Grieving Man Jailed For Stealing Back Dog

[Trixibelle22]

Thumbs up poodlefan. Find it odd that a pound would rehome an unsterilised dog though. And why was an unsterilised male with a bitch in season?

[poodlefan]

Thumbs up poodlefan. Find it odd that a pound would rehome an unsterilised dog though. And why was an unsterilised male with a bitch in season?

Not all pounds desex before rehoming.

I can think of one logical reason the dog was running with an in season bitch .... perpetuating its genes. Oh goody.

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

I don't care how many reasons you give for this dog's behaviour.

The dog attacked someone trying to catch it and its bite amputated another man's fingers. That to me indicates an absence of bite inhibition that make this dog unsuitable to be in any community.

You have to think beyond your understanding of the dog and deal with the possible consequences of any further escapes. The dog is dangerous to strangers.

Nothing you do will change that.

So, I'll repeat this again: Any dog that feels threatened or feels he/she is being attacked will fight back. It's the way dogs are.

Bullshit. Most will retreat. The threshold at which a dog 'fights back" and the damage it does vary widely. Most dogs snap or don't bite down when defending. This dog was at the extreme end of the scale. Oh and by the way freezing is regarded by many dog professionals as precursor to serious acts of aggression. Its red flag behavour that sadly isn't recognised as such by many folk. I don't think they should pay with surgery and loss of appendages for their mistake but that's just me.

On this forum we often wonder about the background of such dogs. Perhaps you could shed some light?

How old was dog?

Did it atttend any puppy or training schools to be socialised outside of its family?

Was it desexed?

Was it allowed inside?

Fair enough, blast me with your opinion, oh Dog expert. After the stupidity of the last 'dog expert' that deemed him dangerous, I rarely take into consideration what any acclaimed 'dog expert' has to say. Including you.

Your opinion is like everyone elses - an opinion.

"most dogs snap or don't bind down when defending" - bear in mind that he did bite the first man. When the second man came to 'confront' the dog (i'll put it nicely), that's when things got bad. And where are your statistics for this? Are they YOUR statistics, or are they taken off a website? Is your opinion based on what you've heard?

HOWEVER, it is the victims' word against the dogs' word. They could have been shooing them away, or throwing sticks at them to scare them for all we know - but unfortunately dogs are unable to share their side of the story.

All I have to say to you is that this dog was bought from the pound because his owner could not afford to look after him.

We took him in and gave him a loving home.

He had access inside and outside at all times. If no one was home, he had big, open and cool downstairs area/garage to rest in.

He was not desexed and you can call us horrible, bad owners all you like. I couldn't care what you thought.

He didn't attend puppy schools because when we got him, he was not a puppy. Young, but no puppy.

He was socialised quite often with other dogs.

When we flew in Marley (a puppy at the time) from the eastern states, they were fantastic with each other.

So you can throw your opinions and views around all you like - but you do not know the dog.

You cannot know the mentality of every dog. You cannot claim that MOST dogs would flee.

This dog is not MOST dogs. It is A dog. A unique dog, just like every f***ing dog is unique.

As for him being dangerous to strangers? We've had many friends come over that he had not known. Not once did he bite.

He did not bite the rangers when they dragged him away.

He did not bite anyone after he was stuck in a cage for months which, as you MUST agree, would be very detrimental to his mentality.

It seems you need to think beyond your understanding of all dogs.

Do not expect any support when you are so aggressive with your posts.

you are doing your cause no favours

ETA

This is a PUBLIC forum. anyone can read it so how is your attitude going to change the minds of people?

If you behaved and talked to the ranger the way you have written your posts maybe you contributed to the problem you are facing

Edited March 4, 2011 by Troy

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

Thumbs up poodlefan. Find it odd that a pound would rehome an unsterilised dog though. And why was an unsterilised male with a bitch in season?

Not all pounds desex before rehoming.

I can think of one logical reason the dog was running with an in season bitch .... perpetuating its genes. Oh goody.

Yes, my thoughts exactly. The in heat bitch was left unattended with an entire male.

[Greytmate]

So, I'll repeat this again: Any dog that feels threatened or feels he/she is being attacked will fight back. It's the way dogs are.

No, some dogs will freeze, and some will try to escape. Some will vocalise in different ways and some will snap.

Biting people's fingers off is not the just 'the way dogs are'. Not many dogs will ever do that.

"Biting people's fingers off is not just 'the way dogs are'. <- I don't believe I ever said it was?

Perhaps it would have been better for me to have written "...he/she is being attacked will DEFEND itself. It's just the way dogs are".

I do believe when a dog freezes, tries to escape or vocalise (for help, perhaps?), it is an act of defense.

Just as a human would freeze when a knife is held to their throat, scream for help when they are being assaulted or try to escape when they are being chased. Although, does that not constitute fighting for their life if the person (or dog, in this case) feels threatened?

"snapping" is also a defense. He did what he did to defend himself.

The dog did a lot more than he needed to defend itself.

Maybe Rocky could spend his time in jail studying basic dog behaviour. Then he might accept responsibility for all of his actions that led to somebody losing their fingers.

This sort of incident is completely unacceptable, dogs like that are not normal or desirable in our community. Dogs that bite with that sort of ferocity are not really suitable as pets, and this story shows exactly why they are not.

[wiseguy]

Rocky wasn't incarcerated because of the dog attack.

Rocky pleaded guilty to aggravated burlary & steal for rescuing his dog.

The gaol time was imposed because he refused to reveal the whereabouts of the dog.

Then, miraculously, an anon tip sent authorities to a place where they took an Akita into custody.

It was only an alert veterinarian that reconised the ''new'' Akita wasn't the Akita in question.

A different vet & the wrong dog is nuked, Rocky is home free, & so is his dog.

Very ordinay Rocky, very ordinary indeed.

Edited March 5, 2011 by wiseguy

[Little Gifts]

I adore, ADORE my dogs. I chose not to have children so when I talk of family the dogs are part of that. If I felt one of my dogs had been wrongly accused of something serious would I fight it? Of course I would, and I would do it with fact and persistence. But, if one of my dogs 'accidentally' attacked another human being whether they caused a serious injury or not I would put them down without waiting to be asked. Dogs need to live side by side with humans and if they become unpredictable and a threat to humans then they have crossed a line. You can never guarantee a dangerous dog will not be a risk to others for the rest of its life particularly when you don't minimise the dangers by desexing, training/behavioural work and secure containment. It is not always enough just to love a dog.

This is a very sad situation for all involved but Prodigium you and Rocky have shown you are not dog experts simply by having a bitch on heat around an entire male, both of which got off your property fairly easily. There were bound to be consequences to what happened next despite how much you love your animals. Learn from this experience and please try and listen to the advice of experts regarding dog behaviour because most pet owners (including myself) know very, very little of what our dogs are capable of.

And if Kunsah is still out there somewhere then the minimum that should happen is he is desexed, has a behavioural assessment by a qualified person and is kept in a secure location. Another 'accident' is not acceptable. Your bitch should also be desexed so you don't get lured into easy money by back yard breeding. Leave the puppy making to the professionals.

Edited March 5, 2011 by Puppy_Sniffer

[Inevitablue]

I hope the innocent Akita gets out of the pound soon. The poor dog gets impounded because of an annoymous tip off I'd be PISSED if my dog was taken off the back of misleading information.

I take it Kunsah wasn't microchipped? (is it required in WA?)

[juice]

edited because i cant be bothered.

Edited March 5, 2011 by juice

[sandgrubber]

microchipping isn't required in WA

councils pay poorly. turnover is high. there are some great, and some pretty average Rangers, and quite a few are new to the job and not so cluey about dogs. Depends on the council and history and who knows what else..

Given the iffy way the legal system works, owners of serious guarding breeds need to be extra cautious.

Not nice, but I think the system needs to make an example of someone from time to time.

I hope others learn from this unfortunate case.

I'm glad to be out of WA and in a place where there's no BSL, but you need a license to have an un-neutered dog or bitch and they hit you with big fines if an intact animal is found wandering. Lots of pit bulls here. I find them much less frightening than Akitas.

I hope the poor guy who lost fingers is getting some compensation.

I hope the innocent Akita gets out of the pound soon. The poor dog gets impounded because of an annoymous tip off I'd be PISSED if my dog was taken off the back of misleading information.

I take it Kunsah wasn't microchipped? (is it required in WA?)

Edited March 6, 2011 by sandgrubber

[BittyMooPeeb]

I hope the innocent Akita gets out of the pound soon. The poor dog gets impounded because of an annoymous tip off :D I'd be PISSED if my dog was taken off the back of misleading information.

I take it Kunsah wasn't microchipped? (is it required in WA?)

I doubt it was 'someones dog' as the article claims the pound will rehome it! (if they seized it from owners it would be returned to them)

I find it odd that they claim the dog is not the one they wanted due to loss of weight and friendly behaviour. After x months in the pound it is very likely the dog woudl be thinner, and given that he lived as a loved family pet, the fact he is friendly makes sense. The person (vet?) who claims that the original dog was 'always on guard' sounds like an idiot. Did he/she see the dog more than once? (after escaping, biting, being seized etc the dog would very likely be stressed)

PF: The articles dont say that a finger was severed (re the comment about using Molars), and it also said that the man who lost a finger had hold of the dogs collar and was pulling him (NOT the collar of the female dog) so defense is surely a reasonable explanation of what happened in the case of this man. I've been snapped at by scared, stressed dogs during my time in rescue - this doesn't necessarily make them agressive or unsuitable to be in society. Sometimes the snap made contact, sometimes it didnt. Whether the bite was repeated is more of an indication of agression than the consequences of a single snap (I dont know which it was in this case though)

I have lashed out with an arm when suprised in the dark. This doesn't make me agressive. If I had continued by beating the person up it would be a different story though. The same is true of dogs ;)

[Greytmate]

I've been snapped at by scared, stressed dogs during my time in rescue - this doesn't necessarily make them agressive or unsuitable to be in society. Sometimes the snap made contact, sometimes it didnt. Whether the bite was repeated is more of an indication of agression than the consequences of a single snap (I dont know which it was in this case though)

There is a huge difference between a snap and a bite that rips open flesh.

There was no threat to this dog, except that a stranger was restraining it. Its reaction was a very aggressive and violent reaction. That is a world away from a dog that nips or snaps to communicate its needs.

It doesn't matter what the indication of aggression is. One bite or a thousand snaps. What matters is that this dog has inflicted horrific injuries, and this dog is clearly aggressive and not a safe dog to have in public.

[Bilbo Baggins]

It does not say that the dog bit of the finger. If he had hold of the collar his finger could have been ripped/broken and the subsequent medical intervention could have lost him his finger.

[Diva]

It does not say that the dog bit of the finger.

The original post says exactly that -

Kunza was declared a dangerous dog in April after it mauled an elderly man’s hand and bit off one of his son’s fingers when he tried to help his father during the attack in Karrinyup.

[TsarsMum]

hmmm well you do something wrong you go to goal. thats life. there is other ways to fight it and 20k to appeal come on i doubt that there is legal aid.

dog attacked a person its dangerous. it took a persons fingers 1 or 5 it did that.

and in w.a i dont think there is a desexing thing at pounds its a fee and there yours.

maybe they will desex there dogs and learn from this lesson

[geo]

I've been snapped at by scared, stressed dogs during my time in rescue - this doesn't necessarily make them agressive or unsuitable to be in society. Sometimes the snap made contact, sometimes it didnt. Whether the bite was repeated is more of an indication of agression than the consequences of a single snap (I dont know which it was in this case though)

There is a huge difference between a snap and a bite that rips open flesh.

There was no threat to this dog, except that a stranger was restraining it. Its reaction was a very aggressive and violent reaction. That is a world away from a dog that nips or snaps to communicate its needs.

It doesn't matter what the indication of aggression is. One bite or a thousand snaps. What matters is that this dog has inflicted horrific injuries, and this dog is clearly aggressive and not a safe dog to have in public.

Aggressive possibly, Violent not so sure that fits as dogs aren't usually Violent per se.. not that it matters, it's just that so many posts have all these human adjectives for a dogs behavior. (ie rips open, my dog would only have to have his mouth open to 'rip' flesh if his head was moving fast enough)

It bit the fella under some duress, yes it probably bit too hard, acceptable for society, probably not, would the dog do it again, if in the same situation probably.. risk vs probability will determine the outcome. Not suitable for suburban life but out in the middle of the bush somewhere i'm sure he wouldn't get into trouble.

Lots of owners on forums here have admitted should their dog get out (or someone break in) and be put in a stressful situation they could bite, especially if they couldn't escape from someone holding their collar.

I'm not excusing the dogs behavior and more could've been done to prevent him turning out like that. I do know that i wouldn't be approaching a large strange dog though unless it's body language was comfortable with me being there.

It's always hard when a dogs life is on the line, and if's n buts always slew arguments, sadly there is no winners. It's hard to disagree with either outcomes in these instances.

I hope the owner has learned a hard lesson as it's the dog that is going to suffer, and of course the bloke missing a digit.

[Greytmate]

I've been snapped at by scared, stressed dogs during my time in rescue - this doesn't necessarily make them agressive or unsuitable to be in society. Sometimes the snap made contact, sometimes it didnt. Whether the bite was repeated is more of an indication of agression than the consequences of a single snap (I dont know which it was in this case though)

There is a huge difference between a snap and a bite that rips open flesh.

There was no threat to this dog, except that a stranger was restraining it. Its reaction was a very aggressive and violent reaction. That is a world away from a dog that nips or snaps to communicate its needs.

It doesn't matter what the indication of aggression is. One bite or a thousand snaps. What matters is that this dog has inflicted horrific injuries, and this dog is clearly aggressive and not a safe dog to have in public.

Aggressive possibly, Violent not so sure that fits as dogs aren't usually Violent per se.. not that it matters, it's just that so many posts have all these human adjectives for a dogs behavior. (ie rips open, my dog would only have to have his mouth open to 'rip' flesh if his head was moving fast enough)

It bit the fella under some duress, yes it probably bit too hard, acceptable for society, probably not, would the dog do it again, if in the same situation probably.. risk vs probability will determine the outcome. Not suitable for suburban life but out in the middle of the bush somewhere i'm sure he wouldn't get into trouble.

I used violent for a term to describe an act that resulted in serious injury. Dogs are not usually violent.

Lots of owners on forums here have admitted should their dog get out (or someone break in) and be put in a stressful situation they could bite, especially if they couldn't escape from someone holding their collar.

Lots of owners on forums here are totally responsible for controlling and confining their dog, and would have to take responsibility for any harm it caused if it did get out. Lots of dogs can handle mild stressors like being grabbed, without inflicting serious wounds.

I'm not excusing the dogs behavior and more could've been done to prevent him turning out like that. I do know that i wouldn't be approaching a large strange dog though unless it's body language was comfortable with me being there.

It's always hard when a dogs life is on the line, and if's n buts always slew arguments, sadly there is no winners. It's hard to disagree with either outcomes in these instances.

I hope the owner has learned a hard lesson as it's the dog that is going to suffer, and of course the bloke missing a digit.

It is a shame that WA doesn't seem to offer one last chance like the Dangerous Dog laws do in the eastern states. However, this dog has proven to be very dangerous, and the owner has proven to be very irresponsible.

[megan_]

The only thing more dangerous than an aggressive dog is an owner who believes their dog isn't.

I have a dog who - if stressed enough but comfortable enough IYKWIM, could charge and snap at someone. I doubt very much she could take a finger off, mainly due to her size. However, if she did, then I'd accept responsibility for it. That is what being a responsible owner is all about. FWIW, in Victoria, provocation isn't a defense for a dog attack.

The more people say "this is what dog's do" the more restrictions we'll see on our dogs - If this is "what dog's do" when a stranger touches them then dogs shouldn't be allowed in society!

Edited March 7, 2011 by megan_

[Diva]

The more people say "this is what dog's do" the more restrictions we'll see on our dogs - If this is "what dog's do" when a stranger touches them then dogs shouldn't be allowed in society!

This, exactly. If dogs are so inherently dangerous that any stranger approaching one is going to get a mauling, why the hell wouldn't society ban them all entirely or at a minimum require them to be kept in roofed cages?

Fortunately the vast majority of dogs aren't like that at all, and excusing those who are damages all dogs. There may be a place for a dog with that temperament, but it isn't in a not-very-secure suburban back yard.

[mita]

Fortunately the vast majority of dogs aren't like that at all, and excusing those who are damages all dogs. There may be a place for a dog with that temperament, but it isn't in a not-very-secure suburban back yard.

Good point. Especially as you've clearly said that this issue doesn't apply to the vast majority of dogs.