Dog rapes child

[scooter_the_shooter]

I didn't use it before because I thought other people wouldn't like it. I have no problem with saying "let's kill it" instead of "let's put it down"


Thats why I use "put it down" and I imagine that's why most others do too.

[Samurai Waki]

If I allowed my emotions to rule over me; I would say the dog should be put to the long sleep. However, as somebody who loves animals, and accepts that animals (and this certainly includes humans) are prone to do things they cannot totally control, I would say that I feel disgusted towards the parents.

I have wrestled with myself quite a bit if Pitbulls are aggressive as a breed, or trained to be aggressive. Ultimately, from what I've seen working at the Humane Society, I have come to believe that Pitbulls are truly a lost cause. Even the ones that have been there since they were puppies, have a knack for causing mayhem, and a reputation for biting and mauling without provocation (I won't touch the buggers). Now, this isn't to say all of them behave this way, I know from some people that I have volunteered with, who have adopted Pitbulls, they turn out quite normal... but, even so, they remain a fiercely loyal and protective breed, and they develop a certain Maternal or Paternal bond with their owners and children. This can go so far as to say, that they do treat Children as though they were their own, and as a form of dominance Male Dogs will Hump/Penetrate their offspring and mates to show them whose in charge. So... I don't know. Male Pitbulls are really a different matter than females in this case, although females will probably attempt to do the same, you won't have to worry about anal hemorrhaging. The fact of the matter is, as a responsible parent, I would just go without the big animals, because my Yorkshire seems to do the job just fine.

[HoreTore]

I'm always open to new ideas, but this is myth. Can you provide some real facts to back this up? Not just you or someone standing on a soapbox and stating something very emphatically. Show me some real scientific evidence of this, please.

I have a few books on animal behaviour here, but since it's a little difficult to post them here, wiki will have to do:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_aggression

Dog aggression is a common dog behavior, and can be seen in all breeds of dogs, although some dog breeds have a predisposition to display such aggression. The breed standard usually spells out whether dog aggression is common in the breed and to what degree it is allowed. Most of the terrier breeds and the bull breeds have a higher likelihood of developing dog-aggression upon reaching maturity. Individual dogs may or may not display the level of aggression that their breed standard suggests.

Very brief, but I can't find anything better on ze net. It really is quite logical. Aggression is a part of the dog's instincts. Instincts are determined by 2 things; experience and genetics. Different breeds have different genetics, so different breeds will have different instincts, and thus different aggression levels.

[Whacker]

[quote=HoreTore]I have a few books on animal behaviour here, but since it's a little difficult to post them here, wiki will have to do:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_aggression[/quote]

Awesome, link goes to an article with no citations, and a few external links. Of those, only two have information I found after about an hour of clicking and reading which imply that aggression is inherent to certain breeds, and those two were also completely unsupported. If anything, on the Animal Behavior site, there is a link to an article by a behaviorist who mentions absolutely nothing about certian breeds being more aggressive, if anything she seems to indicate that is more of a myth.

Still waiting on something conclusive here. Someone show me a study done using the scientific method, blinded, that shows conclusively that some breeds are more aggresive than others. Statistics such as dog bite numbers alone prove absolutely nothing.

[KukriKhan]

This link is about as close as it gets to scientific study of canine aggression - that is to say, not very close. Obviously, there is a gap in real research done, versus media outrage over individual incidents.

Note the prescient conclusion at about mid-page:

The age group with the second-highest amount of fatalities due to a dog attack are 2-year-old children. Over 88% of these fatalities occurred when the 2-year-old child was left unsupervised with a dog(s) or the child wandered off to the location of the dog.

Anecdotally, I've been attcked/charged by dogs 6 times in the past 10 years, bitten 3 times, most recently, yesterday. All of the animals were pitbulls. Do I think pitbulls are inherently more prone to aggression?

No. I think pitbull owners in my town are more irresponsible. They tend to have them to protect against detection of criminal activity. How do I know this?

I've reported each attack (as required by workrules) , and on 5 occasions, when the animal-control guy arrived, he called the police to assist, not in handling the dog, but the people, who it turned out had been running meth labs, or had stolen carparts stored. Sadly (for me), these folks have no money I can recover for compensation.

I keep hoping that the next dogbite will be from "Bootsie" the Pomeranian, owned by a millionaire.

[Big King Sanctaphrax]

Is there not a lot of money in dealing Methamphetamines?

[Whacker]

Is there not a lot of money in dealing Methamphetamines?

They're probably burning it all on their own drug of choice.

[KukriKhan]

Is there not a lot of money in dealing Methamphetamines?

Yeah, but 2 things:

1) That cash is not accessable by me in a civil damage suit. The cops keep it locked up for years as evidence, when they can recover it - which they usually don't, it being passed up the druglord chain.

2) The yay-hoo's around here often start using their own product, eating into profit, and leading to forgetful stuff like "where's the dog?".

[R'as al Ghul]

When I see what kind of people have dogs and how they (mis-)treat them, I feel we need a kind of pet-license that can be revoked in such cases. Apart from that, I'm of the opinion that the owners are completely responsible for their dogs' actions. If you own a dog that is capable of killing children you must train it properly so that it doesn't happen. Seeing that most people already have problems to call their dogs to order this seems to be the core problem.

[Moros]

I'd say kill a dog who had the intention of killing someone. Killing a dog for natural behaviour which the owner could expect from it, well I think that's wrong. The poor dog doesn't know what happened. Ofcourse what happened to the poor kid is bad, really really bad and sad, however if someone is responible it's the parents.

[Fragony]

I'm of the opinion that the owners are completely responsible for their dogs' actions. If you own a dog that is capable of killing children you must train it properly so that it doesn't happen. Seeing that most people already have problems to call their dogs to order this seems to be the core problem.

I agree. Pet-license is a good idea for some races, like Pitbull Terriers. It aren't bad animals, but they aren't good with kids and other dogs. Treat them well and they are the most adorable creatures, but they are dominant and need a headstrong owner. Problem is that if they bite, their jaws lock and they start tearing. Only people with a lot of experience should be allowed to have them. These guys obviously were unfit.

[Ronin]

I agree. Pet-license is a good idea for some races, like Pitbull Terriers. It aren't bad animals, but they aren't good with kids and other dogs. Treat them well and they are the most adorable creatures, but they are dominant and need a headstrong owner. Problem is that if they bite, their jaws lock and they start tearing. Only people with a lot of experience should be allowed to have them. These guys obviously were unfit.

the jaws locking thing is a myth.

[Fragony]

the jaws locking thing is a myth.

Not really, pitbulls jaws work like a scissor, and when they bite they keep at it very naturally. 'Locking' isn't really the right word, it's a bit like the talons of a hawk. Needs no extra effort to keep biting.

[HoreTore]

[QUOTE=Whacker]

I have a few books on animal behaviour here, but since it's a little difficult to post them here, wiki will have to do:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_aggression[/quote]

Awesome, link goes to an article with no citations, and a few external links. Of those, only two have information I found after about an hour of clicking and reading which imply that aggression is inherent to certain breeds, and those two were also completely unsupported. If anything, on the Animal Behavior site, there is a link to an article by a behaviorist who mentions absolutely nothing about certian breeds being more aggressive, if anything she seems to indicate that is more of a myth.

Still waiting on something conclusive here. Someone show me a study done using the scientific method, blinded, that shows conclusively that some breeds are more aggresive than others. Statistics such as dog bite numbers alone prove absolutely nothing.

Then go buy a book on animal behaviour/animal genetics. Or loan one at a library. The internet isn't a very good source of information, you know. And statistics isn't the answer btw, genetics is.

[Privateerkev]

I am going to take this oppurtunity to try to seperate two issues that got melded together in this thread. The first issue is the inate instinct and behavior of dogs and whether that changes according to breed. The second is what to do with a family pet after they have severly injured a member of the family. I am going to ignore the first issue because I don't really know the answer on it but I have my suspicions and ideas. Though I suspect your opinion on issue one will influence your opinion on issue two.

I am surprised that no one on here has yet to suggest simply getting rid of the dog. The opinions seem to be in one of two camps. The "do nothing because it was just an animal doing its animal thing" camp and the "kill it because it is a monster and will never be rehabilitated" camp. If I caught the dog in the act that was described, my first act would be to forcibly remove the dog from the victim. If the dog happened to get hurt or killed in that encounter, then "oh well" because I would have much more important things to worry about. Now, once the animal is removed from the victim, the question becomes "what the heck do I do with this dog?" While murdering the dog after the fact would probably make me feel a little better in the short term, I do not think it would solve anything. My child would still be damaged and traumatized and killing the dog could not possibly change that. But I would immediately get rid of the dog. Not to family or friends where my child could encounter it again, but far far away. And not because the dog is "inherently violent and evil" as some on here have charged. I would do it because I would not want my child to live with the being that hurt them so much. What kind of dad would I be if I said, "now little johnny, I know your butt hurts but Fido was just being a dog so why don't you two make up." So, I guess from my opinion on issue two, you could probably make out my opinion on issue one. All I'll say about issue one is that I guess I fall somewhere in the middle of everyone who has posted on here.

[HoreTore]

@Privateerkev: Shame on you for bringing reason and moderation here!

[InsaneApache]

Indeed.

[Privateerkev]

@Privateerkev: Shame on you for bringing reason and moderation here!

I have to say that, that is the first time I've heard that one. I'm used to accusations of bringing drama into sistuations. Not the opposite.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I have to say that, that is the first time I've heard that one. I'm used to accusations of bringing drama into sistuations. Not the opposite.

Perhaps you can start another gun control thread and then wax on poetically on one point of view or the other -- this will quickly trash any illusions that you are being analytical or moderate. Of course, starting such threads in the Backroom is morally analogous to opening a head shop near a rehab center.....

[AntiochusIII]

Perhaps you can start another gun control thread and then wax on poetically on one point of view or the other -- this will quickly trash any illusions that you are being analytical or moderate. Of course, starting such threads in the Backroom is morally analogous to opening a head shop near a rehab center.....

This case is a clear justification why we should have strict gun laws IMO. Clearly your average human is very irresponsible -- if an adolescent aggressive breed male dog is being left alone with a very young child, then what about a gun which doesn't bark or hump but shoot?

<-- no that's not the middle finger

*thread subject too depressing for wishy-washy me to engage in*

[ajaxfetish]

Er, not to distract from the topic at hand, but while dog's do indeed hump and bark, guns rarely shoot spontaneously. That kind of comparison would require either the child or adult to take the dog and use it (either intentionally or accidentally) to sodomize the child.

Ajax

[Privateerkev]

Perhaps you can start another gun control thread and then wax on poetically on one point of view or the other -- this will quickly trash any illusions that you are being analytical or moderate. Of course, starting such threads in the Backroom is morally analogous to opening a head shop near a rehab center.....

While I hope I am being analytical, I do not claim to be a moderate. I tend to hold strong views and opinions on things. I just try to make them well thought out views and opinions. If someone starts a gun control thread, I will comment on there about what I think.

[InsaneApache]

[AntiochusIII]

Er, not to distract from the topic at hand, but while dog's do indeed hump and bark, guns rarely shoot spontaneously. That kind of comparison would require either the child or adult to take the dog and use it (either intentionally or accidentally) to sodomize the child.

I wasn't being serious.

[Divinus Arma]

When the baby was finally free, he was visibly sick.

Male baby. The only indication that I saw regarding gender. Seems they tried to avoid that.


For some reason the thought of a female baby being penetrated in her peep is more disturbing than a male baby being penetrated in the pooper.


Either way, it's not a pleasant thought.

[Major Robert Dump]

So does the dog have to register as a sex offender? Stay away from parks and schools?