Child Killed By Dog

[Ruffles]

This would have to be possibly the most INFURIATING thread I have ever laid eyes upon. I cannot contribute as this topic is far too emotive for me. But I have to say thank goodness for PF and other advocates of LOGIC and REASON.

I can do nothing but shake my head at the total ignorance displayed by some in this thread, and the primitive nature in which people behave and think.

[Aidan3]

This is one for those who agree with BSL (Matthew).

This is where BSL went in Italy. First they banned all the usual suspects - Pit Bulls, Rottweilers, German Shepherds, Dobermans etc.

But the dog bites & deaths continued unabated, so more breeds were banned. Eventually they ended up with over 97 breeds banned.

Devil's advocate here - how could they possibly know if it didn't work?

Dog bites will occur by chance. By banning a breed you are aiming to take out bites that occur at some statistically significant rate due to high-risk animals (a big ask when you look at it that way). If you're banning breeds every second week you're never going to know either way, bites just don't happen frequently enough to satisfy any statistical jiggery-pokery you might apply.

I'm not gonna get into this argument, I learned here on this very forum that the BSL hysteria is such that even the most logical & rational argument will not penetrate people's minds when they have decided to pursue a course of willful ignorance. IMO, all I can do is present evidence that proves that hysteria ill founded. Eventually, the people who ARE rational & intelligent beings will see the in the mounting evidence the truth of the matter - eg people like Poodlefan, and I hope to Dog that amongst the lawmakers the same rationality & intelligence is present.

The great unwashed, ill-educated & willfully ignorant like Matthew will never be convinced & I wouldn't bother trying to argue with them.

I'm not sure if you got the part where I was saying I was playing "Devil's Advocate" or not?

I would like to see a better quality of argument against BSL because I think dogs deserve it. The Italy example is just another example of how policy is decided either way based on a profound misunderstanding of statistics.

[rotts4ever]

I am very surprised to hear Steve Austin take this point of view, I thought that he had more sense!

RIP little girl.

Especially when last I spoke to him he owned a rottweiler(and donated a great seminar to our club for the Rottweiler National a couple of years back) and raved what a great dog he was. I think he needs to remember when talking about banning breeds the powers that be start pointing fingers at the Rottweiler.

Regardless of my feelings for any breed once you open the door your breed could be next on the hit list and no one will care how responsible you are or in the fact your dogs have never caused any problems.

Cheers Lee

[Leelaa17]

This would have to be possibly the most INFURIATING thread I have ever laid eyes upon. I cannot contribute as this topic is far too emotive for me. But I have to say thank goodness for PF and other advocates of LOGIC and REASON.

I can do nothing but shake my head at the total ignorance displayed by some in this thread, and the primitive nature in which people behave and think.

This.

[suziwong66]

Hi Poodlefan,

can you please find me a link that refers to the dog's breed? i can't find anything in any of the media outlets i've searched. Ps. i'm not entering into the current debate, i'm just looking to find accurate media reports on the gawd awful tragic incident.

taa

It's not a breed. It's already been plastered all over the news since this happened - it's a mongrel. No one knows what it is

I do believe i was speaking directly to Poodlefan about a link regarding accurate information. Your negative picky input is not necessary or welcomed.

My response was neither negative nor picky. Who are you, by the way- another journo? Goodoh, lovey. The dog that killed the little girl was not a breed. It was a mongrel.

find some manners. No not a journalist; not that it's any of your business. If i choose to ask a DOL member to help me find a media source with some accuracy in the media that's MY business; not yours.

[suziwong66]

Suziwong I was watching the hourly news reports on tv all day yesterday and it was reported as pit bull and pit bull cross in all the daily reports on Channel 10. Subsequently it has been referred to as Amstaff, although I haven't heard or seen that myself. The child has also been referred to on Channel 10's news reports as 3, 4 and 5 and the adult that the dog chased in to the house has been referred to as 20 and 30. The child was also 'killed by the dog' (implying immediately at the scene) in some reports and in later reports the child was in surgery and died then or shortly after (details were sketchy), implying that it survived the attack, made it to hospital and died later. What do you believe????

I am actually a journalist and this is why I don't work for mass media. This lack of fact checking and sensationalism is not what news reporting is supposed to be about. No wonder the media has a bad name - it should be an important community service reporting fact and balanced stories. Instead they run with whatever will grab the most attention and try and beat other media outlets by getting the story out first. The most significant thing to me is the dog killing the child at the house or the child dying in hospital as a result of the dog attack. How can you get that wrong? They didn't - saying the dog killed the child and implying it happened right there in front of family and friends is far more sensational and it was a deliberate choice on their part.

Thank you Puppy_Sniffer your quote "What do you believe?" relates to exactly why i asked Poodlefan's help in finding a somewhat accurate report as he/she appeared to have some sense of 'non mass media' enlightenment. My searches just kept getting the mass media hype and i wanted to know if there was anything more balanced about.

[huski]

You know what scares me?

People like Matthew B, who is a good representation of the general public's view about pit bulls and dog attacks, that seem to think that only certain breeds or types of dogs can bite, hurt and attack people, children, other dogs and animals.

THAT attitude is truly terrifying.

I wish people would focus on the fact that any dog can and will bite and that dog attacks are completely preventable.

[DaisyDog]

This would have to be possibly the most INFURIATING thread I have ever laid eyes upon. I cannot contribute as this topic is far too emotive for me. But I have to say thank goodness for PF and other advocates of LOGIC and REASON.

I can do nothing but shake my head at the total ignorance displayed by some in this thread, and the primitive nature in which people behave and think.

This.

x2

[Zhou Xuanyao]

People have been making appeals to emotion for years, it is not effective. The way I see it, it is countering "their" emotive crap with "our" emotive crap. "They" comprise 90% of the population, who's going to win ?

Logical, holistic arguments are what will stand the test of time.

I used to have a great quote in my signature, taken from a New Scientist editorial.

"Using bad science can never be justified, even in the pursuit of noble causes. It only give ammunition to those seeking to undermine your case".

Followed shortly thereafter by -

"When anti-smoking groups want to make their point they should stick to the solid facts, there are plenty of them".

Of course in this case he is talking about anti smoking groups making up furphie's, cherry picking facts, etc in an effort to further their cause, when it is completely unnecessary and in fact only undermines them. Similarly in our case, withholding or denying facts (for example, the capabilities of game bred, conditioned APBT's) is setting oneself up to be undermined and ending up looking like a jack arse, which does not help our cause.

Edited August 19, 2011 by Lo Pan

[Aidan3]

Well said, Lo Pan.

[Tapferhund]

People have been making appeals to emotion for years, it is not effective. The way I see it, it is countering "their" emotive crap with "our" emotive crap. "They" comprise 90% of the population, who's going to win ?

Logical, holistic arguments are what will stand the test of time.

I used to have a great quote in my signature, taken from a New Scientist editorial.

"Using bad science can never be justified, even in the pursuit of noble causes. It only give ammunition to those seeking to undermine your case".

Followed shortly thereafter by -

"When anti-smoking groups want to make their point they should stick to the solid facts, there are plenty of them".

Of course in this case he is talking about anti smoking groups making up furphie's, cherry picking facts, etc in an effort to further their cause, when it is completely unnecessary and in fact only undermines them. Similarly in our case, withholding or denying facts (for example, the capabilities of game bred, conditioned APBT's) is setting oneself up to be undermined and ending up looking like a jack arse, which does not help our cause.

Well, I read an article not that long ago where it said it only takes 10% of the population to sway the other 90% .

[Aidan3]

Well, I read an article not that long ago where it said it only takes 10% of the population to sway the other 90% .

Minority groups can have a significant impact on the attitudes of the majority. Being consistent and coherent is very important.

[k9angel]

Vets warn about banning Dangerous dogs.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/national/10075916/vets-warn-against-banning-dangerous-dogs/

Veterinarians say banning breeds of dangerous dogs would not stop attacks, despite a Victorian government vow to crack down on vicious pets.

Victorian Premier Ted Baillieu said on Friday the government wanted to "be rid of these dogs as soon as possible" following the death of a four-year-old girl who was mauled by an unregistered American pit bull mastiff cross in Melbourne on Wednesday.

The owner of the dog could face charges under the Domestic Animals Act and fines in excess of $19,000.

The government has also foreshadowed measures that could include the owners of dangerous dogs facing 20 years' jail in a similar law that applies to culpable drivers.

The amnesty for registering dangerous dogs will end, meaning councils can seize and destroy the animals, while a "dob in a dangerous dog" anonymous hotline will also be set up.

But Australian Veterinary Association (AVA) spokeswoman Kersti Seksel says socialisation of dangerous dogs rather than banning them would be more effective.

Over-regulation for dog owners has not improved the situation so far, Dr Seksel said.

"It's understandable that people are now calling for the banning of some breeds, however all the good evidence available shows that this doesn't work," she said in a statement on Friday.

"Unfortunately, we believe the banning and over-regulation of dogs in our communities could be part of the problem as this leads to poor socialisation and increased risk of attacks."

The AVA is instead calling for the government to increase funding for education and socialisation programs for dogs, their owners and young children.

Its statistics show that the most likely victims of dog attacks are children aged under 10, usually by their own dogs at their homes.

"We're never going to be able to prevent every incident, but a really good way to help prevent bites and attack is through socialisation of puppies with people and other dogs at a young age, and teaching our children how to be safe around animals," Dr Seksel said.

Ayen Chol was killed when the dog escaped a neighbour's home and chased the four-year-old's cousin into her house in St Albans on Wednesday night.

Ayen was watching television in the house when the dog attacked, lunging at her as she clung to her mother's legs.

[black_dog]

You can Imagine It with any of our other med - large powerful breeds too, and you did say those magic words Untrained and Chained

Enough to cause problems for many a dog don't you agree

I can, but I'm just pointing out the fact that aggressive APBT-looking dogs are particularly scary, and to see a trained one pulling a pallet of bricks and biting a tyre three metres off the ground doesn't make them less scary.

You know what scares me?

People like Matthew B, who is a good representation of the general public's view about pit bulls and dog attacks, that seem to think that only certain breeds or types of dogs can bite, hurt and attack people, children, other dogs and animals.

THAT attitude is truly terrifying.

I wish people would focus on the fact that any dog can and will bite and that dog attacks are completely preventable.

I think that Matthew_B pretty well sums up the majority view. Dog attacks get reported in the media only when they are the most severe, ie from the most powerful dogs. People think about this quite simply: it is a combination of powerful dogs and bad owners, so lets get rid of the dogs and punish the owners.

Most people agree that dog attacks are preventable - what they want is to take away the weapon from the idiot. Exactly the same as P-platers and WRXs.

If you dismiss M_B's view, as has been done at length, then how will you convince everyone else that thinks like that?

[sconski]

I say ban stupid people from owning dogs! So many idiots own dogs they dont excerise or discipline. They give them no boundaries or any affection, they stick them in the backyard like a garden ornament then bitch and moan when the dog gets unruley or distructive.

Unfortunately there is an element of society who are drawn to these powerful breeds such as the APBT, they arent drawn to the hand knitted yappy dogs and unfortunately for the APBT they dont do the work required to have a well balanced loving APBT. Heck there are plenty of people out there who dont do the work to have well balanced dog of any breed of dog, but it seems most other breeds dont attack to KILL like these type of dogs seems to do.

So until we as a society stop tolerating those around us who dont adequately care for the dogs, no matter what the breed (and I mean those who dont walk their dogs, socialise their dogs, discipline and love their dogs as family members not just garden ornaments) then I'm afraid I think that to protect the community in city areas then APBT, their crosses and perhaps even breeds of that type should be banned.

What I dont understand though, is how are they getting these dogs? In Victoria as of 2 Nov 2005 it is an offence to acquire a restricted breed dog, it is an offence to import a Pit Bull, they must be desexed, and you cant sell your dog to another Victorian. So clearly there are plenty of people out there committing an offence by obtaining these dogs in the first place!

[Zhou Xuanyao]

While I agree with tapferhund, I also think that despite people's obvious concerns about dog attacks, it remains a fringe political issue. I don't see the outcomes of elections being decided on dog control policy. Therefore, the majority of people do not necessarily need to be convinced, only the right people. I think it is better to focus on a "top down" approach.

Edited August 19, 2011 by Lo Pan

[sandgrubber]

Well, I read an article not that long ago where it said it only takes 10% of the population to sway the other 90% .

Minority groups can have a significant impact on the attitudes of the majority. Being consistent and coherent is very important.

Effective minority groups . . . but dog owners seem inclined to talk among themselves rather than working consistently and coherently to work the power structure or change public opinions. People worried about the fate of bull-type x breeds would do better phoning their state representatives, writing letters to editors, etc. than engaging in bun fights on forums, like this one, that do not reach the general public or the power brokers. (I'm as guilty as the next of this . . . but I'm no longer in Australia and my local and state government isn't going to go into BSL anytime soon.)

[rep628]

PitBulls have a very bad reputation in society. Just imagine trying to sell your house and telling the prospective buyers that your next door neighbour has one or two Pitbulls. They are one of the most feared type of dog in modern society. Now a pitbull type has slaughtered a small child, someone's baby. What good is a having a dog that has to be confined for fear of it attacking an animal or human ? My opinion is this type of dog has no place in society. Do the dogs suffer because they have bad owners that don't know what to do ? Yes. Do we need these dogs ? No.

TD, the fact the society fears something doesn't mean that fear has any basis in fact. I wish folk could see that their belief is being manipulated by politicians and the media for their own agendas and for the most part with no real reason for that fear.

I get that people are worried about large powerful dogs and their potential to kill. I share that concern.

I wish folk would read past the headlines and hysteria and actually educate themselves about what makes a killer dog. The research is out there, the books are out there and the fact that most people with real knowledge of dogs and dog aggression don't support BSL should be telling you that something's smelly about the BSL solution.

Which part of "banning dogs breeds doesn't stop dog attacks" are people failing to grasp???

People like Mathew and others who dont have a fundamental understanding of dogs dont realise how easy it is to make a maneater.They can remove all pitbulls tomorrow and using dogs that are already here and legal you can breed another type of dog in a very short space of time.One that is more human aggressive ,larger and more dangerous.It is not that hard and not that hard to turn them nasty.Armed with that knowledge which end of the leash should you target?

If a meth head can make a batch of meth under his kitchen sink with limited knowledge and basic ingredients it proves you dont need to be a chemist.Dog breeding is the same its not rocket science.

Wow, sheer lunacy! If we believed you, every Police Dog Squad member and security guard dog unit would be suffering numerous injuries caused by their dogs. The fact that they don't is because the breeds selected are those which can be trained to restrain their aggressiveness and to attack only when commanded. The pitbull that killed the little girl that is the subject of this topic could not be stopped no matter what.

I've ignored your uninformed diatribe til now, but your comment on Police Dog Squad members has gotten to me. Have you ever been involved in a Sporting Dog Club? I am. Or know personally members of the Police Dog Units/Military Dog Units. I do. Have you ever seen the amount of times dogs get overaroused and "miss"? I have. Have you heard or even chuckled at the jokes about how cheeky their OWN dogs are for biting them - be it because the dogs have redirected for being corrected too hard, how "that one loves her some skin", or missing the tug toy. I have.

Do you have ANY concept of what they look for in these dogs, and what they cultivate from pups as young as 3-4 months? Or that some of the commands that set these dogs into actions are the own dogs' ability to read/understand human body language? Somehow, I don't think you do.

The cross breed dog that you are speculating on was clearly not subject to the intense pain/training/correction the vast majority police/military/working dogs experience when on the field in order for them to be able to do their job. And then you fail to account for the high failure/burn out rate of these animals. Not saying this could/could not have stopped that dog. And hey, I'm not even a training director, or have my Amstaff title in a Schutzhund obedience/tracking title yet. I'm just very, very fortunate to be in the midst of some really switched on people, participate & have a pretty keen ability to observe.

"Restrain their aggressiveness".. You have no clue.

[sariluda]

My partner made the comment that he couldn't understand why anyone would want 'that kind of dog' and I have to agree with him. We often say on here that we don't understand why people go out and buy designer dogs because there are so many lovely pure breeds to choose from. Well I don't understand why people insist on fighting to keep the pit bull type breeds when there are so many other lovely breeds to choose from.

No one wants to see their lovely docile pet pitbull type dog put down because of some hastily prepared legislation, but banning the breeding (at least) of these dogs and therefore allowing the breed to eventually disappear doesn't seem unreasonable.

IMO there arn't a lot of breeds that compare to a well bred American Pit Bull Terrier. If the breeding/importation ban is ever lifted I'd love to have a really nicely bred one if I thought I could deal with the DA. They arn't the same as similar breeds and they definetly arn't for everyone.

I suggest watching this video, it gives me shivers and makes me want to cry everytime.

If someone told me they were going to ban all Border Collie/Border Collie type dogs I don't know what I'd do. This is my breed, I am passionate about them and they work for me, you don't ever have to have a pitbull but they are an old breed with a rich history and up untill recently they were adored by the public. I can't imagine what we would loose with them.

what a fantastic video, shows their TRUE nature, APBT is genetical the same as a ASBT,and please correct me if i'm wrong but my understanding is that an ASBT /APBT is closely related to the boxer, and the only way to determaine this breed when not pedegree (pure breed with 3 or more registerd genarations) is through DNA testing and not by the LOOKS of the dog. Absolutely there definately needs to be tougher penalties on owners that own non pedegree cross breeds/purebreed pedegree dogs that attack regardless of the breed type, hopefully this will deter back yard breeders and buyers,(also puppy farming)as you DONT KNOW WHAT YOUR GETTING. leave dog breeding to profesionals that will breed from the best dogs in all area's of temperament, etc, therefore breeding stock can be screened for betterment of the breed standard, ie; not breeding from animals with anxiety, fear, agressive or timid natures as all of these aspects produce insecure and unstable offspring. Back yarders and puppy farmers dont give a shit about these features of the dogs they breed with, it's all about the $ not the improvement of the breed standard. therefore you end up with mongrels NOT PIT BULLS that attack and seriously injure or on this sad instance kill. IMO a cross breed dog is a mongrel if it's not purebreed with a pedegree it's a mongrel, and saying this dosen't nesasarily mean that it's going to be a vicious killer, it's just a tittle. at the end of the day any dog in the wrong hands be be a non desirable whether it be a purebreed pedegree or mixed mongrel,But these CHEAPER dogs from Back yardes are more accessable to undsirable owners. It's about regulatating breeds not banning breeds. If you ban somethingthing and make it illegal then it CAN NOT BE REGULATED it's called the black market, derrrr. oh and Bull Terriers Rock :-) RIP to the Sudanese angle :-(

[rep628]

While I agree with tapferhund, I also think that despite people's obvious concerns about dog attacks, it remains a fringe political issue. I don't see the outcomes of elections being decided on dog control policy. Therefore, the majority of people do not necessarily need to be convinced, only the right people. I think it is better to focus on a "top down" approach.

When I was with a group of people that rallied against BSL back in Canada - we went straight to the government officials. It worked, I can go back and live in one of my favourite cities in Canada if I so desire with any breed of dog on this good earth. So I might ask, or this might be a better post in a new topic.

What are each of us doing this weekend to deal with this?

We're all quite willing to get on here and share our saddness, our frustration, and tit-for-tats to the rare few that can't see the forest for the trees (hey, my previous post was no different). But are we using the same keystrokes to write to our local government? What about a phone call to our local vet to make sure their beliefs are in line with ours and if not, guess where our money is moving to? Have we wrote letters of support to those who are asking for reason (Charlie of the 7 PM Project, the AVA, RSPCA Vic Shelter Manager), or as someone mentioned earlier, maybe even a note to the family from all of us here at DOL?

Lo Pan, if you only had time tomorrow, who would your "Top Down" letter be to? I'll make it my goal tomorrow. You make mention, the email will be in my "Sent" folder.

And now it's off to bed for me, just did a very late shift of emergency, I think the witching (or is it b!tc&ing?) hour has caught up with me..