To think you shouldn't give someone's dog 'a thrashing' if it bites you?

[GuestCat]

Went for country walk with my uncle, public footpath across farmland. Uncle is in his late 60s, lived and worked on farms when he was young. He always carries a wooden stick that he calls his 'snake-stick' in case he needs to move cattle away from a gate. As we were crossing a bridge (clearly signposted as a public right of way) a large dog ran up to us and sank its teeth into my uncle's leg, completely unprovoked and with no warning, no growling or anything. Uncle grabbed it by collar, half-choked it until it let go, then started hitting it (hard) with his stick. Dog was yelping and trying to get away, I told Uncle to let it go as i was worried he'd hurt it or worse. He said dog needed a 'good thrashing' to teach it a lesson. Woman then appeared, said dog was hers and shouted at us, turns out she lives next to bridge. They had a massive argument, dog ran back to its house, woman said she'd report my uncle to RSPCA for being cruel to dog, uncle said he'll report her for letting aggressive dog on the footpath.

I don't know what to think... my uncle insists he was in the right and says dog needed to be taught a lesson or it might hurt someone or bite a child, said people nowadays are too soft on dogs. I felt a bit sorry for dog, he said I'm too soft and would think differently if i'd been raised on a farm like he was. AIBU for thinking he shouldn't have given it a thrashing?
BTW the bite wasn't deep as he had cords on, but it left bruise and little blue puncture marks where teeth went in.

I wonder how rational you'd be in you were attacked out of the blue and in pain as well as shock?

I'm a dog lover and owner but I can see that the uncle was probably not feeling very rational.

The owner is the one who really deserves a thrashing though. Of course the dog has "never bitten before", they never do. Except there's usually warning signs that owners have missed.

I think you should have taken your uncle for medical attention and maybe a tetanus and then reported the dog to the police.

If you did neither of those things you are very irresponsible indeed.

A dog who runs up and bites unprovoked is a dangerous dog who could potentially kill.

You are being ridiculous to criticise your uncle.

I adore animals.

Your uncle did the right thing. The woman was in the wrong. The dog is dangerous and, if not put to sleep (which I personally think is the right thing to do) should at least be leashed and muzzled at all times. Not only did it bite him, but it didn't let go until physically forced to. That is an animal that is out of control and can cause serious harm.

If I were you I would report the woman and her dog and make sure your uncle's tetanus is up to date.

It's all very well to be perfectly controlled and exhibit restraint from the comfort of your keyboard, personally I have no idea how I'd react. I would have read the riot act to the owner though, and report it. Next time the dog could go for a child.

Exactly. How people react when faced with a biting dog is very different to how they might think they would react when sat at home and not under any threat.
A dog tried to attack my son once when he was about 8 years old. Fortunately it only bit his trouser leg and didn't bite through to his skin. My DH had a rounders bat in his hand and was prepared to hit the dog if it hadn't let go of our child. The owner stood there not bothered about his dog yanking my sons trouser leg and behaving aggressively until he saw my DH approaching with the rounders bat at which point he scooped up his dog. If my DH had witnessed the dog bite my sons flesh and the owner do nothing I think my DH may well have given the dog a good thrashing and I'm not sure the dog would have survived. I think it is more a protective instinct that animal cruelty just for the sake of it.

I think it is more a protective instinct that animal cruelty just for the sake of it.

Except the uncle in the OP made deliberate and rational choice to beat the dog to teach it a lesson. He wasn't acting on instinct beyond the original beating it off with the stick. I find it worrying that people can't see the difference between the two.

No, I can't see the difference because I would be making damn sure that the dog doesn't attempt another attack by beating it as much as I felt the need to in order to keep it cowering and afraid of attempting another attack. Like I said if my DH had witnessed the dog bite my sons flesh and he had got to the dog before the owner my DH would have beaten the dog, quite possibly to a point where the dog wouldn't survive. My DH wouldn't be taking the risk that the dog could re-attack if he stopped hitting it.

A dog that bit someone unprovoked?

You know what, I really don't give a monkey's about pweshus doggies' feelings.

I think a lot of blokes might go over the top if they encountered an obviously vicious dog in the presence of a family member. The thought uppermost in their mind will probably be to try and intimidate the dog into running away so that it doesn't bite their niece/wife/whatever.

Massive animal lover but in those circumstances I'd have given it a thwack to get it to let go.

Especially if no owner was present there's no idea if it is a man eating stray or carrying rabies.

Your uncle should call 101 and report the dog bite. take photos of his wound. The police will take action against the dog owner. Your uncles actions have done owner a favour - his injuries could have been much worse or you both attacked if he hadn't acted so quickly/had the stick. If he has any long lasting problems re the wound and infection/scarring then it is open to your uncle to sue the dog owner.

I would be making damn sure that the dog doesn't attempt another attack by beating it as much as I felt the need to in order to keep it cowering and afraid of attempting another attack

Which is completely stupid because nobody has any idea what reaction a beating will cause in a dog. You could just as easily be revving him up for a really vicious attack the moment you let go of it.

Unless of course you beat it to death which is just lovely for your already scared and possibly injured ( needing medical attention) child to witness

I think both dog owner and uncle were in the wrong.

As a dog owner, I am in control of my dog at all times. She is very placid, and follows commands. I hate to see out of control dogs of the lead, it gives all dog owners a bad name. This dog should clearly be reported to the police, as it is a criminal offence to have a dog dangerously out of control in public.

Your uncle was wrong to beat the dog to 'teach it a lesson'. It won't work either, dogs don't learn like that, as any dog owner knows. I wouldn't blame him for doing whatever he needs to do to stop the dog biting him: that is just survival instinct.

Maybe your uncle said that it was a 'good thrashing' because he wanted to justify his actions, and his actions might have been a consequence of fear. If he is a proud man, he wouldn't want to admit that he was very scared. I know I would be terrified if a dog bit me or my children, I would probably scream at the top of my voice and freeze, but others would probably have a very aggressive response, for which he might be embarrassed about and cover it up with this type of 'macho' response of 'he needs a good beating'.

Unless of course you beat it to death which is just lovely for your already scared and possibly injured ( needing medical attention) child to witness

I'm sure all of those children who have been seriously injured by dog attacks and had to witness adults beat the dogs off were really concerned about watching somebody beat the dog - even to death .

"witness adults beat the dogs off were really concerned about watching somebody beat the dog"

You know full well that my comment was in response to your comment;

"I would be making damn sure that the dog doesn't attempt another attack by beating it as much as I felt the need to in order to keep it cowering and afraid of attempting another attack"

which was nothing at all to do with beating the dog off the child and in your own words to do with beating the dog til it was incapacitated either through fear or pain.

Once the dog is off your child you lift your child and go somewhere safer to assess the injury and calm the child. You dont leave your child in pain while you kick seven shades of shite out of a dog that has already let go. Unless youre a mindless thug

Yes, curlysue I would keep it cowering to prevent it from re-attacking my child. I'm sure my child would rather I incapacitated the damn dog than let it bite him again. I'm sure my child would be more traumatised from the dog attack than he would by me attacking the dog.

In the scenario where my DH was prepared to beat the dog we were both present and I know my DH would have dealt with the dog in any way he needed to whilst I saw to our child but even if I was on my own my priority would be making sure the dog doesn't attack again to worsen my child's injuries before I see to the already sustained injuries.

I must be a mindless thug then.....moreso than the dogs owner who did nothing about his dog biting my child's trousers and behaving angrily until he saw my husband about to whack his dog with the rounders bat!

Thing is, this wasn't just a little nip. Not only was it unprovoked and with no warning, but the OP said he had to half-choke the fucking thing until it let go of his leg. In those circumstances, with a clearly vicious dog that bites and doesn't let go until it is absolutely forced to, and with no owner around to get it the fuck away from people, then beating it in the hope that it will then be in a state of submission (and I know that isn't guaranteed because they're all wired in different ways) is a perfectly understandable course of action to take. It was a big dog. It could have caused some serious damage if it had attacked further. Damn right you need to do anything you can to intimidate it and prevent that happening. Good job the uncle had his stick and the quick instinct to use it forcefully, I reckon.