It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
reply to post by Serdgiam
The characteristics of Pit Bulls are well known and problematic. Their high pain threshold makes them
good natured. Their strong jaws make them dangerous even when they aren't angry. What would just
be a gesture for a Poodle can cause serious harm. It is quite possible the dog that bit this child didn't
intend harm. This is why the dog is dangerous. It lacks the necessary restraint.
reply to post by Serdgiam
That makes absolutely no sense. And side shooting the issue with stupid hypotheticals does nothing to further the topic at hand.
These people shouldn't be allowed to ever have another dog ever.
It's not the dog's fault. As was clearly stated in the op, the child was in the act of picking up the dogs bone. I dare you to name any breed of dog that's just going to let someone walk up it take it's food. That dog doesn't know that child meant no harm, all it knows is that there was an immediate threat to it's food source and acted accordingly. Just as most everyone here happily claims to have no problem putting a bullet in a wanna be thief, so to did the dog protect his/her property ( by any means necessary ).edit on 17-3-2014 by DexteramLucifer because: one to many of the same word
Pitt Bull again....When will people learn
These dogs are not bread to be hang bag dogs, cute little things to keep around the house for kids to play with. Their bred for violence, to protect their keeper and their selves.
reply to post by StallionDuck
I really do not get why the dog should be put down. Of course, I feel sorry for the kid, but putting the dog down does not change anything, the kid still got attacked.
There does not need to be a dilemma, who is more important or whom people value more. The fact that the dog attacked the child was an instinct for protecting its bone. Easiest way to get attacked by near to any animal is by trying to take their food/bone, whatever like that. Animals do not think rationally and unless trained well there are just instincts and often the primal instincts come up in situations like that, even for well-trained dogs. This does not mean an animal is a violent, dangerous monster....
I do not understand, why there always needs to be a blame set for something, somebody needs to get punished for situations like that. In this particular case, of course, we could blame the dog, dog owner, nanny, parents,ven the kid, whomever, but as there is no time machine, we can not change the fact that it happened and the kid got attacked. It is impossible to prove who is the most "responsible" for this situation.
In this case, I do not see a reason, what would the euthanisation of the dog give... Rather just focus on getting the kid necessary treatments, than waste time and money on trying to get back at somebody. Sh*t happens sometimes and often there is no one solely responsible for the situation. I do not know about the full history with the dog, maybe there have been incidents like that - if there have been attacks like that before, maybe it truly should be put down for prevention of future attacks, but maybe it was the first time and otherwise it is very peaceful dog. If the latter, you can not blame the animal for being an animal, just like you cant blame a kid being a kid. Just as parents are responsible for raising a kid, so is a dog owner responsible for raising its dog.
edit on 17-3-2014 by Cabin because: (no reason given)