how many more times will this happen

[sam]

14-Month Boy Savaged By Rottweiler

A 14-month-old boy has been severely mauled by a Rottweiler at Middleton, near Bognor Regis, West Sussex. The child is said to be in a serious but stable condition in hospital. The boy suffered bites and cuts and was taken to St Richard's Hospital in Chichester.
His condition is not thought to be life-threatening.
A spokesman for Sussex Police said the boy's family were at his bedside.
The attack comes days after another baby was mauled to death by two Rottweilers at a pub.
Five-month-old Cadey-Lee Deacon was attacked at The Rocket public house in Leicester on Saturday.

She was taken to hospital but died later of her injuries.
A police spokesman said the dog in the West Sussex attack had been seized by police and the owner has agreed for it to be destroyed.
The spokesman said: "At 12.10pm police and ambulance attended an address in Middleton where a 14-month-old boy had been injured by a dog.
"The child is now with family at St Richard's Hospital. He has suffered a number of bites and cuts to his body.
"His condition is not life threatening and he remains in hospital for treatment."

[gleeber]

I see a lotta dogs around and theres quite a few of them I dont like the look of. Rottweilers are one and these bull terriers are another. I was attacked by a dog a couple of years ago on the beach and this guy was an ordinary potlicker. He gave me a gluff though.
People love their dogs. Apart from making it illegal to keep a dog, incidents like these will always happen.

[Kaishowing]

Once upon a time, owners were held responsible for the behaviour of their dogs.....but since they abolished the dog licence in 1986, that's no longer the case.
Now if anything happens, the dog may have to be destroyed for the sin of not being properly trained or monitored by the owner.
The licence used to cost 38½p per year (from what I remember,) and it was that price for ages...which was a joke. Never made anyone think about the responsibility of owning a dog.
95% of dog owners are responsible people, who respect and love their animals, and are considerate to other people.
As for the remaining 5%, perhaps having to pay £15 per year just to own their dog, plus knowing that they're legally responsible for the behaviour might make them think a bit before visiting the kennels.
I'm also aware that some areas have their own council run dog licencing schemes...but not in Caithness.

A seperate question........Should certain breeds of dogs be made illegal to own in the UK? (aside from the ones already listed in the 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act)

[_Ju_]

Again I say from extensive experience: problem dogs result from problem owners.

There are no dangerous breeds, just breeds capable of inflicting more damage in less time due to the fact that they are stronger or more instinctive (a semi automatic is just as dangerous colt pistol; the semi is just alot quicker).
Dogs are dogs and need to be dealt with as such. They have a pack mentality and behave in certain instinctive ways. A dog owner has to know how to use theses instincts in such a way as to establish without a doubt in their pets minds that they are boss. Above all, a owner who is afraid of their own dog is a danger ( and yes, afraid owners are very, very common, especially among the so called dangerous breeds).

[maverick]

Most people who keep these big dogs as pets don't understand what they were bred for. There is no such thing as a bad Dog just bad owners. These attacks on children and adults happen because the owners don't understand their animals, and are very complacent when it comes to trust and safety. Most dog owners have no element of control over their dogs, and the ones that do never take their eyes off them. Dogs that are bred for protecting, guarding etc, should be licenced and the owners should have to pass some sort of proficency test before being allowed to own one...

[Boozeburglar]

I am a dog owner, and get frequent fear from folks because my dogs are staffie/ pit bull types.

They have a great temperament, wouldn't harm a fly, but....

I would never leave them them near young kids.

Dogs are not intelligent enough to be safe around children, end of.

These people that are trying to suggest that it is down to bad owners/trainers are talking rubbish.

No dog is safe around young kids, ever, no matter what training they have.

[MadPict]

Once upon a time, owners were held responsible for the behaviour of their dogs.....but since they abolished the dog licence in 1986, that's no longer the case.

They still are - legislation may have changed over the years but you're still responsible for the control of you dog in a public place. Even if a badguy climbs into my garden and gets stopped by the furry exocet i can be prosecuted....

A seperate question........Should certain breeds of dogs be made illegal to own in the UK? (aside from the ones already listed in the 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act)

No - the ownership of dogs should be restricted - it's too easy to buy a dog and many people buy them for the kids, but that lovely cuddly puppy grows into a large dog with demands pretty swiftly.

And at what point would you say a dog is 'safe'? A Jack Russell can cause as much damage to a toddler than a GSD. And what about breeds which suffer from 'rage syndrome'? Certain types of spaniels have this inbred disorder, turning them from docile floppy eared pets into demented biting machines in the blink of an eye.

As already stated "There are no bad dogs - just bad owners" applies in a vast majority of cases...

[JAWS]

Once upon a time, owners were held responsible for the behaviour of their dogs.....but since they abolished the dog licence in 1986, that's no longer the case.
Now if anything happens, the dog may have to be destroyed for the sin of not being properly trained or monitored by the owner.
The licence used to cost 38½p per year (from what I remember,) and it was that price for ages...which was a joke. Never made anyone think about the responsibility of owning a dog.
95% of dog owners are responsible people, who respect and love their animals, and are considerate to other people.
As for the remaining 5%, perhaps having to pay £15 per year just to own their dog, plus knowing that they're legally responsible for the behaviour might make them think a bit before visiting the kennels.
I'm also aware that some areas have their own council run dog licencing schemes...but not in Caithness.

A seperate question........Should certain breeds of dogs be made illegal to own in the UK? (aside from the ones already listed in the 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act)

When the Dog Licence was abolished it did not alter the responsibility of owners in any way.
Reintroducing the licence would not make irresponsible people any better dog owners, such people would not bother getting a licence anyway, no matter what the cost.
The old Dog Licence was a hangover from the days when only the wealthy thought only they should allowed to keep dogs it was meant to prevent the lower orders getting above their station.
It certainly didn't stop dogs biting people, in fact I don't think most dogs knew if they were licensed or not. Usually the only time anybody checked to see if an owner had a license was after a dog had bitten somebody not before so that certainly didn't make any difference.
The only thing the Dog Licence did was to create an awful lot of administration with no particular benefit.

The main question in my mind is what are parents thinking about leaving a baby of a few months unaccompanied with two dogs that size, especially in the case of the Pub where they were not even the owners of the dogs. The Licensee, who was the owner of the dogs, was away an the parents were taking pair of the Pub and the dogs in his absence.
It seems to me that the fault lies not with the dogs, or the owner, but with irresponsible parents taking inadequate care of their child by leaving it where there were two large dogs whose temperaments they did not know.

[henry20]

I would agree with the bad owners=bad dogs to a degree.

I have a collie x staffie which I got from the SSPCA centre who had been mistreated. Unfortunately, nothing I do can change his ways - he is not a vicious dog (although he does have a nasty bark)

I was very sceptical the first time a friend visited with her child (a toddler at the time). The dog was fine, the child pulled him by the tail (as kids do) and my dog turned, looked at him, then turned away.

Despite having had a bad upbringing, my dog is fine with children, but I would NEVER EVER leave him in a room with a young child.

My friend had a baby and my dog was fine with him living in the house, again, we NEVER left them alone together. We encouraged some contact - so the dog wouldn't get jealous or resentful, but they were always closely supervised.

[Naefearjustbeer]

No matter how well trained a dog is it still has an built in instinct and that could surface at any time. Kids have to be looked after. The problem witha rotweiller is that it is so big and powerfull than when it decides to attack there is not a lot you can do about it. Yes a Jack russel can be a bad tempered little dog but a swift boot to the rear end will send it flying. Try the same to a rotweiller and you will lose your leg.

[saffy100]

Hi,

What a relief it is to hear sense for a change in all the above posts.
I have Staffies, one of the breeds they would ban if that sort of legislation came in, they are friendy towards people, but if i am out walking and come across people with kids or dogs i ALWAYS put them on their lead, and would NEVER leave them unnatended with children. It is caution, we all come across people that annoy us for no apparent reason...this is the same for animals, sometimes they can just turn....they don't have to have shown agression before.
As someone said, all kinds of dogs have traits, not just the "dangerous" breeds.
And yes a Rotty will cause more damage than a Jack Russel, but Jack's were bred to kill (rabbits etc) so even if it was Jack Russells in the case of the baby and small child we still could have been looking at the tragedy. More people are attacked by collies every year than any other breed, but it does'nt hit the papers unless it's been done by a big breed and they always show a snarling staffie or Rottie.
I agree that ownership is the problem, i am the BOSS with my dogs and they know it..!!! but unfortunately it is so often that people buy a dog due to its image etc.
In the case of the baby i see the grandparents have been stabbed and the lady died, in an unrelated incident, i can see why they needed guard dogs,I worked in a few bars in Birmingham and London and they all had guard dogs...needed them in fact....but they were there to do their job and not be pets. It was a tragedy, but i believe down to human error.

Saffy100

[davem]

If people remember, this all happened years ago too. You couldn't open a paper without a story about a dangerous dog. The tragedy that was reported is awful but I refuse to believe that all the fierce dogs have been resting and causing no damage for years. It's just that news managements think that is the story of the moment.

[pultneytooner]

The firedoor wasn't left open on purpose and I am sure the parents feel bad enough without people making out that they caused the bairns death through irresposible behavour.

If people remember, this all happened years ago too. You couldn't open a paper without a story about a dangerous dog. The tragedy that was reported is awful but I refuse to believe that all the fierce dogs have been resting and causing no damage for years. It's just that news managements think that is the story of the moment.

As if the stories aren't bad enough to read both the television and newspaper carry pictures of dogs that wouldn't look out of place in a horror movie.

[henry20]

The firedoor wasn't left open on purpose and I am sure the parents feel bad enough without people making out that they caused the bairns death through irresposible behavour.

I'm sorry, but where a child is concerned, you can't make these 'errors' - as these parents learnt the hard way.

These dogs were trained as guard dogs and as they were owned by the grandparents, the parents were well aware of this and should have been extra careful around them.

[Murchiemannie]

Dogs no matter the breed are still be be watched where young children are concerned.
Some of these people who own the guard dog breeds treat them like trophies and you can see that as they are just pulling them off there feet as they walk them on the leads. they just can't control the dogs at all.Folk should remember that they are all capable of turning on people, but if they train and look after them properly from pups they make good pets. The line should not be crossed between pet and guard dog as it just confuses the dog.

[sam]

A toddler savaged by a rottweiler came within a hair's breadth of death after the animal sunk its fangs into his neck, it has been revealed.
Harvey Lawrence, 2, suffered severe scarring on his face neck and legs after the dog's frenzied attack missed a vital artery in his neck by a fraction of an inch.
He was only subdued after a brave neighbour battered him on the head with a hammer during the attack in Middleton on Sea, West Sussex. Neighbours described the rottweiler, called Tyler, as a menace that terrorised the neighbourhood.
The attack is the latest to involve the muscular attack dogs, coming just three days after five-month old Cadey-Lee Deacon was mauled to death by two rottweilers in Leicester.
Harvey had been playing in the drive of the £500,000 detached home of his grandmother, Gwendoline Briaris when Tyler attacked.
His other grandmother, Lyn Carey, of Gosport, Hants called for rottweilers to be banned by placing on the Dangerous Dogs List.
Speaking outside St Richard's Hospital, Chichester, where Harvey is being treated she said: "It seems his gran was just taking Harvey to the beach and he wanted to see the dog.
"But Tyler was just intent on savaging the boy, and it was just so strong she couldn't fight it off.
"This darling boy is so battered, it's heartbreaking. He has so many injuries. They thought he might have to go to Southampton hospital because the dog's tooth went through the back of his neck.
"He's a darling little boy, just adorable, and now he's got these nasty scars on both sides of his face, his neck, his legs."
Mrs Carey praised the bravery of neighbour Mike Pepper, 66, who stopped the attack by hitting the rottweiler over the head with a hammer. She added: "We feel very strongly that rottweilers should be on the dangerous dogs list.They are so strong the owners just can't control them."
Mr Pepper said that after he rescued Harvey he had puncture wounds in his neck and that the dog had bitten through his cheek and into the bone. Harvey lives in Emsworth, Hants with his father, Mark Lawrence, 31, an IT worker and mother Clare Carey, 33.
Mr Lawrence said: "We've been with him all night. I think he is going to be okay."
The dog's owner, Richard Cullen, a former police officer had agreed to have the dog destroyed. Paediatric consultant Tim Taylor said he was optimistic that Harvey would make a full recovery but said he would remain in hospital for another couple of days.
Dr Taylor said Harvey had several stitches in the many wounds across his body but was well enough to have breakfast this morning. He said: "Harvey has been reasonably settled and when I visited him this morning he had had a light breakfast and was watching Fireman Sam on TV."
Neighbours said there had previously been concerns about the dog and it was kept tethered following complaints about its potential danger. Engineer surveyor Les Green, 58, said: "It was August Bank Holiday last year and it had got out and was roaming through everyone's garden.
"We didn't know who the dog belonged to so we called the police but because it was a Bank Holiday, they didn't come out. It used to be quite a friendly dog but it is so big and scary."
Two neighbours who did not wish to be named said that Tyler could suddenly change his temperament from being friendly to turning vicious. "Mr Cullen often brings him to the local pub, the Elmer, and he can be well behaved. But I've seen him running loose in the local park, fighting with other dogs. One dog had to go to the vet after Harvey bit him on the neck.
"We were playing football and Tyler went mad and started shaking him around in his jaws."
A Sussex Police spokesman said: "Police inquiries with the family and the owner of the dog continue."
Peter Hopgood, 63, who lives next door to the Lawrence family in Emsworth, said he was "shocked" by the incident. He said: "I am absolutely gobsmacked. It's devastating because he is a lovely little boy. He's got a lot of character, very pleasant, always running around in his football kit. He's got a lot of interest in everything. I think it is really sad that this has happened."

[Tugmistress]

I am an 'owner' of a rescued rottie, also of two GSD's that are rescues.
I know nothing of their history (except the bitch) before they came to me. The eldest GSD i have had since he was 4 years old and he is now 14. Through careful observation and through a battle of wills that lasted a few years i have learnt that he had 'guarding' training. The rottie, who is now 3, i have had about 1 year. I am convinced he had a bad reputation for nothing, he came from north wales and had been branded 'dog vicious'. To be brought into a house with two GSD's and have very few problems i doubt this to be true. I honestly think that he has not been allowed to be a puppy during his life, and now he is allowed this chance we have a very large bouncy dog. Some people on here know me in real life and have been up to the house and have met my hounds. Whilst i am around i 80% trust him, which is the same as i trust the other two, but no dog should be trusted 100% and especially left alone with children or babies, whatever the breed. I have scars from the older GSD, he was used to being boss in a human environment, and he learnt that with me he wasn't boss. I love my dogs to bits, they have no threatening behaviour when i am around, but, as has been stated beofre, they have similarities to humans. We can all have mood swings, just that one little thing will annoy us that other people can't see. A dog is a descendant of the wolf, a wild animal, and as such has to be thought of as such.
sorry if my reply is disjointed but i hope you understand what i am saying.

[sam]

i believe that all dogs have it in them to turn on people, but where a dog has been trained to be a guard dog then they should be in secured area's away from children and adults for that matter, after all the dogs will do what they have been trained to do

[unicorn]

My pet hate is people who have dogs that they treat as babies, I find these the most vicious dogs of all because nobody ever tells them off and they get to bark and nip at whoever they want.

[taylor.4]

I am a dog owner, but i wouldn't trust my dog 100% round kid's, if i'm not at home and my kid's have their pals in my dogs kept in his bed, not that he would attack, but i would never take that chance.