Boy 10 mauled to death at holiday park

[Witchofzog]

I can't link on this phone but it is on most news sites. The owner was found off site after a police hunt so possibly fled when she knew her dog had killed a child. It's just awful - a young boy probably just going to the loo in the middle of the night on a campsite having his life ended because of a dangerous dog and an owner who can't control and/ or keep it securely away

@HearHere
Yes computer programming and data being utilised is a great idea. Modern technology being put to good use

@LittleMissHappy19

Its a long thread and so I was asking for a quick 'recap'. What changes in law would you propose?

It's completely irrelevant if the irresponsible owner could get the dog off or not!

I disagree.
Being able to overpower an animal during an attack is vital in preventing further injury/ fatal injury

we need much better statistics and data collecting around dogs, if all animals were chipped then there could be some kind of database and if your dog is involved in an incident that could be recorded
dogs could all be required to have scannable chips so that members of the public who are concerned about dogs could have a phone app that tells you if the dogs around you have been involved in incidents
the possibilities are limitless when you consider the capabilities of modern technology

Right as a dog lover or 'fur baby lover' as you all like to call us, I (along with a lot of other dog lovers) are listening to the dog haters points of views. I wish that you wouldn't be naive enough into not accepting other people's points of views.

@Hearhere I completely agree with this. I have absolutely no issue as a dog lover, with laws being brought in like you suggest.

Can you see where I am coming from now, in regards to it doesn't go off height, size and weight? And why this is completely illogical.

I'm sure if your proposal was brought in, in five years time..all the dog haters would be shocked at the statistics.

I am not a dog hater
Thank you

To be clear I am not arguing against the proposal to use the dimensions of the dog I was suggesting in addition to that we used data collecting etc as outlined in my post

flax, the USA is very different from the UK with regards to dogs. Many more free roamers for one thing. Unfenced 'yards' (huge gardens) for another.

The dog lovers have put forward plenty of sensible ideas, but no, we are obliged to believe that all 'large' dogs (size not specified) pose a serious danger, so serious that they should be legislated out of existence, despite the existence of many docile large breeds. Dogs have been compared to wild predators. We've been told that domesticated animals are unnatural and therefore more dangerous than wild ones. It would be helpful if the anti-dog people really knew what they were talking about, but I have concluded that they don't.

As somebody pointed out, there is money in illegal activity with dogs, and any project to reduce the presence of dangerous dogs would have to allow for the people involved in that trying to subvert the system. Other places have different models of dog regulation. Maybe we ought to look at them.

In my view there are two factors (which are often conflated)
1-The ability of the dog to cause damage, this can be ascertained by the metrics suggested by @Flax, the size weight height neck size bite strength etc of the dog, all these can be measured and weighted in such a way as to enable us to score or classify/categorize dogs according to their ability to do damage

2-the propensity of the dog to attack, this can be ascertained by looking at the record of the breed as well as the record of the individual dog

Some good ideas being proposed.

@LittleMissHappy19

If a chipped dog has been found have been involved in a recorded 'incident' or more than one incident. What should happen next to the dog?

@Flaxmeadow maybe before typing you should really read what people are suggesting.

This was my original post

Everybody is in agreement that things need to change. What happened was beyond tragic. It was the owners and mothers fault, why this poor little boy isn't here anymore.

People saying all dogs should be banned, are absolutely idiotic.. you honestly believe that would happen?!

The problem starts at how easy it is to be able to buy a dog. It should be against the law to buy/ sell dogs on the internet.

If you do wish to have a dog then it must come from a reputable breeder (kennel club)

It should be against the law for any bitch to have more than two litters of puppies ( let's face it, the main reason people breed their dogs is for the money!)

Your puppy should of had it's first vaccinations, and then when the dog registers with your vets, it should be mandatory that every owner is to complete a course from a dog trainer or dog behavioural specialist.

Once they are satisfied, that your dog is well trained and you are a component dog owner, then you can be signed off.

It should also be mandatory that a yearly check up is carried out by your vet. Your vet would be able to tell instantly, the control you have over your dog! How well looked after the dog is I.e (has the dog been back for flea/ tick/worming treatments, is update with vaccinations etc)

If any of these are missed, then you must be made to pay for the trainer to come back out. As obviously you are not a responsible owner!

If you do not comply, then you will be fined. The monies will go to dog charities, and the dog will be taken off you. You will then not be allowed to own a dog again.

I think small steps like these, will put a lot of people off owning a dog!!

Like I said I am listening to other posters opinions, and I agree that laws like mine, along with @Hearhere's suggestion would help massively.

Banning breeds straight away with no statistics, is completely ludicrous.

@GrumpyMiddleAgedWoman

What would your proposal be for changes in law ?

I know we have posted them before but it's such a long thread and maybe we could just recap our ideas.

In my current view there are two factors to be considered:
1-the ability of the dog to cause harm, this can be determined using, for example, such metrics as the height, weight, size of the dog, neck size, jaw size bite strength...I mean really this could be done just by a quick 3D scan of the dog
2- the propensity of the dog to cause harm, this could be determined by looking at the history of the breed ( if the dog can be identified as a member of a particular breed) and the history of the individual dog

@LittleMissHappy19

You made some good suggestions.

Under your proposals, what should happen to a chipped dog recorded on a data base as being involved in an 'incident' or more than one incident?

For example. What should happen to dog that has bitten a person. A bite that has required the person to seek medical treatment from a GP or A&E department.

What should happen to the dog if it's been found to have been involved in an incident?
if we could change the culture around dogs such that most dog owners were concerned to be seen as responsible then maybe we could have a situation where dog attacks were much more readily reported so that we had good data on what actually happened?
I think if there is a severe attack sadly the dog should be destroyed, I don't think it's right that we should have pets as part of human society who have caused severe damage to humans.

Dogs have do have some great qualities and they do enrich people's lives, I think we should be trying to maximize this side of dogs and move right away from weaponized dogs

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3647132/Ferociously-loving-Video-shows-toddler-snuggling-four-burly-pit-bulls-nap-cuddled-kissed-massive-dogs.html
I can hardly believe my eyes....

I have been attacked by a dog and I had to go to a&e, the wound became infected it was very painful very upsetting
The thing that shocked and upset me most was the response of the owner, totally ignored my shock and distress told me it was my fault and disappeared PDQ
I think after an attack the focus should be on the owner of the dog

So Flaxmeadow would ban all dogs over a certain size. Which would probably include my lab x who helps me with my mobility ( self taught, not an official assistance dog )
Batshit.

Hearhere, I've been bitten in my time too. It's not pleasant. I didn't quite need A&E, but only because I was wearing leather gloves at the time.

I agree with you (hurrah!) that after a bite there should be a focus on the owner. I think you'd find the Dunbar bite scale interesting when considering what should be done with a dog post-bite. I'd link if I wasn't on my phone.

@PenelopeFlintstone

I'm lost for words. I can't believe what I'm seeing either, not just the photos but the text in the article as well. I despair

I've stayed at Tencreek. It's a lovely holiday park. This is just so awful.

Firstly, no dog should ever be allowed to stay alone with children. That's my personal opinion - you just never know what might happen. I have a 2 year old. I bloody love dogs. But I would never let a dog sleep in the same room as my child, let alone leave my child in a caravan with one.

Secondly, the owner of the dog. I'm not excusing her behaviour but shock makes you do pretty weird things. You don't think straight. There was a report in the local paper that said a woman helped her on to the train to Plymouth. She had blood all over her, as did her dog. Who, in their right mind, tries to travel with evidence all over them? No-one... if she was truly trying to run away from it all and if she was thinking straight, she would have disposed of the t-shirt, washed the dog etc.
Shock makes you think weirdly.

Thirdly, other reports I have read say that the mum and friends were in the next door caravan partying the night away with drink and drugs. This makes sense. I personally cant make sense of that. I struggle with leaving my DS at night as soon as I'm out the door. This is the bit I cant get. But it's a mistake. A mistake they have paid ever so heavily for. Perhaps it would constitute neglect? I dont know. Perhaps it should...

Thank you @Grumpymiddle, I will look up the Dunbar bite scale
feels good to find some common ground for both sides of this discussion 😊

The daily mail link with the baby and those dogs
I find that very very disturbing

@Gertrude, I do appreciate your concerns, if you have time please read some more of the recent posts on the thread, hopefully you will see that we are proposing a much more nuanced way forward

I'm wondering what people think of my suggestion that dogs could be chipped and that these chips could be scanned just by an app on anyone's mobile phone
would that be too intrusive?
Should the chips be compulsory or voluntary?
And what information could be on the chip?

Yippee! I feel like we are all finding some common ground now, in helping sort out this problem.

Right if something like the proposals a few others and I have suggested, along with @Hearhere's..

It would all depend on if the dog was unprovoked or not.

I do believe incidents happen, due to very poor ownership, no training, no education. So I think incidents would reduce sufficiently if these proposals like ours were put into place.

But let's say for example the dog owner has had training, the dog is fully trained and been signed off, the dog has had yearly check ups, and then Mr Jones is walking down the road and the owner and dog are on a walk, and then just all of a sudden the dog goes crazy and then bites him..I do think after an evaluation by an expert, if the expert deems the dog (no matter what breed) to be dangerous, then the dog is to be PTS.

But I will then give you another example, we had to take our son to a and e..there was a teenage boy (13) in the bed next to us, he had been bitten by his collie on his forehead.
We got talking to them, and the father said that the boy had been winding up the dog, the father had told him throughout his life to respect dogs etc..he seemed like a very responsible owner to us.
We could hear the consultant speaking to the boy and checking him over (as their was only a curtain between us) the father explained that the boy admitted, he was tormenting the dog..pulling the dogs tail, and trying to drag it in reserve. Ending up in the dog being petrified and retaliating, by biting him.
The consultant shouted at the boy saying 'If I was trying to drag you around, hitting you, pulling you around constantly and you didn't like it what would you do?! I hope you have learnt you lesson!! Don't you dare do that again!'
Under circumstances like that, I feel that dog was not at fault at all and should no way be PTS.

It would all depend on the circumstances.

I don't think that the fact that a dog is provoked should be allowed as mitigation
a properly trained dog will be able to inhibit the urge to bite (as explained in the Dunbar bite scale material)