Loving my Oldies Posted August 25, 2013 Share Posted August 25, 2013 Makes you wonder that all that roaming makes the dogs more social with each other and people, whereas here, our dogs are all confined, not socialised as much etc etc and we are starting to see more serious problems. Not that I'm saying open your gates, but I think it says something about the way we keep our dogs these days. I reckon this is the case, too. The way we live our lives (and consequently those of the creatures we bring into our lives) is unnatural. Dogs aren't meant to spend all their time outside the house on a lead and being pulled away from other dogs simply because they want to investigate other dogs. People aren't meant to spend up to four hours a day sitting on a train or in a car commuting. It is going to get worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosetta Posted August 25, 2013 Share Posted August 25, 2013 Exactly. What else can we expect from dogs that are confined in yards, expected to be "guard" dogs and encouraged to be aggressive by moron owners, most likely ill treated. What is going to happen when those dogs escape their confines? Two of these cases lately relate to owners who are "away". Hit the owners hard in the hip pocket and ban them from owning any dogs until they attend a responsible dog owner's course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loving my Oldies Posted August 25, 2013 Share Posted August 25, 2013 The problem is, Rosetta, that I believe there is another and perhaps greater problem than that you have expressed. So many people who have dogs simply have no idea and they don't know that they have no idea. What can be difficult about owning a dog? You take it for a walk a couple of times a week, give it a can of food, check every few days that it has water. That's all there is to it isn't it? Oh, and if someone leaves the gate open - well the dog is stupid to go outside, isn't it. And the proliferation of those retractable leads is going to add to the problem as the dogs, if and when they are walked, are allowed to ramble, run, jump, go anywhere and they are never corrected except by a jerk on the lead as the lead is either retracted or braked. God help us all and the poor poor dogs. I am still tossing up whether or not to speak to the owners of a dog who was being walked by a friend. His idea of training a dog? You have to be cruel to be kind. Yeah - so right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandgrubber Posted August 25, 2013 Share Posted August 25, 2013 The problem is, Rosetta, that I believe there is another and perhaps greater problem than that you have expressed. So many people who have dogs simply have no idea and they don't know that they have no idea. What can be difficult about owning a dog? You take it for a walk a couple of times a week, give it a can of food, check every few days that it has water. That's all there is to it isn't it? Oh, and if someone leaves the gate open - well the dog is stupid to go outside, isn't it. The bigger factor is no time. What with single parent families and households where both parents work, not to mention everybody being very busy with all sorts of activities and kids obsessed with video games, it's getting so that only retired folk and a few dog nuts have the time required to do right by a dog. People could learn if they put their attention to it, but attention is so frazzled and divided that education is near impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzeboots Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Just in case anyone is interested in the truth of this matter & not the hysteria relayed in the media: It was proven in court at no time did either of the dogs attack or make any skin contact with the elderly woman. Both dogs were accompanied by their owner, in their own front garden when the elderly couple walked past the end of the driveway at the top of the hill, one of the dogs barked, once & was reprimanded by the owner & both dogs immediately sat by the front door of the house. The path at the end of the driveway was in a chronic state of disrepair & very uneven, the woman lost her footing & fell on to the road where she sustained her injuries, laceration to the head from impact on the road & a broken finger from putting her hand out when she fell. The owner administered first aid until the ambulance arrived. The legal technicalities of a dog attack in WA states that even a dog muzzled & on a leash that makes a person feel uncomfortable can be reported & seized whilst an investigation ensues. In response to the comment about BYB: Let me assure you that these two dogs were most definitely not a result of BYB's, they were a mother & her pup from a very loving family. As far as them being unregistered: both dogs were in fact registered previously in the country town the owners came from, this had expired when they moved from the country, with moving to a new home & both starting new jobs, it was purely an oversight. The owners are a young career driven couple that were unaware of the Koongamia area when they moved from the country. The media have been contacted by the legal team representing the owners & were given the "legal" truth of the incident, three media outlets offered an apology but the retraction will never make front page of the West or the leading story on the nightly news. Whilst I understand the previous comments are based on emotional responses to ill-informed media reports, please be aware that an elderly woman was very badly hurt & the owners have taken full responsibility for the fact that the mere presence of their dogs & one barking caused the woman's injuries & have not shirked their legal consequences. Perhaps the lesson here is: although it is human nature to form an emotional reaction to a news story, we need to remember that the media have no responsibility to investigate the full facts prior to publication. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cavNrott Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 (edited) It is excellent news that it was proven in court that there was no dog attack. Was it understood to be an accidental fall by the elderly woman as a result of the local council failing to maintain and make safe the footpath? Why then were the dogs taken away and impounded? Are we also to understand that these are pure bred pedigree dogs that were purchased from a registered breeder? I note you disagree that they were BYB dogs. The fact that they are mother and her pup from a very loving family does not mean they are not BYB dogs. You seem to be confused about registration. The registration being discussed on this forum is that the dogs are pedigree dogs bred by a regstered breeder. The dogs pedigree papers are then registered with the registering body of the state in which the dogs were bred. It does not mean the registration of pet dogs with the local council, which is a requirement of all pet dog owners. Perhaps the lesson here is: although it is human nature to form an emotional reaction to a news story, we need to remember that the media have no responsibility to investigate the full facts prior to publication Absolutely agree with your comment re: the media. edited to change a word to make sense. Edited July 3, 2014 by cavNrott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mita Posted July 3, 2014 Share Posted July 3, 2014 I Perhaps the lesson here is: although it is human nature to form an emotional reaction to a news story, we need to remember that the media have no responsibility to investigate the full facts prior to publication Absolutely agree with your comment re: the media. Agree with that quote, too. And dogs can't sue for defamation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_PL_ Posted July 3, 2014 Share Posted July 3, 2014 Suzeboot, one dog barked from it's front yard, startled the old lady and she fell in the gutter? Are WA dogs not allowed to bark when they are on their own property? I can imagine it would be different if they are on the street or rushed out of a pitiful boundary fence.. but their own front yard? Dogs do that all the time. Dogs would be being seized all over the place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yonjuro Posted July 3, 2014 Author Share Posted July 3, 2014 This is very strange indeed. There is one thing in getting some details wrong in a story, but what was originally reported and supposedly corroborated by witnesses seems so far away from falling down that it makes no sense at all. If these new comments are correct then how this ever went to court is a travesty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tibbie_tabbie Posted July 3, 2014 Share Posted July 3, 2014 The vet 'investigating' claimed she had bite wounds, didn't they?! Confused.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yonjuro Posted July 3, 2014 Author Share Posted July 3, 2014 The vet 'investigating' claimed she had bite wounds, didn't they?! Confused.... That is what gathered from the radio interview, however he could have been commenting on the reports he was given I dunno, I am really confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cody Posted July 3, 2014 Share Posted July 3, 2014 Just in case anyone is interested in the truth of this matter & not the hysteria relayed in the media: It was proven in court at no time did either of the dogs attack or make any skin contact with the elderly woman. Both dogs were accompanied by their owner, in their own front garden when the elderly couple walked past the end of the driveway at the top of the hill, one of the dogs barked, once & was reprimanded by the owner & both dogs immediately sat by the front door of the house. The path at the end of the driveway was in a chronic state of disrepair & very uneven, the woman lost her footing & fell on to the road where she sustained her injuries, laceration to the head from impact on the road & a broken finger from putting her hand out when she fell. The owner administered first aid until the ambulance arrived. The legal technicalities of a dog attack in WA states that even a dog muzzled & on a leash that makes a person feel uncomfortable can be reported & seized whilst an investigation ensues. In response to the comment about BYB: Let me assure you that these two dogs were most definitely not a result of BYB's, they were a mother & her pup from a very loving family. As far as them being unregistered: both dogs were in fact registered previously in the country town the owners came from, this had expired when they moved from the country, with moving to a new home & both starting new jobs, it was purely an oversight. The owners are a young career driven couple that were unaware of the Koongamia area when they moved from the country. The media have been contacted by the legal team representing the owners & were given the "legal" truth of the incident, three media outlets offered an apology but the retraction will never make front page of the West or the leading story on the nightly news. Whilst I understand the previous comments are based on emotional responses to ill-informed media reports, please be aware that an elderly woman was very badly hurt & the owners have taken full responsibility for the fact that the mere presence of their dogs & one barking caused the woman's injuries & have not shirked their legal consequences. Perhaps the lesson here is: although it is human nature to form an emotional reaction to a news story, we need to remember that the media have no responsibility to investigate the full facts prior to publication. Do you have a link to the source of this information? 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