Some People's Dogs

Thirty Bills Unpaid
Thirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
in A Moving Train
Here's a problem:

Two idiots in Liverpool own a dog and raise it very poorly. They don't feed it for a couple of days and, hungry, it attacks a neighbour and tries to eat him- check that- it does eat him:

The Presa Canario dog, which originated in Spain's Canary Islands, is renowned as a large powerful breed but is not banned in the UK. The court heard that the "wild" and "out of control" Presa Canario sank its teeth into Mr Clarke's arm and dragged him around his garden. The dog effectively chewed his arm off and also mauled his other arm. Mr Clarke died from multiple injuries and blood loss.

Have no fear and don't worry too much for the owners though:

Two women have been jailed for 12 months each after the pensioner was "literally eaten alive" by their dog.


The poor, poor dog owners. That's pretty stiff you know... getting a year in prison. It's not their fault a man lost his life in horrific fashion is it? They knew their dog was dangerous, but they probably didn't think it was... like... gonna eat someone though:

Last month, Hayley Sulley, 30, and Della Woods, 29, pleaded guilty to an offence under the Dangerous Dogs Act of allowing a dog to enter a place where it was not allowed to be and where it injured a person. Today, both women wept in the dock at Liverpool Crown Court as Judge Mark Brown told them Mr Clarke's death was "entirely avoidable".


I get a kick out of the judges comment "entirely avoidable". Duh. Do ya think?

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/two-women-jailed-after-dog-3639842
"My brain's a good brain!"
«134567…13

Comments

  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,664
    I've always said there are no bad dogs, just bad dog owners. I had a neighbor once who had an extremely viscous dog that was allowed to roam the neighborhood. One day I began to I work with that dog- from a good distance at first- and eventually that dog became the sweetest damn dog you ever laid your eyes on. He had it in him all along.
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • JWPearl
    JWPearl Posts: 19,893
    I like to read your posts your a top bloke if I must say from reading your posts I definitely agree with alot of your views, keep posting :)
  • Thirty Bills Unpaid
    Thirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
    brianlux said:

    I've always said there are no bad dogs, just bad dog owners. I had a neighbor once who had an extremely viscous dog that was allowed to roam the neighborhood. One day I began to I work with that dog- from a good distance at first- and eventually that dog became the sweetest damn dog you ever laid your eyes on. He had it in him all along.

    Brian, I agree with you... but do you see how you might be conflicted somewhat here?

    The gun proponents say there are no bad guns only bad gun owners... just as you say something similar about dogs.

    It's fair to say that certain breeds carry much more risk than others. The dog in this scenario, a Presa Canario, is a large, strong, powerful dog that is suited for a rural setting. It is hardly an appropriate animal for cramped quarters, much less surrounded by so many people. It is a massive risk and in my opinion, there is no need for it as a 'pet'. It's a working dog and, upon becoming anxious and aggressive, capable of tearing a man apart.

    People are going to get on here and say, "My Rottweiler wouldn't hurt a flea!" Just as some gun owners are going to say, "My AR-15 has shot nobody!" To both of these types, I commend them for their responsible ownership; however, the fact remains that too many people are not as responsible, and, as such... considerable risk is assumed by society when we do not take any steps to limit or restrict ownership.

    There is no place for such an animal in a cramped urban setting. I feel it is selfish for people to own such large dogs when they are unable to offer them the conditions their genetic blueprint requires. Making it worse... too many people are simply ill-equipped to be a dog owner: they don't have the first idea how to raise them and don't deserve them.

    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • Thirty Bills Unpaid
    Thirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
    JWPearl said:

    I like to read your posts your a top bloke if I must say from reading your posts I definitely agree with alot of your views, keep posting :)

    If this was for me... thanks!

    If this was for Brian... I agree!
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,664
    Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

    JWPearl said:

    I like to read your posts your a top bloke if I must say from reading your posts I definitely agree with alot of your views, keep posting :)

    If this was for me... thanks!

    If this was for Brian... I agree!
    We're all doing great here- every voice here counts! :-)

    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,664
    Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

    brianlux said:

    I've always said there are no bad dogs, just bad dog owners. I had a neighbor once who had an extremely viscous dog that was allowed to roam the neighborhood. One day I began to I work with that dog- from a good distance at first- and eventually that dog became the sweetest damn dog you ever laid your eyes on. He had it in him all along.

    Brian, I agree with you... but do you see how you might be conflicted somewhat here?

    The gun proponents say there are no bad guns only bad gun owners... just as you say something similar about dogs.

    It's fair to say that certain breeds carry much more risk than others. The dog in this scenario, a Presa Canario, is a large, strong, powerful dog that is suited for a rural setting. It is hardly an appropriate animal for cramped quarters, much less surrounded by so many people. It is a massive risk and in my opinion, there is no need for it as a 'pet'. It's a working dog and, upon becoming anxious and aggressive, capable of tearing a man apart.

    People are going to get on here and say, "My Rottweiler wouldn't hurt a flea!" Just as some gun owners are going to say, "My AR-15 has shot nobody!" To both of these types, I commend them for their responsible ownership; however, the fact remains that too many people are not as responsible, and, as such... considerable risk is assumed by society when we do not take any steps to limit or restrict ownership.

    There is no place for such an animal in a cramped urban setting. I feel it is selfish for people to own such large dogs when they are unable to offer them the conditions their genetic blueprint requires. Making it worse... too many people are simply ill-equipped to be a dog owner: they don't have the first idea how to raise them and don't deserve them.

    Actually, I agree that "there are no bad guns only bad gun owners". I know some very responsible gun owners. My issue with guns is not the guns, it's with many of the people who have them and what they do with them and the fact that people can acquire assault weapons and that guns are too easy to obtain in most states. Sorry my friend, I'm just not feeling that conflicted. :-)

    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • Thirty Bills Unpaid
    Thirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
    So can the same arguments you make for guns be applied to dogs?

    Do you take exception to the bad dog owner and would you demand the same prudent measures to avoid the 'unfortunate accidents' we read of too much... such as dog bans like Ontario has with pit bulls? Or do you reserve such measures for guns?

    Can just anyone go purchase a Presa Canario?
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • JWPearl
    JWPearl Posts: 19,893
    Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

    JWPearl said:

    I like to read your posts your a top bloke if I must say from reading your posts I definitely agree with alot of your views, keep posting :)

    If this was for me... thanks!

    If this was for Brian... I agree!
    Yes Brian love his hat..
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,664
    Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

    So can the same arguments you make for guns be applied to dogs?

    Do you take exception to the bad dog owner and would you demand the same prudent measures to avoid the 'unfortunate accidents' we read of too much... such as dog bans like Ontario has with pit bulls? Or do you reserve such measures for guns?

    Can just anyone go purchase a Presa Canario?

    Oh man, some of the sweetest dogs I've met are pit bulls. Treat them right, they're great dogs.

    I see where you're going with the dog/gun comparison and it makes a bit of sense but the urgency of the two issues is vastly different. We could say the same about cars and bees and mayonnaise. I think you're better off focusing on one issue at a time. Having wound up unconscious for three days in the late 80's in the hospital from food poisoning, I'm more concerned about bad mayo than I am bad dogs, but I know more people who died from gun shots than have died from dogs bits or rotten food. Also, all working guns are made to kill whereas most dogs are made to lick your face and shit on the lawn.

    Ah shit, man, it's late- I've gotta get some rest. Remind where we left off, ok?



    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • hedonist
    hedonist Posts: 24,524
    Thought-provoking comments here, thank you!

    As a parallel is drawn between the ownership of pets and guns - responsibility - I believe the same could be done with parenting. Some people just have no business being in that position; they're either not able or willing.

    The "but I want one!" mentality.

    (as to pits, I love them! I respect their strength too. And yes, most properly raised and treated are incredibly loving and loyal)
  • Thirty Bills Unpaid
    Thirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
    I've spoken at length against guns. I feel that people should be able to purchase a hunting rifle if they pass background checks, but I am opposed to handguns and assault style rifles. The statistics and ugly incidents speak to my reasoning behind my position here.

    I would speak similarly to dog ownership. I grew up with dogs and would love to have one at this very moment. Despite the fact that I do have adequate space, the problem is I don't have the time to raise one properly. I would not be able to be a good dog owner because of this fact. Way too many people get dogs without really thinking about whether or not they will be able to raise it and train it. As a result, people suffer.

    The story I have cited speaks to this. My wife and son have been attacked and needed medical attention (I've said this before somewhere in this forum). And there are countless other stories that speak to the simple fact that- just like owning guns- many people are incapable of responsibly owning a dog. As such, just as I would suggest limitations on gun ownership... I would for dog ownership as well.

    If someone is getting a little Yorky... no problem- have at it (the most vicious Yorky couldn't bite through paper); but if someone wishes to purchase a pitbull or German Shepherd... prove you have the space and means to raise it properly. I know people that live in an apartment, leave their pitbull at home all day while they work, and are too tired to take it for exercise when they get home from work. This is not a good situation in my mind.

    Ontario has banned pitbulls, but perhaps screening owners and having them take a course as part of the licensing process might be a better way to try and deal with the problem bad owners consistently present us with?
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • hedonist
    hedonist Posts: 24,524
    edited June 2014
    Hell, Thirty - we had to go through a screening process for the kitten we adopted a few years ago...and proving our capability was fine by us.

    We knew we had the means to give him a good home and life.

    *edit to address your last point - absolutely agree. Why should pits be banned when much of the problems are due to their owners?
    Post edited by hedonist on
  • goingtoverona
    goingtoverona Posts: 616
    I think punishment has a lot to with repetitiveness. when people don't get seriously punished for shit like this, it sends the message that it's not that big of a deal when situations like this occur. same thing with drunk drivers killing people and texting while driving. the people didn't mean for their dog to kill, it was an accident right?

    as far as banning a specific breed is concerned, I think that's straight ignorance. no different than saying I don't want to associate with blacks because they steal and sell drugs or I don't want to be friends with Mexicans because they are here illegally and are affiliated with a drug cartel. if you let a fraction of a percentage contaminate the whole for guns and specific dog breeds, then I for the life of me don't get why you don't do it with cars, alcohol, tobacco, knives, fast food, and all the other bull shit.

    if you think what I believe is stupid, bizarre, ridiculous or outrageous.....it's ok, I think I had a brain tumor when I wrote that.
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,680
    edited June 2014
    Fantastic owners of dogs that are considered a more vicious breed are always so shocked when their dog attacks another dog or a person. They always say that it had never shown an ounce of aggression.... until it did.

    Yes, bad owners often play a role in these incidents. But that is NOT always the case. It's a mistake to boil it down to poor dog ownership.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • rgambs
    rgambs Posts: 13,576
    PJ_Soul said:

    Fantastic owners of dogs that are considered a more vicious breed are always so shocked when their dog attacks another dog or a person. They always say that it had never shown an ounce of aggression.... until it did.

    Yes, bad owners often play a role in these incidents. But that is NOT always the case. It's a mistake to boil it down to poor dog ownership.

    its not about some breeds being more "vicious" but rather more "powerful". All animals are unpredictable, but we live with them for a reason!
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • Thirty Bills Unpaid
    Thirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
    rgambs said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    Fantastic owners of dogs that are considered a more vicious breed are always so shocked when their dog attacks another dog or a person. They always say that it had never shown an ounce of aggression.... until it did.

    Yes, bad owners often play a role in these incidents. But that is NOT always the case. It's a mistake to boil it down to poor dog ownership.

    its not about some breeds being more "vicious" but rather more "powerful". All animals are unpredictable, but we live with them for a reason!
    But the problem is that some don't live with them for a reason- they are forced to live alongside them because other people are entitled to dogs regardless of their capacity to raise one properly and regardless of the appropriateness of the animal given the home setting.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • rgambs
    rgambs Posts: 13,576
    Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

    rgambs said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    Fantastic owners of dogs that are considered a more vicious breed are always so shocked when their dog attacks another dog or a person. They always say that it had never shown an ounce of aggression.... until it did.

    Yes, bad owners often play a role in these incidents. But that is NOT always the case. It's a mistake to boil it down to poor dog ownership.

    its not about some breeds being more "vicious" but rather more "powerful". All animals are unpredictable, but we live with them for a reason!
    But the problem is that some don't live with them for a reason- they are forced to live alongside them because other people are entitled to dogs regardless of their capacity to raise one properly and regardless of the appropriateness of the animal given the home setting.
    that's a very good point...when i lived in columbus (big city for me lol) i was borderline afraid of dogs. It was exactly for that reason, that powerful, high energy huskies and pits and shepherds dont belong in apartments, high rises, and crowded city parks. But out in the country where they can live normal dog lives they are great and never intimidating. Big mastiff runs up to you in the woods you are less nervous than with a weimer in the city lol
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • callen
    callen Posts: 6,388
    PJ_Soul said:

    Fantastic owners of dogs that are considered a more vicious breed are always so shocked when their dog attacks another dog or a person. They always say that it had never shown an ounce of aggression.... until it did.

    Yes, bad owners often play a role in these incidents. But that is NOT always the case. It's a mistake to boil it down to poor dog ownership.

    Agree freind has the most loving pit. Had him on my lap. Petted him many times. All loving animal.

    He bit friends gf other day.
    10-18-2000 Houston, 04-06-2003 Houston, 6-25-2003 Toronto, 10-8-2004 Kissimmee, 9-4-2005 Calgary, 12-3-05 Sao Paulo, 7-2-2006 Denver, 7-22-06 Gorge, 7-23-2006 Gorge, 9-13-2006 Bern, 6-22-2008 DC, 6-24-2008 MSG, 6-25-2008 MSG
  • Thirty Bills Unpaid
    Thirty Bills Unpaid Posts: 16,881
    Nearly every owner of such animals say, "He's never done anything like that before" in the aftermath of an attack.

    Certain breeds are wired to behave aggressively when certain stimuli presents itself- making them unpredictable. And, these 'breeds' have a long and growing history of attacks, regardless of the individual dog's personal history. In many cases... the dog's aggressiveness has not manifested itself yet.

    I'll always have to accept people's choice of dog for a pet. I think that people should be accountable for their animals though and not with little bitty by-law tickets and stern frowns from others. I think, such as in the case cited to initiate this thread, that if your dog injures or kills someone... you should be held criminally responsible. Haphazard dog ownership is no different than recklessly speeding with a car through a residential neighbourhood. Those two women should have received lengthy prison terms... not one laughable year.

    With exceptions of course, then watch people make careful selections for pets and take the necessary precautions to ensure their dog doesn't become a hazard to their neighbours.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • know1
    know1 Posts: 6,801
    The majority (maybe a slight majority) of people who own animals are unfit to do so, IMO.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.

Categories