Dog attack article in Herald, 10th June.

Discostuy

Hermit07 wrote: »

Absolutely it could have been a jack russell, labrador etc and the dog might not have even been an akita. I dont have a problem with whatever breed of dog it may be but I have a massive problem with the RB brigrade only concerned about the effect it has on the RB's reputation. For god sake a little child was attacked. The dog in question was not securely under control if it managed to do this. I have kept restricted breeds before and I can assure you there was no gaps, holes in my fence where little hands could reach in.

I am concerned for the RB's reputation. I have 2 Akitas, its bad enough they can't be let off lead, must be kept on short leads and walked by over 16's only...this sort of publicity makes it even worse. The RB list is a complete load of non sense in my opionion.

My two love nothing more then meeting the kids on the street who pet them and feed them sweets. But these are the same kids who have lost many footballs into my garden, because (thankfully) their parents told them under no circumstances are they to enter the garden when the dogs are there.

I'd say it would be a different attitude if the dog was protecting a child from some stranger sticking his hand through a fence trying to get at the child. The dog would be a hero.

ISDW

Hermit07 wrote: »

That is absolutely lovely talk. Managed to get knocked up?. I wont even respond to that.

A child was injured, it shouldnt have happened. The child should not have been able to get any part of their body into the dogs enclosure. End of.

There seems to be a clan brigage on this board as other people have mentioned recently and its not a nice place to post. If this were posted on the parenting forum, there would be uproar.

I didn't think it was an enclosure, was it not the dog's garden?

It is obviously awful that the child is injured, but I have very, very good fencing around my property to contain my dogs. However, as I live so near to the sea, I can't have solid fencing, it would blow down, so I have fencing that a child could put his hand through if he really wanted to. If a child put a hand through and it got bitten, it would not be my responsibility. I have spent a fortune on fencing, I have padlocks on my gates, but unforunately, kids will be kids, we all know that, they will do things they shouldn't do. I also have a 7 year old boy and I would be very upset if this was him, but I wouldn't be calling for 'these' dogs not to be owned. We don't actually even know what kind of dog this was, was it an Akita, or was it a large husky, so possibly a malamute. What on earth kind of special licence is needed for any domestic dog?

Hermit, I'm sorry, but different rules apply to different forum here, a lot of stuff that if it was posted in a different section would cause uproar. How many posts have there been I wonder in the parents section advocating getting rid of the family pet when a child is born? That would cause uproar in this section.

Sensationalist reporting such as this in the Herald does nobody any favours at all. A child has been hurt and a dog killed, a sad day all round.

Hellrazer

Right-Time to step in here.

crotalus667--Your comments towards Hermit are way out of line.
Whether the user has kids or not is not the discussion here.So consider this a warning.

antomagoo

Crotalus667 you were bang out of order with that post it has done nothing for your argument.

Its typical of the crap that the herald and other rag papers have been putting out there when it comes dog attacks.

Like ISDW says kids will be kids and despite all the best parenting in the world there will be occasions when a kid will do whatever he/she wants.

Some dogs can be completely different when in their own terrioty as opposed to what they are like on a walk. Scaring kids off dogs by telling them RB are dangerous dogs does not help, education is the only way we'll get over the obsession of "Dangerous Dogs"

Hellrazer

My view--I dont think the dog should have been put down.The kid invaded the dogs territory and to be totally honest I reckon my big fat baby lab would have attacked any stranger entering her space even though shes the biggest baby that lets our lot pull her around the place and she has never once even growled at them.

Again I feel that theres more to this than the media are making out.Those kids could have been winding the dog up for all we know.

sambuka41

Just out of curiosity could the owner have contested the dog being put down? Or is it a case of once it bites it must be put asleep?

stupidusername

I really don't get the attitude of putting down any animal if there's an attack on a human. Animals are wild. People should be taught this from a very early age. If you are going to be around animals you need to be educated, and responsible. While I get the a child is just a child, children generally aren't taught how to be around other people and animals. The parents here were the responsible ones, it's their responsibility to educate the child as to the nature of animals. In no way would I blame the dog here. And I probably never would in a situation like this.

As has been mentioned, the dog was sufficiently separated from anyone that is not on his property, and so it isn't the owners fault. As far as the dog was concerned it was an intrusion into his and his owners territory. AND it is entirely possible that the child could've poked the dog, or provoked him. It's not as if that's likely to have been mentioned to the media.

I do feel bad for the child but at least he'll now have some sort of education as to how not to deal with animals, as it clearly wasn't coming from his parents. And what kind of parent leaves a seven year old home alone anyway??

Sittingpretty

Oh ra ra ra here we go again with the Big bad dogs and the innocent little children brigade. This rattles my cage good and proper. As has been mentioned yes, it is very unfortunate that a child was hurt here, I'm not for a minute saying otherwise but for the love of Jesus the drama, the put the dog to sleep, the complete and utter ignorance of both Irish law and most Irish people when it comes to dogs and pet care just baffles me.

I have a 3 year old GSD, I also have a five year old child. Firstly I would never leave a 7 year old child alone, not even for a quick trip up to the creche. So yes this poor unfortunate child's mother does have some responsibility to shoulder whether she likes that or not. Secondly children shouldn't poke their hands through fences to retrieve balls, whatever happened to knocking on the neighbour's door? It worked for me when I was a small one. Thirdly why oh ehy oh why can parents not educate firstly themselves and secondly their children on how to deal with dogs/animals of any breed. You simply don't poke your hand into a garden with a dog in it. My 5 year old could tell you that.

I'm am utterly sick of the complete and utter ignorance of Irish people to animals in general and dogs in particular. We are an absolute disgrace. NAtion of dog lovers my arse :mad:

Dyr

Hermit07 wrote: »

I take it a lot of replies on here are from people who dont have much experience of 7 year old children or who dont have children. The child didnt climb over fences, trample flower beds etc, he innocently put his hand tru a fence to retrieve a ball and was savaged. I know lots of kids of that age who would do the same.

As I have said I have vast experience of the breed in question. The dog was not properly secured if the child was able to put its hand though the fence and be mauled.

Im quite shocked at some of the replies on here to be honest, for any of you who do have children, how would you feel if this happened to your child? Those who dont have children and think its ok, well your priorties will soon change when you become a parent. Regardless of whether the child should have been taught to knock on the hall door to retrieve the ball. He got savaged by a dangerous dog.

It is people like the owner of the dog in question who give the responsible owners a bad name. If this is the attitude of people on this forum that a 7 year old is to blame because a dog who may be a restricted breed was not properly secured, then I shall be taking my posts elsewhere.

Vast experience of a breed that was'nt actually named? Well that's enough to convince me. It's a bit like me saying I've a vast experience of children :pac:

if you take your posts elsewhere you might want to visit dublin zoo and tell them that their enclosures aren't up to scratch, end of lol.

seamus

sambuka41 wrote: »

Just out of curiosity could the owner have contested the dog being put down? Or is it a case of once it bites it must be put asleep?

Yes, the owner can contest. When an incident like this occurs, the warden will seize the dog and "encourage" (read: threaten) the owner to sign the dog over to the warden. The warden will then destroy the dog.

If the owner refuses to sign the dog over, the warden must go to court and make an application to a judge for the animal to be declared dangerous and destroyed. Obviously the owner can get involved here and make his own petition, but the Irish judiciary are very ignorant when it comes to animals in general and where there has been a serious human injury (such as in this case), the odds are that the dog will be destroyed.

Given that the incident occured last week and the dog has already been PTS, the owner probably had it done voluntarily as a court case can take months to come up.

crotalus667

Hellrazer wrote: »

Right-Time to step in here.

crotalus667--Your comments towards Hermit are way out of line.
Whether the user has kids or not is not the discussion here.So consider this a warning.

That was my point

crotalus667

sambuka41 wrote: »

Just out of curiosity could the owner have contested the dog being put down? Or is it a case of once it bites it must be put asleep?

if I recall correctly from the article the dog was beaten with a hurl and sticks it may have been a case where it had to be pts for it’s own sake

stupidusername

Just read the full article there, and it says that the mother was at work. She left him at home with his 15 year old sister. Why is no one saying anything about this? Sure anything could happen them left by themselves.

i-digress

To be honest, why does there have to be anyone to blame here? It's an unfortunate accident.

I have siblings much younger than me, and I can see all three of them putting their hand through a fence to collect a small ball, rather than bother the owner. They're taught well, will give up their seat voluntarily on a bus for example, but they could do that. The kid might not even have seen that there was a dog in the garden.

It's unfortunate that the dog was a RB. My sister in law has a rottie and she is the most gentle, sweet dog I know. My parents dog is a Jack Russel/daschund mix but if he thought anyone in our house was in danger he would do the exact same thing as this dog. He's well socialised, great with kids even my two year old sister, but he would do whatever it took to protect us. That's his nature.

And that's the thing that annoys me. Dogs are not humans. I was always told growing up to approach dogs I didn't know slowly and check whether it was ok to pet them. If I messed with a dog and got bitten, that's what happens. There is no excuse for an over aggressive dog, but I hate when people think that dogs should act with human logic.

I think dog owners of all breeds should be required to attend a course on the basics of owning, socialising and training a dog before they get one. It's a shame that stories like this mean that people like my sister in law, who puts a huge amount of work into her dog, gets tarred with the same brush as dog owners who didn't do so much as look at a Wikipedia page on their breed before they got a dog.

Graces7

I have serious doubts as to the level of the injuries , a full blown attack by any dog of a similar (or indeed smaler) size focused on the arm of a seven yo would of destroyed the arm to the point where the arm or at least some of the movement would be lost[/QUOTE]


I wondered that too; it is simply not mentioned?. If a dog really means to bite it will go through to the bone.

Hellrazer

crotalus667 wrote: »

That was my point

But you didnt have to make it in the way that you did.
I think most people here agree that the kid was wrong to stick their hand through a fence but your comments were inflammatory.

adser53

right I could be wrong here but here I go....

South dublin county council banned owning RB's on their properties a few years back and you had to apply for an exemption if you already possessed an RB-hence the talk of a "special licence". This means feck all and served no purpose in the article other than to sensationalise a horrific ACCIDENT. Youd swear it was a tiger with a special exotic animal licence the way it was written.

As I then believe this incident happened in a council estate I have a few opinions that some may find offensive but it's from my extensive experience working in these areas and growing up near them.... Essentially, the kids are left up to their own devices and the dogs aren't exercised or socialised and spend the majority of their time locked or chained up out the back. These 2 factors are a recipe for disaster. As I queued up to buy this copy of the herald in jobstown, a couple beside me had read it and were talking about an incident 2 weeks ago in killinarden where a child put their hands through the front gate of a house with a husky (their words, not mine so couldve been any breed) that then grabbed the child and pulled them full force into the gate causing extensive bruising to the childs head and chest. The mother went to complain later and the dogs owner was aggressive to them.

This is almost the exact same as the incident in clondalkin involving the akita and couldve been a lot worse.

I own 2 akitas and I'll freely admit I always speak in the defence of the RB. This case is no different. The child shouldn't have put their hands through the fence and he should've been supervised. Legally the dog's owners did nothing wrong. If i dangled my arse over the back wall and got bitten by the neighbour's dog, that'd be my fault. It's sad the dog was put down in this case but my jaded opinion also tells me it probably wasnt treated right in the first place which is why it bit the boy. Dog attack stats will tell you that a constantly confined or chained up dog is far more likely to attack, REGARDLESS of breed.

Graces7

adser53 wrote: »

right I could be wrong here but here I go....

South dublin county council banned owning RB's on their properties a few years back and you had to apply for an exemption if you already possessed an RB-hence the talk of a "special licence". This means feck all and served no purpose in the article other than to sensationalise a horrific ACCIDENT. Youd swear it was a tiger with a special exotic animal licence the way it was written.

As I then believe this incident happened in a council estate I have a few opinions that some may find offensive but it's from my extensive experience working in these areas and growing up near them.... Essentially, the kids are left up to their own devices and the dogs aren't exercised or socialised and spend the majority of their time locked or chained up out the back. These 2 factors are a recipe for disaster. As I queued up to buy this copy of the herald in jobstown, a couple beside me had read it and were talking about an incident 2 weeks ago in killinarden where a child put their hands through the front gate of a house with a husky (their words, not mine so couldve been any breed) that then grabbed the child and pulled them full force into the gate causing extensive bruising to the childs head and chest. The mother went to complain later and the dogs owner was aggressive to them.

This is almost the exact same as the incident in clondalkin involving the akita and couldve been a lot worse.

I own 2 akitas and I'll freely admit I always speak in the defence of the RB. This case is no different. The child shouldn't have put their hands through the fence and he should've been supervised. Legally the dog's owners did nothing wrong. If i dangled my arse over the back wall and got bitten by the neighbour's dog, that'd be my fault. It's sad the dog was put down in this case but my jaded opinion also tells me it probably wasnt treated right in the first place which is why it bit the boy. Dog attack stats will tell you that a constantly confined or chained up dog is far more likely to attack, REGARDLESS of breed.

For this sense and reason, thank you.

It says all that needs saying.

CL32

Hermit07 wrote: »

I have a massive problem with the RB brigrade only concerned about the effect it has on the RB's reputation.

No one here is actually happy that a child got injured for gods sake. Can you not understand that? No one here is happy a dog was destroyed either.

I think the shoddy and sensationalist manner of the reporting suggests it may not have made the paper if the dog in question was a big, powerful lab. That is the crux of the matter for the RB brigade as you call us.

I have several cousins, neighbours and god-children in the same age group as the injured child so I believe I can emphatize.

Tripp

This is a terrible thing to happen to any1, especially a child.
This is going to sound harsh and cruel but ill say it anyway.
If some1 enters my property ( its quite secure ) without me wanting them there and my Akita see's them. She will protect her territory.

Whispered

Hermit07 wrote: »

Absolutely it could have been a jack russell, labrador etc and the dog might not have even been an akita.

If it was a jack russell or a lab then the wording would be very different in the paper, if indeed it made a paper at all.

There is a young girl on my road who is petrified of dogs to the point she will run screaming if you pass her in the car and the dog is looking out. I came back from a night shift on wednesday and went to bed, the kids were playing ball on the road, my dog was asleep on the back of the couch looking out the window(the window is a suntrap in the morning). Anyway, I was dozing off when right under my window I heard the familiar "IT'S A DOOOOOOOOOG AAAAAAAA DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOG" The child had gone to chase her ball into the garden and the dog moved his head. He obviously gave her a fright but FFS she shouldn't be going into peoples gardens looking in their sitting room windows. Do you know what happened, the mother heard her toddler screaming, ran up the road, grabbed her and stalked off telling her loudly not to mind "the bold dog". It's getting ridiculous at this stage, I can't walk him if she is out without screams, I can't drive past her with him in the car or she starts, now he can't sit on the back of my sofa, in my sitting room. I know she's a small child but honestly, it's getting to me now. Because of the childs reaction and that of her mother, I can't walk past the neighbourhood kids without mutterings of the dog being bold and wanting to eat them for dinner. I can say hand on heart, he's never ever been out without complete control on a lead and doesn't even look at the kids.

That is the sort of crap owners of RB dogs and other large dogs (exepct of course labs - the wonders of toilet paper advertisments :rolleyes:) have to put up with anyway. Without neglegent mothers allowing their kids out without any supervision or manners apparently then questioning owners for having their dogs on their property. It's ridiculous.

It's sad the child got hurt and I would question why the dog did it. But once again people look on it as a reason to try bring a ban against certain dogs. If one JRT bites, should they all be PTS?

lrushe

Just read this story reminded me of a story I read recently in America where an elderly woman was found dead in her driveway with bite marks all over her body and her Rottie Zeus standing over her. The dog was taken and destroyed straight away. After a postmortem was done on the woman it was found that she had had a heart attack and her Rottie was trying to drag her outside for help. The point being that when it come to RBs or anything resembling one it is always a shoot first ask questions later, had the dog in either story been a lab or poodle chances are they'd still be alive.
The mother's quote at the end really gets me "I just want to say to other parents that this type of dog is not to be trusted around children", THE DOG WASN'T 'AROUND CHILDREN' IT WAS IN IT'S OWN BACKGARDEN. If it was me they would have to prise my dog from my cold death hands to put it down, I'd fight it through every court in the land.
Where are the repercussions for a mother leaving her 7 year old in the care of another minor???

ppink

i think a lot of the problems wth kids being scared comes directly from the parents. also the fact that they will stick a hand through a fence...they should be taught not to, in a reasonable fashion.
i was badly attacked by a GSd when i was small, my family had to beat him to get my head out of his mouth as he was shaking me. I had blacked out!
I am sitting here now with my GSD's panned out beside me. I never had a fear of dogs despite that one bad attack(30+ stiches over my head) and 2 other bites. It was never an option in my house......there was no such thing as " the bad dog" or anything of the sort. It was just dealt with calmly and rationally.
Writers need to use words like "savaged" and "mauled" to get people reading, whether this was actually the case is another issue.

i feel sorry for the child but think the full details would have to be seen before judging if the pts was correct or not.

ghost_ie

adser53 wrote: »

right I could be wrong here but here I go....

South dublin county council banned owning RB's on their properties a few years back and you had to apply for an exemption if you already possessed an RB-hence the talk of a "special licence". This means feck all and served no purpose in the article other than to sensationalise a horrific ACCIDENT. Youd swear it was a tiger with a special exotic animal licence the way it was written.

As I then believe this incident happened in a council estate I have a few opinions that some may find offensive but it's from my extensive experience working in these areas and growing up near them.... Essentially, the kids are left up to their own devices and the dogs aren't exercised or socialised and spend the majority of their time locked or chained up out the back. These 2 factors are a recipe for disaster. As I queued up to buy this copy of the herald in jobstown, a couple beside me had read it and were talking about an incident 2 weeks ago in killinarden where a child put their hands through the front gate of a house with a husky (their words, not mine so couldve been any breed) that then grabbed the child and pulled them full force into the gate causing extensive bruising to the childs head and chest. The mother went to complain later and the dogs owner was aggressive to them.

This is almost the exact same as the incident in clondalkin involving the akita and couldve been a lot worse.

I own 2 akitas and I'll freely admit I always speak in the defence of the RB. This case is no different. The child shouldn't have put their hands through the fence and he should've been supervised. Legally the dog's owners did nothing wrong. If i dangled my arse over the back wall and got bitten by the neighbour's dog, that'd be my fault. It's sad the dog was put down in this case but my jaded opinion also tells me it probably wasnt treated right in the first place which is why it bit the boy. Dog attack stats will tell you that a constantly confined or chained up dog is far more likely to attack, REGARDLESS of breed.

Just a word in defence of those of us on council estates. I live in a Council flat - ground floor with a small back garden - and have 3 dogs. The eldest is a lab/collie cross and the younger two are Jack Russell crosses. They are exercised every day - and by exercised I don't mean taken for a walk but taken to a dog park where they can run and play for at least an hour excluding the walk there and back, and are never chained up. The children who play in the field behind me have been taught by their parents never to climb over the wall into my garden after balls but to knock on my door and ask for the ball back, even though they know the dogs well and know they are friendly, simply as a matter of courtesy.

I don't think the breed of dog matters in this case - any dog who isn't socialised and sufficiently exercised would probablly do the same

adser53

ghost_ie wrote: »

Just a word in defence of those of us on council estates. I live in a Council flat - ground floor with a small back garden - and have 3 dogs. The eldest is a lab/collie cross and the younger two are Jack Russell crosses. They are exercised every day - and by exercised I don't mean taken for a walk but taken to a dog park where they can run and play for at least an hour excluding the walk there and back, and are never chained up. The children who play in the field behind me have been taught by their parents never to climb over the wall into my garden after balls but to knock on my door and ask for the ball back, even though they know the dogs well and know they are friendly, simply as a matter of courtesy.

I don't think the breed of dog matters in this case - any dog who isn't socialised and sufficiently exercised would probablly do the same

Oh of course ghost, I completely agree with you on breed being irrelevant, see my poll here about dog attacks http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055907162 where you'll see that out of 57 votes, 45 of the attacks were by unrestricted breeds.

And I didn't mean to tar all council tenants with the same brush, I know that's unfair. I just feel that in this particular case, it's a common story due to the number of council tenants present in every council estate that are irresponsible parents & dog owners and the amount of, eh....,"mischievious" kids . These people give Restricted Breed owners AND good, decent council tenants a bad name.

morganafay

ghost_ie wrote: »

I don't think the breed of dog matters in this case - any dog who isn't socialised and sufficiently exercised would probablly do the same

Yeah most breeds of dogs are just as capable of biting as RB dogs. They're still all dogs, so they're 99.9% the same. I think some breeds of dogs are very unlikely to ever bite, but only a few, and you'll always get one. Most of it is down to how you raise the dog. All dogs can be dangerous.

Hellrazer

Probably another thread of its own but this whole restricted breed thing has me fuming.

We`re in the process of adoption and we`re dealing with social workers on a weekly basis.

Few months back we were assigned a new social worker.
As most of you know at the minute we have only one dog--A big Fat labrador who wouldnt harm another living thing.
Well this social worker arrives to the house for a meeting,sees the dog and starts panicing and ranting on about the restricted breeds list and asking was the dog on it--bear in mind our 2 younger ones are currently playing with the dog in the same room who is letting them jump on her,pull out of her,dress her up in dresses at the same time that this one is going on about the RB list.

She runs out to the car,brings in the list and starts going on that if the dog is on the list the adoption could be halted.My wife says "grand--well we`ll halt the adoption rather than give up the dog"
That stopped this social worker in her tracks.But it goes to show the panic caused by even having a restricted breed list.

crotalus667

Hellrazer wrote: »

Probably another thread of its own but this whole restricted breed thing has me fuming.

We`re in the process of adoption and we`re dealing with social workers on a weekly basis.

Few months back we were assigned a new social worker.
As most of you know at the minute we have only one dog--A big Fat labrador who wouldnt harm another living thing.
Well this social worker arrives to the house for a meeting,sees the dog and starts panicing and ranting on about the restricted breeds list and asking was the dog on it--bear in mind our 2 younger ones are currently playing with the dog in the same room who is letting them jump on her,pull out of her,dress her up in dresses at the same time that this one is going on about the RB list.

She runs out to the car,brings in the list and starts going on that if the dog is on the list the adoption could be halted.My wife says "grand--well we`ll halt the adoption rather than give up the dog"
That stopped this social worker in her tracks.But it goes to show the panic caused by even having a restricted breed list.

I try to educate a wee bit if it is brought up and point out the fact that no dog should be treated with less caution than any other

padunne

Hermit07 wrote: »

Regardless of lazy editors etc there was a 7 year old child severely mauled here:mad:

The child should not have been able to put his hands though the fence. No matter what breed/type of dog you have, They should be kept in a secure area, even more so if it is a restricted breed.

The human error was not down to an innocent little 7 year old trying to retrieve his ball. Hes only a child for god sake and he was out playing like most 7 year olds do, the creche could have been only around the corner.

I dont feel one bit sorry for a dog that could attack like that because even though in fairness he was guarding his own territory, there is no place in society for dogs like that.

I also have extensive experience of the breed and in the right hands they are a fantastic dog but I also come across some with fearful aggression which needs corrective training to resolve. Responsible owners will work to correct this, irresponsible owners will encourage the behaviour.

I am a mother myself and I can tell you hell has no fury if this was to happen to my child.

You can't say a person's property has to be fenced well enough not to allow a childs hand through, that's absolutely ridiculous. I feel sorry for the child but more so for the dog.
In my opinion it was the mother's fault for not looking after the child in the first place. What happens if he ran in front of a car. Again automatically the car is at fault even if they are driving with due care.

stupidusername

Another child 'mauled' by a dog in the news today.

I've just had a look for an article, but can't find any! I saw it on tv3 news @ 5.30.