Bonniebank Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 If you are an owner of a dog that belongs to a 'dangerous breed' category and you also have a small child please take this as a warning. Don't leave your dog with the child unattended under any circumstances. Only a little moment was enough for the following to happen. See the photo attached .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonniebank Posted March 12, 2009 Author Share Posted March 12, 2009 sorry.....meant to add.... :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tatelina Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 I love that photo.......... http://www.dolforums.com.au/index.php?showtopic=161400 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shel Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Lols... so kyoot! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthernStarPits Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Lol a future graffitti tagger in the works! i read someone tagged some cows in a paddock a while ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xJasperx Posted April 10, 2009 Share Posted April 10, 2009 :D :thumbsup: :love: oh thats precious .... lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted April 10, 2009 Share Posted April 10, 2009 When that kids mum stops laughing that kids gonna be in a world of trouble Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arawnhaus Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 (edited) I know it's a cute photo and all, but what if that was the start of a problem,problems begin somewhere don't they? Ok one dog allows that but if same child did it to another? Yep parents watch blah blah, but no sadly they do not always. Edited April 11, 2009 by Delkerabo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisa. Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 I know it's a cute photo and all, but what if that was the start of a problem,problems begin somewhere don't they? Ok one dog allows that but if same child did it to another?Yep parents watch blah blah, but no sadly they do not always. i see your point, and concur with your argument... they should never be left alone because all it takes is a second. But that doesn't mean we should be so paranoid as to CONTINUE to put BSL on the breeds RATHER THAN THE DEEDS!!! i'm so far gone on this, i hate it... i've seen a JRT have a go at a kid for petting it... but they're not considered a dangerous breed, yet they could injure the child too!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandgrubber Posted April 25, 2009 Share Posted April 25, 2009 Lovely photo . . . every breed has some redeeming features, and I hope (against hope) all dogs of all breeds get redeemed by good management and breeding to tone down aggressiveness. BUT, as has sometimes been pointed out on this Forum, DA and HA don't always go together. Because a dog is sweet with children that it has come to accept as members of its pack doesn't guarantee that it won't take the white fluffy dog next door by the neck and shake it until dead, or for that matter, that it won't have a go at the postie. Cute pictures are a weak defense against BSL. It isn't one sort of good deed that is required. It is consistent good [or at least socially acceptable] behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redangel Posted April 25, 2009 Share Posted April 25, 2009 (edited) In my experience working as a vet nurse I had more to fear from those white fluffies than the larger breeds...personally any dog should not be left unattended with a child...and from my experience it seems the wrong people get the wrong breed-or certain breeds attract the wrong sorta people. Unfortunate but true legislation is a way of protecting some people from themselves or other people from other peoples careless ways. Either way duty of care rests in the induvidual and excessive reactions (either way) are ott. Btw I thought the picture was sweet... Disclaimer: Drawing on dogs should not be encouraged Edited April 25, 2009 by redangel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm2008 Posted May 5, 2009 Share Posted May 5, 2009 Cute, but naughty lol :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danii Posted June 30, 2009 Share Posted June 30, 2009 :p that has just made my week..... i had my eyes closed thinking it was going to be some horrible attack or something ahhhh..... my sides hurt from laughing too much! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
therm Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 Hey are you from aussiepythons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
therm Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 Hey are you from aussiepythons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amstaffs4me Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 (edited) :cool: Thats magic!!! Also the reason I didn't get my dogs when my kids were little ... Just not safe for the dog!!! Edited July 3, 2009 by Amstaffs4me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danii Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 Hey are you from aussiepythons? who??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puppymum Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 I know it's a cute photo and all, but what if that was the start of a problem,problems begin somewhere don't they? Ok one dog allows that but if same child did it to another?Yep parents watch blah blah, but no sadly they do not always. i see your point, and concur with your argument... they should never be left alone because all it takes is a second. But that doesn't mean we should be so paranoid as to CONTINUE to put BSL on the breeds RATHER THAN THE DEEDS!!! i'm so far gone on this, i hate it... i've seen a JRT have a go at a kid for petting it... but they're not considered a dangerous breed, yet they could injure the child too!!! The problem I have with focusing on the DEED rather than the BREED, is that it generally means nothing can be done until after a person or pet is actually attacked - having an individual dog dealt with after the fact is not much consolation to the victims. That being said, I don't really think BSL is the right answer to the problem either, but I am interested to know what people think about what role genetics, and therefore appropriate breeding, plays in aggression in dogs. If there was legislation of some type that aimed to prevent inappropriate breeding of aggressive dogs, regardless of breed, do you think this would be useful / appropriate? Or do you believe that breeders only need to consider the looks and health of the dogs, and that behavior is completely in the hands of the owner? My personal belief is that some breeds are more inclined to be aggressive to people and/or animals. I think however that it is more appropriate to focus on innapropriate breeding practices, as well as owner education about how to raise dogs, than to label an entire breed as dangerous - particularly when so many dogs are mixed breeds of unknown heritage. But I do worry about arguments that imply that aggression is unrelated to genetics, and also worry when people claim ANY dog is completely safe around children/dogs/cats etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shel Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 The problem I have with focusing on the DEED rather than the BREED, is that it generally means nothing can be done until after a person or pet is actually attacked - having an individual dog dealt with after the fact is not much consolation to the victims. That's a bit like saying everyone who weighs over 95kg has the potential to be an efficent violent attacker, so we should lock them up in case they do something nasty. Or that people who have tattoos are more likely to be criminals, so we'd better kill them (I have a tattoo btw). I think rather being predisposed to aggression, these dogs are predisposed to being owned by people who many people find intimidating. Gangs of youths standing on corners with a big, scary dogs. Young men who we deem undeserving of owning a dog because they don't have a job, or simply because they're young. We must do something to protect the women and children! It's descrimination repackaged. Don't believe me? Think any of these dogs should be seized and killed? If not, then BSL is wrong. Kids get bitten by all kinds of dogs. Tough guys will get a big strong dog whether they should have them or not. Neither of these facts have anything to do with pitbulls. (Images from Pin Ups for Pitbulls) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teebs Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 The problem I have with focusing on the DEED rather than the BREED, is that it generally means nothing can be done until after a person or pet is actually attacked - having an individual dog dealt with after the fact is not much consolation to the victims. That's a bit like saying everyone who weighs over 95kg has the potential to be an efficent violent attacker, so we should lock them up in case they do something nasty. Or that people who have tattoos are more likely to be criminals, so we'd better kill them (I have a tattoo btw). Crap, i have a tattoo and 2 bull breeds, whats that saying about me ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now