Montreal woman fatally attacked by dog in her backyard

Bingo Terry. Until and unless laws are passed that crack down hard on owners. This attack (and many others) was more than preventable. The dog should have been put down long ago. Am willing to bet the owner is of a shall we say, certain "profile"

Fad dogs, be they PBTs or Rotties and before them Dobermans (which got a decidedly bad reputation but they sure looked mean) and before them GSs (see the links analysis on that breed)...and and "black dog syndrome" is also very real. Ask anyone that owns/runs a rescue...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrym

I would pass a law where owners are legally responsible for any and all expense related to an attack from their dogs. This would include paramedics, police, animal control, everything. If people got handed a $18k bill because their wonderful family dog decided to jump the fence and viciously attack a person or animal they might rethink their choice of pets. You can't fix stupid but even they understand money.

---

1000.00 dollars a stitch.
2000.00 dollars a stitch above the shoulders.
Can't pay ??
Go to jail !!
If the dog kills someone you go to jail.
No I'm sorry.
No I didn't know .... Blah blah blah.
And I am against breed specific legislation.
But I'm for people being held responsible.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBen

Are we only counting attacks that end in fatalities.

---

No, I am not. Apparently, you did not read my post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBen

...and yes even "lap dogs"....if you want to make a fool of yourself even further and argue that small dogs, or lap dogs are incapable of seriously harming toddlers and more.

---

Fact: the severity of injuries correlates with the size of the dog.

You are making arguments based on what can happen. I am making arguments based on what does happen, and on how often it happens.

So, no: we do not have to ban chihuahuas. That is not a logical consequence of regulating pit bulls, and it is not something there is any reasonable argument for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrym

I would pass a law where owners are legally responsible for any and all expense related to an attack from their dogs.

---

Not sure about Quebec but in Ontario, dog owners already bear absolute liability. The problem is that nobody thinks his dog will cause a problem, so general deterrence does not work here.

Suing the idiot who owned this dog blind, or even putting him in jail (and I would say, arguably, that criminal negligence could apply) will not bring the victim back to life. If we want to prevent incidents we need effective regulations. But as MikePal's last post shows, those are pretty hard to come up with.

I believe that when you have a dog - any breed- you are responsible for the safety of others. Don't assume that responsibility and the penalty should be meaningful.

I like to rescue JRTs for the challenge, and to give them a real chance to make it. MANY end up in animal shelters because folks buy them as a cute pup, but don't have the experience to manage them.
I give it my best effort, but sometimes have to put one down due to uncontrollable aggressiveness.

One I have now is just fine off leash , in the dog park, running with the setter etc. , but must be muzzled when I have company and when we go on a walk. If I don't do that , and someone gets bit, it is MY responsibility and I suffer the consequences of that poor choice not to muzzle.

You have a dog? You're responsible for the safety of others.

Interesting comments from BC's SPCA on Dangerous Dog legislation;

Quote:

---

BREED SPECIFIC LEGISLATION


The BC SPCA opposes breed specific legislation
as a strategy for reducing inappropriate aggression and dog bites for the following reasons:

Breed specific legislation ignores the fact that aggressive behaviour can occur in
any breed and therefore does not protect the public.

There are no efficient methods to determine a dog's breed in a way that can
withstand legal challenge or be a foolproof method for deciding whether a
guardian is in compliance or violation of laws. Any breed ban bylaw inevitably
results in the creation of subjective, arbitrary factors to determine breed.

Popularity of breeds changes over time --what is identified as a "dangerous
breed" today, may be different tomorrow. Some countries with breed laws now
have upwards of 30 breeds on record, all of which require enforcement.

People who want aggressive dogs simply switch to another breed or select a
cross-breed that cannot effectively be identified as belonging to or looking like a
specific breed. Breed specific restrictions in bylaws do nothing to discourage
irresponsible behaviour by individual s who breed, train, sell or possess
dangerous dogs not covered by the breed specific legislation.

There is no reliable way to identify the number of dogs of a particular breed in the
canine population at any given time making financial planning for enforcement of breed legislation nearly impossible.

Breed specific legislation treads upon the rights of responsible dog guardians
who cherish a non-aggressive pet whose breed may fall under the legislation.
Conversely, the guardian of an aggressive pet whose breed does not fall within
the legislation will not be subject to appropriate legislative remedies.
http://www.spca.bc.ca/assets/documents/welfare/position-statements/dangerous-dogs.pdf

---

JBen & Welsh - Why don't you carry on your yearly feud via private message so I don't have to scroll by to read other opinions.
I like pitbulls but won't support them in circumstances like this.
My main comment is this guy coming home - seeing a pitbull mauling a women and runs in the house to call for help. Personally I would have been on that dog so fast to assist this woman.
Sad, sad story.

I hate them littel jack Russell and would rather face a Shepard rottys.lol or pit bull any day I went to a old buddy's place and he had a few of them little devil's running around .the littel suckers would jump up and bite you ever chance thy got.i had three cuts in my fingers after I left his place.

If JRT's weren't so small they would be dangerous. Little buggers are nuts.

Well Roper, while that might be ideal, some have a rather long history of inflaming post threads, belittling people, or attempting to...lol, especially when its unnecessary...too funny given....the stats were posted for a couple reasons....None of which were to "defend PBTs", quite the opposite, but I guess when someone is on a mission with a bone to chew.......Silly season indeed.

Perhaps if the day ever comes Mods.....
And back peddling apparently, or at the least being unable to recognize sarcasm and instead is putting words in peoples mouths..yet again...."[COLOR=#333333]So, no: we do not have to ban chihuahuas. That is not a logical consequence of regulating pit bulls, and it is not something there is any reasonable argument for."

Never said we should ban Chihuahuas. Is sarcasm lost.....

That said, if you peruse both links ( I can't be bothered to go back in order to humour you Welsh) so I hope I will be granted a wee bit of latitude, instead of attitude.

Huskies are #2 or #3 on the list of fatal attacks. Not exactly large dogs are they?????

Some might deem them smallish or medium. I can think a couple dozen larger dogs that rarely attack people, let alone fatally.....You were saying......and Im sure the survivors of Husky attacks might also disagree with you..........

And the point then was "People should google the list of breeds, some might be surprised by the breeds"......and yes even lap dogs.....6 pretty severe attacks by Dachshunds that year ;)

Actually decided to humour you Welsh. Heres another...if we throw PBTs and Rotties out with the dirty bath water.

Chows also way up there. 54 attacks, 36 maimings, 7 fatalities...Not exactly a large breed.
Boxers also way up there..48 attacks, 20 and 5...also not exactly a large dog.
Dogo ( Gilroys large killer breed)...2 attacks
Akita a large breed dog...65 attacks 48 and 8...more attacks yet marginally fewer fatalities. or about the same as both Chows and Boxers....you were saying......