Quote: Mara Jessup

In this case I wouldn't say that the dog was innocent. An unprovoked attack from a dog under a year old is serious stuff. IMO, this dog was wired wrong.

True, but wouldn't that then be even more of a flag for proper management and containment, OR, PTS before something tragic happened.

(discussion purposes only; not trying to openly contradict a fellow board member)

This wasn't a Leerburger. It was an average person who adopted a young lab/chow mix. How many times have people posted on this board about their dog "suddenly" doing something and forum members identify warning signs that surfaced months before?

Reports are that this dog was only 8 months old. There was some serious wire-crossing in that dogs brain IMO. I'm wondering if it survived a high fever, parvo, or distemper myself and maybe had some brain damage result.

IMHO, it doesn't matter if you're a LBer or not... regardless of the age or issue, if the dog has a "wire crossed', steps must be taken to isolate him from potential conflicts.

I'm 51 years old. I've only been at LB for three years. I never needed any expert to tell me when a dog of mine needed to be restrained. When I was a teenaged,"average" dog owner, I gave several dogs to country cousins because the dogs were not fit to live in the suburbs.

Back to my original point; if something had happened to that dog to compromise its sanity, would you not expect the owner to keep that dog contained, or humanely end its misery?

IMHO, the dog shouldn't have been running loose. If my dog gets loose, even if by mistake or accident, am I held accountable for its actions?

For me, this is the bottom line:

"IMHO, the dog shouldn't have been running loose. If my dog gets loose, even if by mistake or accident, am I held accountable for its actions?"

YES.


Our dogs have to be under our control.

A dog who is under our control cannot harm anyone.

To me, and I say this with respect to every person replying here, all of whom I know are good responsible people, this is the absolute bottom line:

Know the dog's failings or not, be aware of danger signs or be ignorant, the dog cannot harm anyone if the dog is under our control.

Anything short of that is badly failing the dog, the neighbors, society, ourselves .....

Yes, I hope that I'd have recognized the faulty wiring and dealt with the situation, however sadly....

But still, over and above that, whether I recognized or not, bottom line is that our dogs have to be under our control.

A dog who is under our control can't harm anyone.

my community has some pretty " flaky " dog owners who just don't seem to understand their responsibilty for their dogs' actions .

example : we have a valley trail network that runs the length and breadth of our valley . it is used as much as a commuter ( cycle ) route as it is just a pleasant place to walk . several years ago a woman with two completely out of control terrier types managed to run out in front of my front tire and take me down while riding in to work .

despite being a leash law community , her argument was that i shouldn't have been riding my bike there at 7.00 am ( or something like that !? ).

my response to her ( paraphrased for civility ) was " if your dog does something that causes injury or damage to others , i'm not coming after the dog , i'm coming after you . . . "

" if your dog does something that causes injury or damage to others , i'm not coming after the dog , i'm coming after you . . . "

You are EXACTLY RIGHT.

There is one person to blame when a dog injures a human, or another dog, or whatever ... and that person is the owner.



I know I sound a tad rabid, and I do know that the people who post regularly here need no preaching ....

My above comment had to do with the comment about an "innocent dog" being killed. This was not a wrong place/wrong time dog that nipped a child who was harassing it. This was a young dog that viciously attacked an innocent child. Of course the owner is culpable, should have prevented it and needs to be held accountable. But this was not an innocent dog that was simply a victim of circumstance

Yup.

8 month old dog. Equivalent of what, a 4.5 year old.

Why was a young dog running free in suburbia? Dogs, in my biased opinion, are dogs. If we decide to have a dog, the dog is our responsibility to train and protect.

We talk in human terms. Innocent dog. But even the most timid dog will have some level of prey drive, some level of unpredictably, and always the ability to inflict a nip or bite.

The dog's owners are absolutely responsible for the outcome. It is a fact their negligence led to outcome.

I'm probably in the minority who has had a dog that bit some one. It was through my negligence and lack of management. I was wrong. Fortunately my dog didn't have to pay for my negligence.

I'm in the absolute minority who might opine that the dog didn't need to be put down. What did putting the dog down accomplish? Feel good revenge?

I've had a few foster dogs come through the house that were labeled dangerous problems, on their last chance. Fortunately, none have had to be put down, and all found forever homes and became loved family members without incident. I know there are dogs that have so many issues that, well...

What disturbs me about this whole thing is that it was predicable and preventable.

Puppies and children seem an ideal match. In my opinion, not so much without proper training and oversight of both. And no neighbor should have to protect their child on their own property from a dog running free.

What do I know?

I'm conflicted, obviously. Perhaps it is reflective of an under consumption of coffee this morning.

I find it hard to believe this is an 8 month old dog. Too large, too committed and looks very experienced. If he was in fact 8 months old, he's dangerous no matter who owns him. That dog wouldn't be safe to own by anyone except the most diligent and experienced of dog people. We all know there aren't enough of those people to go around.

Good points all around.