FACEBOOK rushes to defense of dog that mauled 4-year-old boy...

StallionDuck
reply to post by Serdgiam

 

Everyone mistakened him for a pit, often.

I have no doubt about that whatsoever! Good looking dog though.

He is less than a year old in this pic. He's still a big baby at this point. He caught parvo at 3 months old and survived. Vet said had he not been so big, he probably wouldn't have made it. We had to feed him an I.V. multiple times a day for 3 days since it was the weekend and we couldn't afford the extra vet care. At 125, I'd say he was about the size of Bruiser. So they may have been around the same in weight. Bruiser was a little bigger though, I think. I think it had a lot to do with him being out in the open 24/7 and the amount of food he ate every day. This dog was the arnold of pits.

I have my doubts about the weight, but its completely irrelevant and going way off topic.

I have taken care of many dogs with parvo, it can definitely be a rough one.

My hope would be that on topics like this, people would care enough to not just get up in arms about a single dog that is in this situation. There are thousands of the same across the US, including ones that have zero violent history. Its an issue that I truly believe is solvable, with the right focus and effort, and we could stop tragedies like this from happening. Its a topic that has massive, massive amounts of completely incorrect information and that leads to everyone running in circles chasing ghosts.

At the very least, the adults in this situation might have learned something, maybe.

reply to post by StallionDuck


Its all good, it doesnt really matter.

I think the important part is that hopefully we can, as a society, start to pursue solutions that actually address the core issues instead of making the problems worse.

reply to post by StallionDuck


Well...that escalated quickly.
This is a place where people speak in hyperbole all too often, and a 150lb pit/boxer would fall loosely into that category.
I did not intend to offend you, and I hope you do find pics of this beast as I am a long-time fan of large breed dogs!

Also if the dog in question had a more square head, maybe he was part American Bulldog?

reply to post by redhorse


I've no need to prove you wrong.
Your opinion is just that, your opinion. And it shall hold not one iota of power over me.

reply to post by chiefsmom


The child was 4 - you try teaching a 4 year old anything of merit, especially "dog safety". Children of that age are naturally curious and will often ignore what you tell them if they are interested in something. Trying to pin blame on the kid is just disgusting and the fact you're defending a dog over a child speaks volumes about your character.

I have already said, the animals owner and the child minder should shoulder some responsibility, but at the same time the dog apparently has history of being a horrible creature and was a dangerous breed. People saying dogs aren't dangerous if "trained properly" clearly don't have a clue - some dogs are bred to be aggressive and powerful animals, no matter the training, like the one in this story. Every time we here of a dog mauling a human, it is nearly always the same breeds, over and over again. You never hear of a Labrador or Yorkshire terrier mauling people..

reply to post by stumason


kid is kid, dog is dog. Do we kill kid that kills other kid ? no. Dogs dont know what they are doing. I would defend the dog. The dog is not to blaim. Its his nature. Neither is the kid. There is no point to argue.

No one is responsible. No one is to blame (except if the dog is trained to fight).

reply to post by ZeroFurrbone


No, because there is every chance a "kid who kills another kid" will learn from their mistake and not do it again after some punishment, but once a dog is dangerous, it is dangerous.

You cannot train out the aggression in some breeds. It's like when they go after crocs or sharks that take humans - they do it because that animal has now learnt humans are not only tasty, but easy prey.

ZeroFurrbone
reply to post by stumason

 

kid is kid, dog is dog. Do we kill kid that kills other kid ? no. Dogs dont know what they are doing. I would defend the dog. The dog is not to blaim. Its his nature. Neither is the kid. There is no point to argue.

No one is responsible. No one is to blame (except if the dog is trained to fight).

edit on 19-3-2014 by ZeroFurrbone because: (no reason given)

so you are saying its in the dogs nature to maul kids and thats ok....hmmmm...

seriously any animal who attacks a person of any age for any reason and causes serious damage needs to be put down...it really is that simple

I've been around dogs all my life (30 years) never ever have I been attacked by ANY dog for picking up a bone......that's why you train them! Sorry but that dog needs putting down he could have killed that little boy....and the owner should not be aloud to have anymore.....and WTF they raised all that money to stop the dog being put down how about giving that little kid the money! As it's his life getting messed up!!!!!!

stumason
reply to post by chiefsmom

 

People saying dogs aren't dangerous if "trained properly" clearly don't have a clue - some dogs are bred to be aggressive and powerful animals, no matter the training, like the one in this story. Every time we here of a dog mauling a human, it is nearly always the same breeds, over and over again. You never hear of a Labrador or Yorkshire terrier mauling people..

Nothing in life has the certainty of ignorance.
Not so long ago in the UK a baby died after being attacked by a jack russel, a few pages back someone recounted an attack by a golden retriever.


The only dangerous dog is one that isn't looked after and trained properly. There's no such thing as a "bad breed" whatever you want to believe.

reply to post by StallionDuck


Don't mean to question you, but buster sure looks like an American bulldog, not an Old English. His legs are long, and his muzzle. Are you in another country? (not America?) I'm just wondering if maybe they are called different breeds in other countries.

This is why I'm asking:


My old english, short stubby legs, smooshed face, but solid as heck at 77 lbs.


@Stuman?
I have kids, and I realize that they don't always listen. Especially at that age, but they can be warned. At 3 my youngest knew not to touch the dog dish, even with our boxer. I did try to clarify that I do believe this was 100% the adults fault in this.

i have 2 guard dogs, in reality they are more about wanting attention and wanting to play, this seems to be the main reason they actually bark at stuff, not that they want to tear someone to shreds. but being dogs and naturally territorial, if it is an "unkown" on their property they WIll defend it. also bear in mind that dogs tend to "play hard" they nip each other and generally "fight" it is just their nature, they are naturally predators after all so it is natural that they "practice" hunting, and defending themselves. i am the one who not only plays with the dogs, but the one the female comes to for "protection" when the male tries to rape her. now if i try to take her snack, or bone away i WILL get growled at, that is the same reaction that the other dog will get, think of it like "MY FOOD", dogs really do think with their stomachs. it's another part of being a predator, food means life. now if i was a "stranger" doesn't matter dog or human, chances are she would defend her food if that warning was not heeded, that is only natural.

in this case i see two parties that are at fault. one the parents for not only failing to teach their child to stay on their property, and not TRESPASS on another person's property, or do something to prevent it from happening. but for also failing to teach the child not to antagonize dogs, and to stay away from dogs without the owner's ok. the second party at fault is the baby sitter for failing in her task to watch the child, keeping the child on their property and away from the dog, and thus SAFE. the dog is NOT at fault at all, for one thing it is protecting it's territory dogs ARE territorial, then the child goes so far as to try to steal it's food, not a wise move at all. now because the dog is CHAINED up, it can't just pick up it's bone and run away from this kid. that means that it will defend it's self and it's food from the invader.

something else we don't know is the child's previous interactions with this dog. children can be cruel to animals pull tails and ears, they will throw stuff at animals, they even yell at animals. so for all we know this child could have been antagonizing this dog for a long time, thus making it an enemy to the dog for past abuse. and if that is the case it's just more neglect on behalf of the parents and babysitter, for failing to teach the child not to do this.

someone asked why the dog owner didn't build a fence. well i have to ask why the child's parents didn't build a fence, especially if the dog was a threat in their opinion and blame it for killing another dog. the dog owner did his part in chaining the dog up, the parents and baby sitter failed in their responsibility to keep the child safe, by keeping the child both on their property and away from the chained up dog.

the dog should not be put down for this failure on the parent's and baby sitter's parts. it is unfortunate that this child has been injured due to the parent's and baby sitter's neglect, but perhaps they will learn from this and start to properly take care of the child. they should be thankful that their neglect did not kill the child. sadly it is the child and possibly the dog that will end up paying the price for the failure of the parents and baby sitter, to insure the child was safe. perhaps in a few years we will see this child will sue his parents and baby sitter for the damage their neglect has caused him. the dog on the other hand has no way to advocate it's rights and so it's up to other people to fight on it's behalf to save it from being killed for something that is not it's fault.

chiefsmom
reply to post by StallionDuck

 

Don't mean to question you, but buster sure looks like an American bulldog, not an Old English. His legs are long, and his muzzle. Are you in another country? (not America?) I'm just wondering if maybe they are called different breeds in other countries.

This is why I'm asking:

My old english, short stubby legs, smooshed face, but solid as heck at 77 lbs.


@Stuman?
I have kids, and I realize that they don't always listen. Especially at that age, but they can be warned. At 3 my youngest knew not to touch the dog dish, even with our boxer. I did try to clarify that I do believe this was 100% the adults fault in this.

He is 100% for sure what I say he is.

He's an old english bulldogge. I had papers on him as well. He is a "Hermes" breed.

These are pictures of that same breed. The shorter the nose the more expensive they are. They can vary in height. This specific breed is one of the most rare breeds of old english bulldoggs. They are $1500.00 dogs and I do live in the US.





The bottom 2 are almost exactly like my Buster. You're also welcome to google "Hermes Old English Bulldogge". You will get the same results.


I did also mention, he was the largest in the litter. At least 2x the size of his brother's and sisters. His mom was really big also. Still, they are registered and papers were given with him. We bought him from friends who breed them. As a matter of fact, they wanted to breed with Buster because of the size.

I guess I can weigh in now. Any soul that puts a dog before humans is pure idiotic to me. This dog should have been put down long ago. Had it been my child there would not even be the need for a damn Facebook page to save the dog because the dog would have eaten a hollow point the moment it viciously attacked the child. It's funny how this world is bass ackwards now. People rally to prevent the execution of vicious dogs and convicted killers and yet fight for a woman's "rite" to murder her unborn child. Give me a freaking break. Dogs are not people and never will be. Some folks have some screws loose.....

reply to post by StallionDuck


You got to be kidding me. Are we really on an alternative forum?

I dont need to reread. Even if you didnt write it, i can read between the lines. You are overreacting because the "victim" was a child or you just hate animals that can present a danger to your dear safety.

Did the dog kill? NO. He acted in self-defense of his meager belongings and his tiny piece of land which represent his whole freedom but you are far too evolved and "reasoned" than to try and put yourself in his schoes right? Not that you could even if you tried tho. No, with people like you, as long as a human being is hurt by anything else thats not human, it deserves death. You are not really different from psychopaths imo. You want the death of creatures you never met, based only on your tiny subjective understanding of life and your biased wrong "justice".

I dont know where you are going and really dont care. I know where im going and it is far from this thread which is a total joke.

This isnt a situation of putting a dogs life above that of a humans. I dont think anyone is saying the dog should live and the child should die...

It is also important to note that there are different types of aggression in canines, and they do not overlap. Some dogs can have multiple forms of aggression, but that doesnt mean they are rooted together nor can they be solved through the same means. Human aggression (HA), dog aggression (DA), and food aggression (FA) are all different forms. A canine who is dog aggressive may never, at any point, show any aggression whatsoever towards a human. The same rings true for food aggression, where the dog can allow literally anything to be done to it by anything or anyone, unless it involves food.

The issue is that the general public isnt educated on these things, and many trainers are not either. The vast amount of ignorance when it comes to canines is one of (if not THE) largest contributor to issues we have with dogs. Education and learning would be an effective way to combat this, but it seems those things are demonized nowadays too.

Instead of rioting on about some perceived injustice in a singular, one-off incident.. we could actually use the time to discuss solutions and implement them. Making things "illegal" doesnt make problems go away either.

reply to post by StallionDuck


I haven't signed into ATS but about two times before, but I had to to comment on this. Screw you ignorant disgusting people that would support killing this dog. I own a two year old un-neutered, pure bread blue nose pitbull. He is without a doubt the most loving thing on this planet. He would lick all the faces of you idiots even while you spewed your ignorant garbage-like opinions. There is no chromosome for violence! THERE IS NO GENETIC CODE THAT MAKES AN ANIMAL VIOLENT! It doesn't exist. It is learned! or it is because of neglect to train and love the dog. All pets are animals that naturally don't live with humans. We have domesticated them which means WE have the responsibility to teach them how to live among us. We are (I hope you understand this) the more intelligent species here, it is our responsibility if we're going to own domesticated animals; to train them and mostly to love the # out of them. Make them understand that the training is not just for your benefit. It's symbiotic! these animals teach us that love and communication extends beyond not just language or race but even species! Oddly I find it easier to love and communicate and find mutual understanding with animals than humans. Humans have become self-indulgent, sensory-obsessed, extremely opinionated, etc. We've strayed far from the path (myself included). Yet these animals blindly love us. They don't see that evil. How could you stand there and say this animal doesn't deserve life. The things we do everyday bring a much more organized and humongous amount of negativity into this world. Our species is single-handedly destroying a planet right now! And you have the nerve to judge wether another life-form deserves it's life. Do you deserve yours?

reply to post by JakeDMUND


Screw me? Wow, such a violent attitude from a pit bull lover. HHHMMM, picture becoming much clearer now

Pathetic

I don't care what breed/species I own food aggression isn't tolerated. It has no benefit, there's no good reason for it...I've even "spanked" my fish.

I have my hands in my dog's dish anytime I want. The dogs even switch dishes mid-meal without any sign of aggression. The first time they growl at me, the dish is taken away and the only food they get is from my hand. Same with bones/toys etc.

All animals can be food aggressive at first, it comes from competing with litter mates over the best teat. With dogs the pack works it out, sometimes violently.

Humans often don't see it as a problem because they really don't want the dog's food so instead it's easier to just train the humans, let the dog rule. Now with a bunny that might not be a bad thing but it should never be tolerated from a predator pack animal whose main objective is to become the dominant leader.

I'm a country woman, my animals hunt. It's important to sometimes take away their kills or any other gross crap they drag up. I've taken live birds from my cats, they give them up willingly. If food aggression is allowed there's a good chance they'll be aggressive in other areas as well.

My cats/dogs live together. I can't have them killing each other. The cats keep the mice/rats under control so they're just as important as the dogs and worthy of respect. Respect is really what we're talking about here and dogs do have the ability to respect others. They damn better respect the alpha male/female in the wild. Why should we expect any less?

Ranchers out here often dump remains from dead or slaughtered cattle on their land. One ranch wife told me they have a fenced area where they dump. The dogs aren't allowed to scavenge. These are very well trained cow dogs she said despite their training they'll become overly aggressive/develop a taste for cattle and can go rogue.

Constant reinforcement is needed otherwise it's a cue that the dog needs to take over. It's natures way survival of the fittest and all that. No fault with the dog it's what they're built to do.

It's hard for me to understand why more "civilized" humans are under the impression that dog/human societies are equal. Humans typically don't smell each others butts or mate in the front yard. Unless you're willing to do that you shouldn't humanize dogs. They're social animals like us but their methods are very different, far more brutal.

Unfortunately the dog in this case has been allowed to go wild, hard to bring them back. The owner of this dog should never be allowed to own another animal, PERIOD. It would be hard to guarantee that dog will never hurt another animal/person no matter where he's kept. He's like a loaded gun with a brain and a bad attitude. He needs to be put down.

We can't forget originally canines were one of our most feared enemies and for good reason. When left to their own devices they'll resort to instinctual behavior.

reply to post by JakeDMUND


While you're letting your anger colour your words, The sentiments you expressed are bang on. Well done. Especially the bit about our responsibility to the animals that we have selectively bred and conditioned for generations.