Another child killed by a dog...

[tnorfotkcab]

Another poor child is killed by a dog.... We already know this is an XL Bully, don't even have to wait for confirmation.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce35zkl9dg3o

👏👏👏

No amount of education will work on those sorts of owners, they have been told time and time again, they have seen the news stories of babies being killed and they still insist that the dogs are big softies and they don’t give them the training and safety measures needed.

https://www.bestattorney.com/dog-bites/labrador-dog-breed.html

No one, not even a drug dealer, wants their dog to kill their child. Dogs do not "suddenly turn"; that is a myth. They have a million and one ways to express their discomfort to us, the problem is most people don't understand them, so when the dog escalates, they believe it came out of the blue. If we teach people the warning signs, we can prevent the escalation from occurring.

Doesn’t help that you see videos on YouTube tube of enormous dogs “ cuddling “ and licking tiny babies, accompanied by sickly comments. I shudder when I see them!

You understand that there are no recorded Labrador related fatalities though? Despite their huge, longstanding popularity and resulting position in bite statistics?

Articles saying that the highest number of bites recorded comes from the most widely owned breed for decades is not proof in any way of bite/attack severity or bites per capita by breed.

(OP edited post from 2 magazine /newspaper articles)

Dogs do not "suddenly turn"; that is a myth

Then why, every time a child is killed by one of these things, are the owners in the news going "he's been our family pet for ten years, he's never hurt a fly, I can't believe he did this!"

The dog would be more intelligent than the owners when it comes to the mutant mutt owners.

Well, according to tthat article 5 were! I answered the post because Dodorogers seemed sceptical that a labrador could inflict fatal injury. I know it’s extremely unlikely, but it is possible

Yeah saying 'We should focus on education' is just hand-waving IMO. Who are you going to educate and how? The people who want to buy these dodgy dogs and keep them at home with kids are thick as pig shit, so their responsiveness to - what? - some sort of compulsory course you have to go on before you can own a dog? - or whatever other form of 'education' you come up with - is going to be minimal. Relying on stupid people being sensible doesn't cut it when it comes to fatal dog attack on kids. The dog nutterati will scream blue murder at any wide-ranging ban on big dogs but that's what would need to happen eventually to make a difference; not that I think it'll ever happen so we'll just keep going through this same shit time and time again.

Because they lie

Are you ok? You've changed your link to an advert from an ambulance chasing solicitor firm in the US, they are not a source of official bite statistics. They are targeting people, in a litigious country, with a common injury, to make money.

Yes

As far as I’m aware, people aren’t bred to have a predisposition for ripping something apart, though there’s a few people I’d consider it a suitable punishment for.

On a serious level, I would be all for DNA testing anything remotely resembling any type of ‘bully’ and if it’s found to be in the gene pool of those with human aggression, then yes, absolutely they should be bumped off. These disgusting creatures are actually more dangerous than many wild animals. They have no fear of us, AND they want to eat us. And people are stupid enough to have them sitting in their sofas.

What that article says is that 'most attacks' are by labs. When owners are polled and asked 'has your dog ever bitten anyone' presumably any 'yes' gets recorded as an 'attack.' Labs are by far the most common dog in this country and given that any breed of dog will have its share of biters, it's not a surprising statistic. It's a bit like saying that Ford cars have more flat tyres each year than any other brand on the road. It doesn't mean that choosing a Ford means you are more likely to have a flat tyre than choosing a Skoda or a Kia. It just means there are way more Fords.

The only statistic that matters is whether Labs are responsible for a disproportate number of attacks, in relation to their number. Especially attacks that result in serious injury or death. And the article doesn't mention that.

I think it's pretty obvious that they don't because if they did, we'd all know about it.

The labrador debate is classic whataboutery. If I can find an obscure statistic somewhere on the internet that shows - with no context - that labrador bites have resulted in fatalities then that proves.... what?

Human deaths from dog bites have overwhelmingly involved large, powerful dogs, including pit bulls. And that's with restrictions and controls in many countries.

No dog is ever 100% safe in 100% of situations. That's why many, many posters very sensibly say they would never leave a dog unsupervised with children. But, patently, some dogs, by dint of their size, power and innate traits, are more dangerous than others.

So, #NotAllDogs, but #SomeDogs and #MostlyBullies.

I think some people are not arguing in good faith. And a great many people need to buy "statistics for dummies" and not come back to this thread until they've read it.

With many dogs, you can also achieve much of this with training.

And what are you suggesting they would do if there were compulsory dog licenses?

Well yes. Sometimes I need glasses due to age, but I have the reading age of an average adult I would guess.

Me? Nothing, I'm just answering the question as to who the big players in the pet industry are. I'm not the poster who suggested there would be barriers. Cool your jets.

I agree, and also, putting everyone else's safety in the hands of the owners being "educated" is nuts. It's arrogant and ridiculous to think that any human can always know what these dogs are thinking, can always read their body language, and can always remove the dog from a potentially dangerous situation before it occurs. I've been a martial artist for 20+ years, it's like me saying I can always predict where a punch is coming from and evade/block it. The reality is people make mistakes, fighters get smacked in the face, and dogs do sometimes bloody turn!

So what? A tree falling on your head is unlikely but possible, a sink hole opening up is unlikely but possible, a meteorite falling plunging the world into another ice age is unlikely but possible. Owning a dangerous dog makes a kid dying likely AND possible.

But not presumably, with XL bullies and the like!

It’s just more nonsense that gets said that ensures nothing ever changes. When kids are dying for no good reason I won’t chill on it and look at a wall for a while. It’s aggravating and infuriating.

When it's babies I can't help but think sometimes it's people using dangerous dogs to cover up shaking