto our propery. But they do. We have meter-readers, mail carriers, Fed-Ex, UPS, Christmas carolers, wandering children, etc. If you seriously don't want anyone on your property, and you want your dogs to be loose, and those dogs are potentially dangerous to visitors (invited or otherwise) then you get a big fence and an intercom. And you have signs posted warning people of the potential danger.

And they did stay in their car until the wife came home. I'm not saying it's right, but I can certainly understand why they might think having an owner present would mean that they could get out of the car.

And again, I'm not talking about the mystery of where the fault lies. I'm talking about the fact that if the dogs were contained (and the owner already had a system in place...it just wasn't being used at the time) it wouldn't have happened...regardless of whose fault it was.

Even assuming the owner was 100% blameless, there's no way I would have gone through what he and his dog and family are going through...just on principle. I would have prevented it by having the dogs contained. Right or wrong, just or not, it's just not worth what happened...all for the sake of not closing a fence door before taking your shower.

 Quote: Connie Sutherland

Just a quick note, friends, that turning this or any thread into a non-dog-related political discussion is a surefire way to close the thread.

Just a reminder. Thanks!

I will be a little more blunt - my web board is NO PLACE to rant about politics or immigration. DON"T DO IT - go to a political web forum if this is your interest. !!!!!!

Although I do not usually follow Ed's posts, I think we have beaten the Congo story enough.
The dog does not deserve to be euthanized, the owners need to look at their habits, the so-called "victim" did not deserve $250k, the people that sit in judgement of things like this need to be educated about dogs and dog behavior and now, all any of us can do is await the outcome.

We all have our own opinions, and valid they all might be...but this is not dog training education for people that come here to find help, support and advice......granted I am not perfect and have been known to wander

We would be better off making this a "What do you want for Christmas from LB that would help you build a better relationship with your dog?"

 Quote: carol boche

I think we have beaten the Congo story enough. The dog does not deserve to be euthanized, the owners need to look at their habits, the so-called "victim" did not deserve $250k, the people that sit in judgement of things like this need to be educated about dogs and dog behavior and now, all any of us can do is await the outcome.

Well said, Carol. I agree.

Point taken Amber,
I will not hold the owner/s completely blameless. Can we agree on say 12 1/2 percent to blame? The dogs did stay in their allotted area until the farce started.
And in the right or in the wrong I would not want this nightmare on my doorstep.
Randy

Thanks for hearing me out, Randy. And I think we all agree that Congo doesn't deserve any of this. I'm glad that he's at least back home.