Great Dane now on the attack - please can we do something? *Distressing content warning*

Of course it’s horrifying. A child was bit in the face and it should be happening at all. Any bite is horrifying.

Does it only become horrifying if the child dies?

@takealettermsjones Great Danes are generally very soft, nice natured dogs.

Mind you, even then people still minimise it.

We are arrogant enough to think that our supposed intelligence makes us better than other animals
Human intelligence means that we are able to make moral choices, that's the difference.

Or, why was the dog left unattended with a child.

The dog's owner is the responsible party here. If a dog can be dangerous, which even dog lovers here are acknowledging, then if you choose to have a dog, you need to be absolutely 100% responsible for it not attacking anyone.

You can't own something dangerous, whether a dog or a gun, and then blame a child for being hurt by it. It is always the owner's responsibility.

I was saying it’s harder to teach kids to avoid dogs now than it used to be, because they’re everywhere. Bit like telling them to avoid stepping on the cracks in the pavement when you live in a city.

I’m not sure why you find this hard to understand, and why you feel a need for an eye-roll emoji.

As I said, we tell our kids not to walk on the road because of cars, so they walk on the pavement. Then we tell them to stay away from dogs, who are on the pavement. So where do they go? Maybe you think the kids should stay at home so the dogs can freely go out to cafes and playgrounds!

And don’t give me this rubbish about teaching them not to pet dogs being the thing to do. It’s evident from multiple posts on here that it’s often the dogs initiating the contact, which usually involves their teeth.

As I said, it’s victim blaming.

I don’t think mass muzzling is the answer but at the same time I do think licensing should be brought back. There will always be dickheads who ignore it, just like there are dickheads who drive cars without a licence, but they will be far fewer. In return, we’ll see the vast majority of people who own dogs actually learning how to handle them. While it won’t stop dog attacks entirely, it should reduce them.

I don't doubt it. But their capacity to injure if they should turn is much greater, because of their size and strength.

I hear black bears are normally quite placid creatures, too. 😉

Maybe you think the kids should stay at home so the dogs can freely go out to cafes and playgrounds!
Yep she totally does think that!
They think their 'fur baby' comes before human children, the reason dog owners are so keen to let the dog in the children's playground is they think it's not fair that their fur baby can't use the same equipment that the human children do.

Personally speaking @legalwotnot as a mother I'm not about to leave my child with a potential danger in the hope the owner has the situation covered! A child doesn't have a right to stroke any dog they want, and common sense needs to be in place. Completely agree that the dogs owner should always be supervising the interaction, but so should the parent.
I own dogs - I would never turn my back on them and leave them being stroked by a child.
I have a daughter - I would never leave her stroking a dog without watching she is safe.

Goes two ways.

I'd be happier if those dog owners who let their dogs off leash in open spaces actually obeyed the signs that say "Dogs must be on leash at all times". Many seem to think there's a hidden bit of the sign that only they can see which says "EXCEPT YOU!"

We've had various incidents over the years when walking one of our dogs (we only ever have one at once!) in various parks,where the leash rule is clearly stated all over the place (especially AT THE ENTRANCE) and people allow theirs to gallop about. This includes the grounds of a local stately home in which deer are roaming.

Anyone questioning this poor boys injuries only needs to click on the link.
Those are some huge holes under the dressings. Poor boy.

It must have been awful for him, poor thing. It will probably give him a lifelong fear. Any dog can potentially harm but I’m more bothered about a law against dogs like American XL Bully type dogs and other similar breeds. Why anybody is happy to have a dog like that around their kids is beyond me.

I think rescue centres need looked at to be honest. Too many stories of these stories in the last few years where the dog has very recently been brought in to the family. I know sometimes that might be through Facebook ads and things but a few times it has been rescue dogs. There was a case recently where a woman was attacked by a dog she had very recently rescued, she wasn’t told of its history and even when she contacted them to say the dog had tried to bite her they didn’t remove it. Some dogs aren’t suitable to be re-homed especially with people who aren’t properly trained and not even aware of the dog’s history.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/woman-mauled-rescue-dog-loses-29760364.amp

People need to stop focusing on the tail and look at other body language. Don't let your kid stroke dogs they don't know, or approach dogs they don't know, regardless of what the owner says

Agree with the second part of this. My kids were always told that if they wished to approach or stroke a dog, to ask the owner first.

But I very much disagree with the second part, which is victim blaming. I have zero interest in finding out about dog body language. I don't have a dog, I don't want a dog. It is the OWNER'S responsibility to take steps to make sure that their dog is not in the position to be able to attack/bite me, not my responsibility to learn all about body language.

Dogs do bite for all sorts of reasons, it is what dogs do. Pretending that dogs can be trained not to, and that people can ‘read’ them accurately is definitely part of the problem. A lot of dog owners seem to believe that their dogs think like human, when research suggests that this is far from the truth.

Because you are accusing me of victim blaming when I am not.

Teaching safety is important. Taht doesn't eliminate all risk. To use your car example - we teach kids to be careful crossing the road. That doesn't mean that drivers don't have to be careful and look of for kids. But of course we would blame a driver less for an accident where they were driving carefully and a child darted into the road. The same is the case for dogs. Obviously the situation is different where a child is bitten just walking along minding their own business vs grabbing a sleeping dog by the tale when they've been warned by the owner not to touch it. It doesn't absolve the owner of being responsible but it is a different situation.

And by the way, cars are much more dangerous for children than dogs are.

Or just stay away from the dog, then you don't need to worry (clearly the owner needs to keep the dog away from people too).

I feel extremely sorry for poor Joanna Harris, but at the same time don't you have to be a bit stupid to think that an animal capable of dismembering an adult human would make a good pet?
I hope she successfully sues and I hope the negative publicity makes the RSPCA reform its practices

I was going to make both of these points.

"@fourelementary lementary · Today 10:30
Not pleasant but I don’t think a Great Dane attack is anywhere near as savage as the Pitt/mastiff/bull type of attacks that kill…"

"@Cheapcookies ookies · Today 10:28
It really shocks me how many dog owners are completely unable to read their own dogs."

It is a horrible attack and terrible for the poor little boy, but luckily nowhere close to the type of mauling from a dog-type like the pitbull/XL Bully with a fighting pedigree. The breed that urgently needs to be banned is the XL Bully as they are responsible for multiple deaths and related to pitbulls. A question is whether it was a genuine Great Dane, in which case the attack would be unusual, or one of the mixes - Great Danebulls are a mix with a bull breed. There really needs to be more awareness that dogs with a fighting pedigree can cause severe damage and have a high prey drive. Herders will herd, retrievers will retrieve, etc. A breed that historically will fight to the death and is capable of killing a bull can obviously do serious damage.

Am regularly horrified by the inability of people to read their dog's signals. We don't let our DC play at a friend's house where they have a very large dog which is clearly anxious and aggressive, but they insist is 'mad/playful'. Also 'cute pictures' of young kids with large dogs giving the whale eye.

It's true that cars are responsible for more deaths than dogs are by a long chalk, however we take extensive measures to mitigate the risks, and without motor vehicles how would we transport people and goods?
Keeping a dog is a hobby, a thing that you do for your own personal amusement, a way of indulging yourself, if your hobby is a menace, causes a nuisance, may result in serious injury or death to others then it needs to be heavily regulated. You should not be able to let your potentially dangerous animal roam about freely and the rest of us just have to put up with it🤬

That child’s got nothing more than a couple of scratches, to call them ‘horror injuries’ is ridiculous.

No dog can ever, ever be fully trusted. And yes, that includes your little darling who wouldn't hurt a fly. you never know.

Imo, if a dog can bite, it shouldn't be in public. If people want to take the risk with their own children within their homes, I feel very sorry for those children.

Any dog can bite. My DC loved growing up with a dog and it taught them so much. What a silly blanket statement.