If I see any more comments on Mumsnet of it's just a dog

[Lifeneedsaresetagain]

Do people not realise that for those who welcome them into the family they are part of the family. And if you have a dog and say it's just a dog, I'm not sure you should have one.

Actually, that's not true. Unless you set the fire, you are not responsible for the outcome a situation like that.

Where I live, there is a law where you are not required to act to help someone at all. Once you start though, you do have to see it through.

Is this a serious question? Are you aware that the law treats human life as superior to animal life, or do you think there are courts for animals accused of killing other animals?

Where did I mention a fire?

Again, citation needed.

If anyone would be in trouble it would be you. Child neglect. Leaving your kid alone in a building.

I would only be able to watch a child drown. I wont be charged with manslaughter for not helping. That is crap, and the PP is full of it.

Yes animals are on trial for killing other animals. Didn't you see Lassie on trial for killing chickens? If Elizabeth Taylor had not helped the old man prove Lassie was a war hero, she would have been a goner.

Yes, apologies, not everyone freezes.

I don't really want to weigh in on the whole saving a dog over a child issue.

That's the scenario being floated most in this thread.

In any case, I'm not responsible if a child dies because of a circumstance that I didn't cause. I have no obligation to put myself in danger to save them. I do not get charged because I froze, or instinctively ran to an easier being to save, or my monkey brain made me react in favour of one or the other.

Oh fuck me. I have been away from this thread for 24 hours. Has it descended into the who would you chose in a fire bullshit?

I love my dog. But ALWAYS the human.

My dog or any child. Always the child.
My dog or my husband. Hmmm. But always my husband.
Fuck me, I am as anti Royal as they come, I’d have them up against the wall in a heartbeat, but my dog or Kate Middleton, it would be Kate (and I would better be heavily bestowed with riches).

Also, I would risk my life to save another human. I would not risk my life to save my dog.

I don't know why you and others keep banging on about parental neglect. In my scenario I am assuming the parents are incapacitated in some way, not that they have abandoned their child. Not that it should make a difference to what a humane person would do in that situation. If I saw an unaccompanied child in a dangerous situation, my first thought would not be, well why should I do anything - they obviously have shit parents.

Chances of that are microscopic.

But lets play - so I let my dog run around in a blind panic to save your kid from the burning fires of whatever the fuck..

He runs into traffic, causes a multicar pile up and five people are dead.

That sounds smart.

Or - I get me and my dog out, tie up my dog, call emergency services and see what I can do to help... no further accident caused, yep, you and your kid might die, but equally they might not, I might be able to help (I won't btw, I am a power wheelchair user, I've already burned to death by being on the 5th floor of a building that has no evac chair or no one trained to use it).

The hypothetical game is endless, pointless, gets peoples backs up. As I said, most people do not know how they'd think in a crisis or what they'd do and many would be really shocked at their responses.

Pitch the hypothetical different - you're a parent with two children, the building is on fire and you have to pick one to save first... which one?

Change it so now its your toddler and someone elses toddler... someone elses toddler is nearer, but yours is.. yours.

Or how about, a kid in a power chair, you need to disconnect the controller from the wheels via the levers on the back to push it, the controller cable has melted... you can save him OR you can save two toddlers. Which do you pick?

See, it's horrible, it's stupid, it's not a useful answer and you simply do not know what the truth is anyway.

Very very few people are going to make rational, sensible, considered choices. Most likely they're going to grab whoever is nearest, if they are not blinded completely by the desire to save themselves.

Back to the dog situation - my dog is likely on a 4ft lead clipped to my waist. The chances of me thinking to unclip him to free me up to go get someone else are vanishingly small, vs just getting the fuck out. That would be me having to de-select a default choice -fix my dog to me in case of emergencies - in order to think about someone who is not my responsibility and I have never thought about before. That isn't how brains work in a crisis.

The dogs I have had like to be on a lead at times. It makes them feel secure.

Are you serious that dogs should never be on a lead? What about near a dangerous road/cliff edge?

I would be out with my dog, and not looking for a child just in case. Looking for people to rescue is the job of trained professional who have the right expertise and equipment.
In the event of a fire, you are not even meant to go collect your belongings. You just go.
If someone rescues a kid on the way out, they will get a hero's welcome and a mention in the paper. If they leave and a child dies, they do not get charged with manslaughter. That is bollocks, and you still can't provide any sort of case law to prove it would be the case.

My dog is old, a bit deaf and blind. Her lead is for her safety.

I hate its just an animal too. My cats are my daughters and this is their home.

My dog is young and occasionally unpredictable in that he will follow a scent to the exclusion of all else. He will also, once in a blue moon, run up to another dog. So he gets put on a lead near roads or other dogs.

His lead is for his safety too.

My friend had an entirely predictable dog which followed a child out who started into the road in front of a car, the dad saved the kid and yanked him back at the last minute, but the dog got hit by the car. The dog had learnt that it was OK to go when the people went. He should have been on a lead, predictable or not.

My almost two yeae old golden retriever is an anxious, unpredictable arsehole despite ALL the training who would follow a squirrel over cliff. A lead is a must for everyone’s sanity and safety.

Crikey, yes, it always makes me feel uncomfortable seeing a dog walk alongside their owner sans lead along main roads. I know in most cases it shows impeccable training, but you just don't know.

I admire your optimism about the training of other people's dogs. :-)

I have two dogs. I can even tell you which dog I would choose to save if I had to choose between them. Not because I value one more than the other, but because my daughter's dog is part of her well being and managing her disability, so I choose that for her.

My dogs are my family, but they do not get taken everywhere for their own safety - I cannot watch them/kids at the same time safely in shops etc it isn't fair on anyone.

They are not "just dog's" but equally I do not see them as equal to my children say.

Strangely, my dog's death hurt me much, much more than my father's death. But he was a nasty old man, and she was a loving dog. I think the only person who missed the old fuck was my mother, and she wept and wept for all the past and not just how he acted.

You must be joking? I get you love them a lot but to call them your daughters?

Does it bring comfort to @Gettingbysomehow? Yes.
Does it affect anyone else? No.

Unleashed dogs near public roads are a liability to themselves, their owners and other road users. I know the owners can be fined, but then it is too late.

I think this is the thing - there are plenty of people I know or even who I'm related to whose deaths I would be significantly less upset than I would by the deaths of one of my animals. That's on an individual level but it's not the same thing as thinking human lives and animal lives are equal. Overall, I do not think they are the same and that's a key difference.