Womans Arm Severed By Dog

[BJean]

I'd love to know where you got the impression that myself (or anyone else here) is agreeing with banning large dogs. I have a husky which could be called a large dog (although technically they are a medium breed) so I'd hardly be advocating the banning of large dogs would I?

My chihuahua is agressive, but most of the time nobody cares because if he's not in anyone's face he's not a danger to anyone, the only way he might succeed in severing my arm was if I had died already and he'd had a week or so to gnaw at it.

So what we have is a combination of powerful animals and humans who no longer use them for work and therefore have little understanding of the proper management of powerful animals, and the reasons for it. Therefore controls over ownership and breeding are a logical step to take IMO.

Control over ownership = control of who, where and when the breed can be owned = BANNING of the breed where it is decreed the breed cannnot be owned.

Edited March 25, 2010 by lilli

[mantis]

It's got everythiing to do with it, you are an irresponsible owner laughing at your dog being vicious, forget the size, why haven't you trained it, or seeked professional help to get rid of aggression?

This is what really aggravates me, on DOL, we have owners of small dogs agreeing with banning large dogs, yet they can't even control a small dog.

So us owners of big dogs who are responsible owners, have to suffer because of BSL & worst of all, so do our beautiful non aggressive dogs.

I'd love to know where you got the impression that myself (or anyone else here) is agreeing with banning large dogs. I have a husky which could be called a large dog (although technically they are a medium breed) so I'd hardly be advocating the banning of large dogs would I?

You are also assuming that I haven't trained him, which isn't true he is less agressive than he was when the issue became apparent, at the end of the day though were I to do a risk assessment on the impact of his agression on myself or any other human the risk would be negligible.

It's a simple fact that a large powerful breed has a greater potential for the sort of damage in the OP than a smaller, weaker one does. Acknowledging this fact does not somehow morph into supporting BSL. It wasn't a chi or a JRT or any other small breed that tore this woman's arm and that is what needs to be looked at - what type of dog can do this damage and what sort of strategies should be employed to try to prevent it happening again.

Suggest you go back through this thread & read what some Pug owners & other small breed owners have said. I never accused you of it, I was just angry about you laughing about your dog being aggressive.

[Jed]

Lilli

I give you much the same answer. Many dogs have the potential to be dangerous and when large and powerful breeds are deliberately crossed with the intention of breeding dogs that can take a person's arms off, or are trained to be aggressive towards humans and other animals, then I don't want to be aligned with the people responsible. It is a perverse form of cruelty to animals and the people who are responsible are as guilty as the dog itself when an attack like this happens.

I am not going go brand any particular breed as dangerous.

But the deliberate crossbreeding of dogs carries with it an explosive recipe for disaster.

Good breeders of purebred dogs have been breeding for good temperament for years. They know the bloodlines and they select for the best features.

Somebody in some backyard puts together a dog and a bitch on the basis that they will make "rooly good fightin dogs" to protect their stash, or whatever.

Or they allow two dogs (probably already crossbred dogs) to mate just to produce a litter of puppies to sell, with no real knowledge of what is in the background of the parent dogs and no idea of what an explosive temperament they might be creating when the offspring reach maturity, particularly if they end up in the wrong household.

Sorry, not on!

The risk is too high.

Purebred dog breeders of dogs with good temperament do not deserve to be aligned with the above.

Souff

Yes Souff

But it will not be cross breed derivatives that are targeted

instead pedigree breeders of medium-big breeds, anything that the public and other

dog breeders dont know much about and or are afraid of.

I dont believe in divide and conquer - or that we can stand by ameliorate why other

breed types fall.

As a big breed person

I feel the future of my dogs lies with the future of all dogs ...

To be honest small breeds like pug, mini poodle, cav, chi

really are insignificant to me, and on some level I view them with contempt

so legistlation which would restrict-to-cease their breeding on health grounds is

inconsequential -

such legistlation would never be drawn up for my breeds - the health problems simply

aren't there to the extent that they are in many small companion bred dogs ...

nevertheless I will fight the RSPCA on their PR crapola campaign

denigrating pedigree breeds

and calling their health a significant welfare issue -

even if mine are never likely to fall under that RSPCA radar.

I read respondants afraid or ignorant of big dogs (and the psyche of certain other dogs)

yet in the same breath they are espousing solutions for the 'control', ownership and future of these dogs ...

yet they would be the first to demand that breeders not the RSPCA be the ones to

oversee the health and future of their own dogs.

Tell me how does a dog attack, come to ownership of all medium-big dog breeds needing to be

controlled?

It comes to pass when self-flagellating dog owners/breeders dont support each other, and espouse solutions for things they do not know much about.

Worse still, they assume that a legistlative system knows more about where dogs

can be owned and bred, more so than any breeder or breed specialist.

When the RSCPA come knocking on their door to decreee that their cav's brain is the

incorrect size for its skull, and cant be bred, (and owned)

or pug's airways are too distorted to breathe and cant be bred (and owned)

that is the dog control legislative system at work.

We've got healthy mutts Vs sickly pedigrees

and small dogs (excluding the sickly pedigree ones) Vs big dogs.

I suppose you cant use the health stick to go after all dogs, so just as well we can

incorporate 'scarey potential' as well.

Aye too much nonsense, give me my scallop shell of quiet

night

Well said, lilli. I couldn't give a rats arse about pitbulls, or staffies, personally. The reason I stand against BSL is because it is totally wrong, for staffies, for pitbulls, for the public, and globally.

And there is the potential to add other breeds. 12 other breeds are banned or restricted in Queensland, including Amstaffs, RR and Maremmas. I have no idea what breeds, if any, are restricted in other states.

If dog owners cannot stand together to fight this cancer, who will? Dog owners/breeders are so busy knifing each other and pointing the finger at other breeds, they ignore the danger - which is that their breed could be added. The legislation is in place, only the names are missing.

It's all well and good to say smugly "oh, my breed would never do that", but your breed could be banned because it's brain is too big for it's skull and it suffers excrutiating pain, or your breed could be banned because it has stenotic nares, and its eyes fall out or it has spinal problems because of the curly tail.

This is not a breed problem, peeps, this is a DOG problem.

You might not want to own a big dog, as I do not want to own a pitbull, but see the global picture, stand up for others to own the breed they want.

Recognize the problem for what it is - a dog which is not controlled or trained with an owner who perhaps did not see that the dog was not suitable as a pet - before - disaster struck.

[HugUrPup]

My last post now

I am on the same page as Jed for those who have misconstrued my comments and accused me of agreeing with banning large breeds. Quit saying "some pug people have said..blah blah blah..because other than Anne, I am the only one who has posted in this thread today who has a pug so it's a bit obvious that certain comments are directed at me.

If dog owners cannot stand together to fight this cancer, who will? Dog owners/breeders are so busy knifing each other and pointing the finger at other breeds, they ignore the danger - which is that their breed could be added. The legislation is in place, only the names are missing.

It's all well and good to say smugly "oh, my breed would never do that", but your breed could be banned because it's brain is too big for it's skull and it suffers excrutiating pain, or your breed could be banned because it has stenotic nares, and its eyes fall out or it has spinal problems because of the curly tail.

This is not a breed problem, peeps, this is a DOG problem.

You might not want to own a big dog, as I do not want to own a pitbull, but see the global picture, stand up for others to own the breed they want.

Recognize the problem for what it is - a dog which is not controlled or trained with an owner who perhaps did not see that the dog was not suitable as a pet - before - disaster struck.

Edited March 25, 2010 by puggerup

[mantis]

Maybe Jed, people should look at Germany's dog laws, scary stuff & could happen here if we don't stand together.

[Bindii]

See!?!?! These things can just happen no matter who you are and how well you can read your dog. That's the reason I have a small breed.. less damage... not less likely to bite..just less damage.

I am not saying remove the risks, because people.

It's a very uneducated reason to have a small breed then.

The only dog that has ever 'damaged' me was a Jack Russell. I've worked full time for two years at two different vet clinics and the only dog that has bitten me was a small one... It slipped it's muzzle off (which it had come in to the clinic with) was taken out to our back area to be mircrochipped. In hind site it should have been done in a smaller consult room, but usually when a vet requires nurses assistance it is taken to the back, and we didn't predict what was going to happen. It bit it's tongue and was bleeding profusely - it was like it was rabid!! It ran around from corner to corner leaping at the vets and nurses (large and small people!) baring it's teeth the whole time. I didn't know it was happening, walked into the kennel area where it was, it ran at me and held onto my arm biting me. It took 20 mins for us to hook it with the noose to catch it.

Sure, they might do less damage... but it didn't make it any less scarier or any easier to deal with the situation.

I am yet to see a large dog act like this in the clinic or else where.

My last post now

I am on the same page as Jed for those who have misconstrued my comments and accused me of agreeing with banning large breeds. Quit saying "some pug people have said..blah blah blah..because other than Anne, I am the only one who has posted in this thread today who has a pug so it's a bit obvious that certain comments are directed at me.

Hmmmm???

No but you're right, you're the only one that has been slightly narrow minded about specific breeds etc.

Edited March 25, 2010 by Bindii

[toughgirl27]

The bottom line is that these type of dogs terrify many people, as do some of the owners of these dogs. Evidence that this well-liked dog 'turned' without warning or provocation, if confirmed, will simpy add to this fear.

Dogs "turning" is largely a myth. The fact that the victim cannot identify the trigger for the attack doesn't mean there wasn't one.

Which, to me, is fairly alarming.

If someone's lived with a dog for 3 years, and, apparently, they know each other reasonably well, why can't they identify the trigger? Is it due, then, to the very nature of the dog?

I have no answers; I'm just wondering.

No some people are just thick (NOT speaking of the case at hand but another example)

and have no idea about how their behaviour is perceived by a dog, and in turn, how to interpret behaviour exhibited by a dog.

A member of my family is thick when it comes to dogs (of course he cannot see this and thinks they all get along well.)

He makes sudden movements in front of their faces, and with one particular dog, pushes him in the chest and stares him in the face at close range.

I say, "dont do that you will get bitten" and go into xyz reason why.

Thick ignores what I say because he cant see how uncomfortable the dog is and the signals the dog is giving him.

Then one day the dog snarls and lunges at him.

I say "see that was a warning, do it again and you will get bitten."

Thick keeps going, until the dog really has a go, knocks him backwards and the dog's teeth stop about 2mm from his face.

I say, "that's the last warning you're going to get. The next time he's going to bite your face off / maul your head

and it will be all your fault."

The penny drops and Thick no longer behaves like an idiot with that particular dog any more.

Isn't that all the more reason to place certain conditions on dog ownership? Compulsory training for a start should be introduced to train both dogs and humans. I don't see pet ownership as a right I see it as a privellidge, like driving a car it comes with certain conditions and responsibilities that have to be learned and followed. The larger our population gets the more idiots there are going to be, it has to be regulated somehow. I also think that it shouldn't be tied up in endless discussions about rights, most people have the right to get a driver's license but some people don't because it impacts on the safety of others, it should be the same with dogs.

Totally agree. "pet ownership is a privillage, not a right." Training should be for both humans and dogs they need to understand the risks and responsibilties of dog ownership. Too many idiots get dogs for the wrong reasons with disasterous consequences. Also agree that the general population don't know how to read a dogs behaviour and in this case I feel sorry for the dog.

That said I do agree that dogs that kill should be PTS. It should not be tolerated, unless the dog was defending itself.

I also wonder what set the dog off in the "grandma attack"?

It certainly was horrific and I hope the woman recovers.

XXtoughgirlXX

[HugUrPup]

See!?!?! These things can just happen no matter who you are and how well you can read your dog. That's the reason I have a small breed.. less damage... not less likely to bite..just less damage.

I am not saying remove the risks, because people.

It's a very uneducated reason to have a small breed then.

The only dog that has ever 'damaged' me was a Jack Russell. I've worked full time for two years at two different vet clinics and the only dog that has bitten me was a small one... It slipped it's muzzle off (which it had come in to the clinic with) was taken out to our back area to be mircrochipped. In hind site it should have been done in a smaller consult room, but usually when a vet requires nurses assistance it is taken to the back, and we didn't predict what was going to happen. It bit it's tongue and was bleeding profusely - it was like it was rabid!! It ran around from corner to corner leaping at the vets and nurses (large and small people!) baring it's teeth the whole time. I didn't know it was happening, walked into the kennel area where it was, it ran at me and held onto my arm biting me. It took 20 mins for us to hook it with the noose to catch it.

Sure, they might do less damage... but it didn't make it any less scarier or any easier to deal with the situation.

I am yet to see a large dog act like this in the clinic or else where.

I also mentioned I am more afraid of SOME JRT's than APBT's. I am afraid of little yappy nippers who's owners don't put them on leads and allow them to harass people and dogs on the street.

I find it easier to train and to be a leader to a breed which is small... but I also wouldn't like all small breeds, because they don't all have the same characteristics.

I won't allow my dogs to go about nipping and terrorizing other dogs and people and I think that if you have a large dog you have to be even more vigilant and responsible when it comes to training and containing them because a) people are often afraid and their fear can feed the dogs anxiety and b) they can be LETHAL if they are not "looked after properly".

Edited March 25, 2010 by puggerup

[HugUrPup]

No but you're right, you're the only one that has been slightly narrow minded about specific breeds etc.

I didn't see you post in the thread today before comments were directed at Pug owners.

I am also not narrow minded in regards to specific breeds.. thanks for the accusation though.

[Bindii]

No but you're right, you're the only one that has been slightly narrow minded about specific breeds etc.

I didn't see you post in the thread today before comments were directed at Pug owners.

I am also not narrow minded in regards to specific breeds.. thanks for the accusation though.

I meant all of the discussion about 'big dogs'

I'm just saying it has little to do with size... It has nothing to do with their size. A Staffy isn't that much bigger than a Pug, anyway.

[HugUrPup]

I meant all of the discussion about 'big dogs'

I'm just saying it has little to do with size... It has nothing to do with their size. A Staffy isn't that much bigger than a Pug, anyway.

Staffys and Pugs are the same..ask Ollie (I am sure Hugo agrees).

I helped rescue a Staffy yesterday.. you may have missed that post. I am not anti any breed really, but I do have a fear, which doesn't make me a narrow minded person I don't think

Edited March 25, 2010 by puggerup

[Bindii]

Staffys and Pugs are the same..ask Ollie (I am sure Hugo agrees).

I helped rescue a Staffy yesterday.. you may have missed that post. I am not anti any breed really, but I do have a fear, which doesn't make me a narrow minded person I don't think

No you're right

I'm tired... and I think i was actually just offended that you forgot about me

Edited March 25, 2010 by Bindii

[centitout]

Val Bonney believes that one reason dog attacks have increased is because of the increase in the use of positive training.

I agree with this,the whole 'JUST IGNORE BAD BEHAVIOUR" and reward every time you look at them is NOT suitable for all dogs.My dogs run as a pack,and they will do as they are told,there is no excuse for bad behaviour.Aversion training and negative punishment do have their place.

[HugUrPup]

Staffys and Pugs are the same..ask Ollie (I am sure Hugo agrees).

I helped rescue a Staffy yesterday.. you may have missed that post. I am not anti any breed really, but I do have a fear, which doesn't make me a narrow minded person I don't think

No you're right

I'm tired... and I think i was actually just offended that you forgot about me

:laugh: :o I'm sorry I offended you. I won't ever ever forget you again

[mantis]

Val Bonney believes that one reason dog attacks have increased is because of the increase in the use of positive training.

I agree with this,the whole 'JUST IGNORE BAD BEHAVIOUR" and reward every time you look at them is NOT suitable for all dogs.My dogs run as a pack,and they will do as they are told,there is no excuse for bad behaviour.Aversion training and negative punishment do have their place.

Cesar Millan says the same thing. Unlike that Victoria woman.

Saying that, I am a bad owner, if Kenny wants a treat, he goes & grabs something he's not allowed to, like a sock, a bit of paper etc & won't give it back until he gets a treat, that's his only bad habit & he's nearly 12, so MEH, though I do yell at him & say he is a bad dog & he doesn't get the treat straight away. Sometimes if I am tired & he does it, I don't give into him, I make him drop & then take whatever it is out of his mouth & tell him I am not always going to reward his bad behaviour.

Lucky for me this 45kg dog knows who's pack leader., but after all these years, I think it's more of a game to Kenny.

[Sandra777]

My last post now

I am on the same page as Jed for those who have misconstrued my comments and accused me of agreeing with banning large breeds. Quit saying "some pug people have said..blah blah blah..because other than Anne, I am the only one who has posted in this thread today who has a pug so it's a bit obvious that certain comments are directed at me.

So I'm an idiot yet you agree with me. My head is spinning.

And what is this obsession with making out "pit bulls" are LARGE powerful dogs. The real ones are generally around (or under) 20kg - which doesn't make them LARGE by any stretch of the imagination.

[Tarmons]

Has it been proven beyond all reasonable doubt that dog was in fact an APBT?

From the News clips that showed the dog being walked to the Police[ ?] trailer, the dog looked like an Am Staff.

From the very beginning when the News broke, the media kept pushing Pit Bull attack. That's where the RSPCA officer on Sunrise was excellent. Despite the pushing and probing by Mel Doyle to castigate the Pit Bull Terriers, the lady kept to her line of argument, namely that ALL dogs bite.

For years GSD owners were subjected to media campaigns about savage GSDs. Every dog attack involved a GSD or a GSD Cross. Any dog with pricked ears was a GSD cross. Then for a while the Rottis got in the neck.

For quite some time now the media hysteria has gathered a renewed momentum against the Staffies and the Pit Bulls. Whenever there is a dog attack, the immediate media response is PBT - and when the picture of the dog is shown you are left wondering as to whether a Pit Bull passed by the front gate when the bitch was in whelp because any similarity in appearance is highly questionable.

I just hope that the seizure and slaughter of Pit Bulls is not going to happen again as it did in SE Qld after the death of Barbara Stringer by a registered Labrador cross..

[HugUrPup]

My last post now

I am on the same page as Jed for those who have misconstrued my comments and accused me of agreeing with banning large breeds. Quit saying "some pug people have said..blah blah blah..because other than Anne, I am the only one who has posted in this thread today who has a pug so it's a bit obvious that certain comments are directed at me.

So I'm an idiot yet you agree with me. My head is spinning.

And what is this obsession with making out "pit bulls" are LARGE powerful dogs. The real ones are generally around (or under) 20kg - which doesn't make them LARGE by any stretch of the imagination.

what are you on about? Was I even speaking to you? and are you Jed now?

Now my head is spinning

Have I called anyone an idiot? Are you sure you have the right person even?

in regards to pit bulls, they are strong powerful dogs.. they aren't as tall as a Bernese mountain dog, but powerful they are.

But you are kidding or something right?

*backs away slowly*

Edited March 25, 2010 by puggerup

[mantis]

Has it been proven beyond all reasonable doubt that dog was in fact an APBT?

From the News clips that showed the dog being walked to the Police[ ?] trailer, the dog looked like an Am Staff.

From the very beginning when the News broke, the media kept pushing Pit Bull attack. That's where the RSPCA officer on Sunrise was excellent. Despite the pushing and probing by Mel Doyle to castigate the Pit Bull Terriers, the lady kept to her line of argument, namely that ALL dogs bite.

For years GSD owners were subjected to media campaigns about savage GSDs. Every dog attack involved a GSD or a GSD Cross. Any dog with pricked ears was a GSD cross. Then for a while the Rottis got in the neck.

For quite some time now the media hysteria has gathered a renewed momentum against the Staffies and the Pit Bulls. Whenever there is a dog attack, the immediate media response is PBT - and when the picture of the dog is shown you are left wondering as to whether a Pit Bull passed by the front gate when the bitch was in whelp because any similarity in appearance is highly questionable.

I just hope that the seizure and slaughter of Pit Bulls is not going to happen again as it did in SE Qld after the death of Barbara Stringer by a registered Labrador cross..

I agree, if anyone comes for my old boy, they don't have to worry about being attacked by Kenny, but they will definitely have to be worried about me. No one is going to take my dog just because of his breeds, when he has done nothing wrong, well apart from chewing a few couches & futons, because I dared to leave him alone, while I went to work, or a night out.

Edited March 25, 2010 by mantis

[Jed]

Maybe Jed, people should look at Germany's dog laws, scary stuff & could happen here if we don't stand together.

Mantis, the angelfire website seems to have disappeared - some time ago. Do you have another link?

What is Mantis talking about? In Germany a pitbull and a staffy cross, both belonging to criminals and both used for fighting attacked and killed a little boy. I think he was 6. On PM, it was found the pitbull had not eaten in 3 days. Authorities knew about these dogs (which had caused other problems) and their owners, who were hardened criminals. The police were reluctant to do anything about the dogs prior to the attack - presumably because of apprehension of the owners.

After this, a lot of large dogs - GSD, mastiffs, Amstaffs, pitbulls, boxers were set on fire, stoned to death, run over, bashed to death with clubs and pipes, drowned, choked, or half killed and left. Owners were set on and attacked. I seem to remember that a GSD was half killed on a bus, and the owner was severely injured when he attempted to save the dog. I think a man was killed defending his dog.

Then bans were enacted. Pitbulls, staffies, amstaffs - just about every dog over 10 kg, and Corgis. I believe the corgi owners had their dogs removed from the bans, but I can't be sure. According to a Corgi club in Europe they are not banned, but they sure were.

There was an extensive website on it, but it disappeared.

And don't think it couldn't happen here - it could. Maybe not the extreme violence towards people's dogs, but the bans certainly could. In fact, it has happened.

Mantis

agree, if anyone comes for my old boy, they don't have to worry about being attacked by Kenny, but they will definitely have to be worried about me. No one is going to take my dog just because of his breeds, when he has done nothing wrong, well apart from chewing a few couches & futons, because I dared to leave him alone, while I went to work, or a night out.

Well, they came for the 13 year old dog discussed elsewhere on this forum. They came with catching poles for thousands of dogs in QLD. Dogs like Kenny, which never did any harm. Dogs were snoozing on the lawn, dreaming of bones and rides in the car when they were set on by ACO's, and terrified, were dragged off on catching poles and killed.

Mantis

Saying that, I am a bad owner, if Kenny wants a treat, he goes & grabs something he's not allowed to, like a sock, a bit of paper etc & won't give it back until he gets a treat, that's his only bad habit & he's nearly 12, so MEH, though I do yell at him & say he is a bad dog & he doesn't get the treat straight away. Sometimes if I am tired & he does it, I don't give into him, I make him drop & then take whatever it is out of his mouth & tell him I am not always going to reward his bad behaviour.

That's not evil, that's intelligent. One of mine greets me when I get home with a song, and always brings me something - a toy usually - and gets rewarded for bringing me a present. She'll never stop!! Neither will Kenny. Good for him.

Edited March 25, 2010 by Jed