Thread: Children mauled by dogs.

Originally Posted by EchiDna

well this is the photo from the ABC news article - would you be happy with that in your suburban street?

Reckon I could fit the whole family in that water tank.



Simon

Originally Posted by Gooner

Congratulations to all on the thoughtful and considered posts in this tragic situation.

I want to make the following 2 points and I do not wish to offend anybody who owns what have become known as 'dangerous breeds'.

I walk my girl (11 year old GR) and it is no longer the enjoyable experience that it once was. I see other dog walkers carrying sticks and its not to shoo the flies away. They expect that sooner or later, they are going to have to defend either themselves or more likely their dog from another dog that has gotten free of its home. My girl could not defend her self from the breeds mentioned above....and why should she have to.
I have no doubt she would put herself between my kids and an attacking dog and she would be mauled and possibly killed for it.
Now, instead of my dog being attacked, suppose it was a kid walking to school with his mates. A 10 year old boy goes down under a 40-50kg brute of a dog with bad intentions and 10 seconds later it is all over.
This is happening. No 2nd chances. You cannot get there in time. Too late. A child is killed.
Why? because somebody chose to have a dog which had the capability to kill. This leads me to my 2nd point.
Its the potential for destruction that these breeds possess that people do not seem to want to acknowledge. Some dogs will fight and then walk away, while others will fight till one is killed. Where in our world do we need the breeds that have this destructive power to kill other dogs and children?
Why do I have to be fearful because I choose to walk my dog in public?
I respect peoples right to choose their breed, but I dont understand why you would have a breed that you do not trust with your kids?

Craig

I don't mean to pick on your post in particular, but it's near the end of them and offers much of the same sentiment that a few others have posted.

Just because a dog may show Dog aggression or have a high prey drive, this does not in anyway equate to Human aggression. The dog I have has extremely high prey drive, is very dominant and to some extent Dog aggressive. All this and I've had her at Obedience training from the week I picked her up (twice a week, she was the youngest dog at that particular club to ever enter advanced Obedience), she has obtained Obedience titles (more of which are to come). I take her walking around our area and while I know she does not like other dogs, she is always in complete control, even when nearly every time we're out she is challenged by other dogs, big or small. (She is always on lead, unless I go for a 15 min drive to a beach which I know is deserted even though we have a 'dog' beach 400meters from our house) When we approach other dogs I either make her sit or drop which she does without hesitation, the whole while the other dogs are barking/growling at the end of their leads. Some of them having to be dragged away, others once they receive the 'look' from her tuck their tail and hide behind their owners. I've had differing responses from people about her. Some comment on how well behaved she is and that she is a credit to canines, to the opposite where people have muttered, "Why bother having a dog like that?" All this when she has done nothing wrong and been the perfect canine citizen. I have taken her on WAAULRO camping trips and every body there loved her.
I have no hesitation letting anybody pat her, although I have a basic rule of she must always be supervised with children. And I truely believe that she would never harm a child, I'm more concerned about what a child would do to her. I know what I used to do when a kid to the neighbourhood dog. (Nothing serious, things like riding her etc)

I am all for Dangerous Dog laws! As long as they are done on a case by case basis. Though I will fight tooth and nail against Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) BSL is like saying a certain ethnic group are more likely to be drink drivers, so just in case we will ban that whole ethnic group from driving.

Sorry for the longish post, but this is something I am very passionate about.

Can someone shed light on why greyhounds always (and I mean always) seem to have muzzles on them when walking/exercising even when just them and their owner miles away from anyone else? is there a law on this or something?

conversely, why are there so rarely muzzles on other dog breeds when out and about? couldn't this solve 70% of the problem? as long as the muzzle doesn't impede breathing and drinking, I assume muzzles would work?? am I over simplifying it?

greyhounds have to wear a muzzle due to NSW legislation.....

for the very reason of many attacks on small animals etc. But again mainly from hounds that have been blooded.
Although greyhounds are known for their high prey drive, not all have any intention to chase a small dog or pocket pet but they still have to wear one even if they are not bad.

There may possibly be a test they can be put through now so they don't have to wear one but not sure.....This is also another reason why we find it hard to rehome lovely greyhounds people think they are an aggressive dog because they have to walk around with a preventative measure on even if they have never shown signs of aggression to small animals

Originally Posted by Shonky

is that your dog mate ? looks like an mareican staffy has the same markings as mine good dogs

Originally Posted by Shonky

is that your dog mate ? looks like an american staffy has the same markings as mine good dogs

because greyhounds are sight dogs as in they are switched on by the sight of prey ....the local neighbourhood cat and they have superior eyesight as i understand it that is why they have to wear a muzzle and not allowed of the lead in W.A. greyhounds are the most beautiful placid pet you will ever have but unfortunatley they will **** off and do a cat or similar at a rate of knots you could do nothing about

they are not bad animals at all and will nick they sofa off you at every opportunity they are suprisingly lazy dogs and love cuddles but they are bred for coursing a kinda sick sport which turned into racing

Originally Posted by lardy

because greyhounds are sight dogs as in they are switched on by the sight of prey ....the local neighbourhood cat and they have superior eyesight as i understand it that is why they have to wear a muzzle and not allowed of the lead in W.A. greyhounds are the most beautiful placid pet you will ever have but unfortunatley they will **** off and do a cat or similar at a rate of knots you could do nothing about

they are not bad animals at all and will nick they sofa off you at every opportunity they are suprisingly lazy dogs and love cuddles but they are bred for coursing a kinda sick sport which turned into racing

afghans, deerhounds, staghounds, whipets and sulki's are all site hounds and as far as i'm aware it is only the greyhound that has to wear it......

also not a 110% sure but all the above breeds (apart from the greyhound) don't get raced or blooded....well maybe blooded if they a mix with something to create a pigging dog prehaps