The poor kid killed by a dog

Wez68 said:
Its like saying John down the road is a hard b****d because his great great grandfather twice removed used to box .
Click to expand...
I don't think that is a fair comparison. I doubt John's great, great grandfather was bred specifically to box, and mated with females also bred to box. As were his parents, grandparents and so on. Sometimes manipulating the mating to maximise the characteristics.
Then all of his offspring were mated the same way, thereby ensuring the characteristics and genes relevant to a boxing were continued through to John down the road many years later.
If that did happen then yes, John probably would be a hard b*****d.
 
Wez68 said:
This thread is getting out of hand ,my final say on the matter ,if ALL dog owners were responsible ,no matter what breed they own ,we would not be having this conversation right now .
Click to expand...
I wouldn't disagree with that statement but I just think you're talking about a perfect world. It is virtually impossible to extinguish the possibility of dogs with 'more dangerous characteristics' getting into the wrong hands.
 
atypical_boro said:
I wouldn't disagree with that statement but I just think you're talking about a perfect world. It is virtually impossible to extinguish the possibility of dogs with 'more dangerous characteristics' getting into the wrong hands.
Click to expand...
Very true , and its always going to happen , hence the need for a real deterrent , current law guide lines are pathetic, and its just too easy to get a dog off Facebook etc , I,ve lost count of the amount of XL Bullys on fb shown with the laughable statement saying these pups are not for sale (ie come buy me ) in the tees area , and you just know these people are only in it for a quick profit , not a care in the world for the bitch , pups or who they sell to.
 
Muttley said:
No, it doesn't.

The sales of ice cream increases in direct proportion to heat strokes. Therefore ice cream causes heat stroke.

Correlation does not imply causation.
Click to expand...
I think some people's love if dogs is influencing their views on this thread.
Muttley said:
No, it doesn't.

The sales of ice cream increases in direct proportion to heat strokes. Therefore ice cream causes heat stroke.

Correlation does not imply causation.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry but that comparison is just daft.

I think some views are impossible to change, which is fine.
 
Jonny Ingbar said:
I'm sorry but that comparison is just daft.
Click to expand...
Of course it is. As is the assertion that somehow banning dogs that look a certain way will stop dog attacks. It won't.

Look for causation not correlation

Jonny Ingbar said:
I think some people's love if dogs is influencing their views on this thread.
Click to expand...
I think that some people's emotional response is overpowering logic, compounded with a lack of scientific understanding and driven by vivid descriptions of situations that we fear (the safety of our children and pets). We look to a government that is clueless and a press which is irresponsible and more likely to publish stories framed in emotional trauma and horror than seek a solution to a complex problem.

Therefore, we get this nonsense.
 
Wez68 said:
This thread is getting out of hand ,my final say on the matter ,if ALL dog owners were responsible ,no matter what breed they own ,we would not be having this conversation right now .
Click to expand...
Yes we would. There are loads of dog attacks by dogs owned by responsible owners. Some dogs are more dangerous than others and no matter how responsible you are with them you can't account for how they will react to situations outside of your control. Not being able to recognise that fact is dangerous and not the sign of a responsible dog owner.

There are responsible tiger owners that look after tigers and don't get eaten by them but that doesn't mean tigers aren't dangerous and everyone should be able to have one. Some responsible tiger owners still get eaten by tigers.
 
Nano said:
Yes we would. There are loads of dog attacks by dogs owned by responsible owners. Some dogs are more dangerous than others and no matter how responsible you are with them you can't account for how they will react to situations outside of your control. Not being able to recognise that fact is dangerous and not the sign of a responsible dog owner.

There are responsible tiger owners that look after tigers and don't get eaten by them but that doesn't mean tigers aren't dangerous and everyone should be able to have one. Some responsible tiger owners still get eaten by tigers.
Click to expand...
A responsible owner should not let the dog get into situations they cannot control ,and if they have any doubts at all their dog is dangerous they should take adequate steps up to and including putting it to sleep if required .
 
Wez68 said:
A responsible owner should not let the dog get into situations they cannot control ,and if they have any doubts at all their dog is dangerous they should take adequate steps up to and including putting it to sleep if required .
Click to expand...
Has your dog ever been near a child? If it has then that was a situation you couldn't control. You can't stop kids being kids and kids can be stupid and provoke even the calmest of animals.

It is impossible to never be in a situation you can't control. To think it isn't is irresponsible in itself.
 
Nano said:
Has your dog ever been near a child? If it has then that was a situation you couldn't control. You can't stop kids being kids and kids can be stupid and provoke even the calmest of animals.

It is impossible to never be in a situation you can't control. To think it isn't is irresponsible in itself.
Click to expand...
Yes lots of times and always under my control, yes it is possible to be under control at all times
 
Nano said:
There are loads of dog attacks by dogs owned by responsible owners.
Click to expand...
"Loads" is a lovely inexact word don't you think? Could mean anything or nothing.

Nano said:
There are responsible tiger owners that look after tigers and don't get eaten by them but that doesn't mean tigers aren't dangerous and everyone should be able to have one.
Click to expand...
Ahoy there Straw Man!

Nano said:
kids can be stupid and provoke even the calmest of animals.
Click to expand...
We should either kill all other animals that MIGHT harm precious little ones or only allow our children to enter animal free areas just to be on the safe side...

Yes, ridiculous but you started it.
 
Nano said:
Has your dog ever been near a child? If it has then that was a situation you couldn't control. You can't stop kids being kids and kids can be stupid and provoke even the calmest of animals.

It is impossible to never be in a situation you can't control. To think it isn't is irresponsible in itself.
Click to expand...
If you own something that be capable of GBH or worse to a kid , it's YOUR responsibility and accountability...
Be it a car , shotgun , dog , bear trap ... whatever ..
It's on your toes ..
The adult is the responsible one, and should be , IMO treat as if they had caused the damage themself

( and that's as a former mastiff owner )
 
As someone who doesn’t have a dog but at some point would like to, I’d accept that if I was out in public , no matter the breed they wear a muzzle and on a lead, allowed off a lead in designated places . I say that as being a non dog owner I’m sick of having dogs run at me or snap or simply put their dirty paws all over my clothes .

Oh and totally support that the owner is a direct extension of the dog when it comes to any injures or harm caused. If you own a god accept the consequences if something happens… you do that when driving or cycling or if you own a gun etc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top