Dog attacked my child (St Aiden's Road) (Lounged)

[woodie]

forgive me as I know little bout dogs. Ive tried to read through this thread, its upsetting ,one thing Im scared of is a dog going for my lili uns. In peckham rye once a pitbull looking thing made a dash for mydaughter who went "dogggiee!". I was too far away and the dog licked her cheek, no harm done. phew. I was really freaked.

This dog. it ran out hurt the child or was already out with no muzzle. They are sposed to heave mzzle on arent they?

So isnt that start point for prosecution on top of the damage.

For me it would be ..buy a high powered air rifle immediately. The law didnt work.killer steak. anything to make the area safe of that dog.

[Moos]

I assume this is the same dog that can be heard from the pub garden snarling and barking. Even in the safety of the pub garden on the other side of the fence it's an unpleasant noise.

[lilolil]

Maybe we should start a petition????

[Louisa]

As ever the poor animal is blamed for the provoked/unprovoked (whichever the case may be as we dont have all the facts here) attack on a child. I have noticed a large number of parents walking the streets allowing young toddlers to walk out in the road and run up to dogs without having any form of discipline from the parent. I am NOT saying that this is the case here with Mandy and her child, but I would certainly like to hear both sides of a story before I jump in and judge other people who are not here to defend themselves.

Louisa.

[trinity]

Hi Louisa - I don't think many people were blaming the dog. On the contrary people on this thread have been blaming the owner of the dog.

One fact is clear and that is that a small child was badly bitten. Due to lack of training (by the owner, the dog was unable to control his biting urge and therefore he is too dangerous to be kept in the community and should be destroyed. This would be the case whether he was provoked or not.

There were also a number of witnesses to this event on another thread who verified that this was a sustained attack and not for example a snap by a dog after being approached by an inquisitive youngster.

[Dulwich_ Park_ Fairy]

Trinity

Louisa is a retard who has a soft-spot for paedophiles and dangerous animals. Best not respond to her posts.

[Moos]

Louisa, I think you should be careful in what you say given that this is a real situation with a family dealing with trauma. If you take the time to read the pair of threads there is quite a lot of detail about what happened, and there was no indication that there was any interaction between the child and the dog before it attacked her.

In any case, I'd be interested to hear your view on what provocation a toddler or small child would be capable of that might justify a 'poor dog''s attack on that child?

I wonder what you mean is that parents should be more careful to protect their children against potentially dangerous dogs, rather than that children should not provoke dogs in case they respond in kind. Could you perhaps clarify?

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

I was walking a border collie off the lead in Peckham Rye when two unsupervised toddlers came running up to him screaming and chasing the dog and throwing gravel at him. He did what any self-respecting sheep dog would do to recalcitrant sheep and nipped one of the toddlers. That doesn't make him a dangerous dog but we do need to remember that even the best tempered dogs are instinctive creatures.

It is ultimately the owner's responsibility, but I do think children should be coached not to approach dogs without permission [and I'm not suggesting that's what happened in this instance - just a timely reminder for future safety. On the same lines, children need to be reminded to stand completely still if they are frightened by a loose dog: running away and squealing (though completely understandable) again will provoke a chase instinct in a dog.]

[LizzygotDizzy]

.

[Finley]

Hear Hear!!!

[SeanMacGabhann]

oooh I'd love to have seen Lizzy's response

sorry PGC - I can't see the rationale behind your post - two toddlers running around Peckham Rye = nothing wrong. Not sure what is meant by unsupervised - you mean there was no parent or guardian anywhere in sight? Would that not constitute a bigger worry than their reaction to a dog?

I'm in agreement with teaching children behaviour around animals - but to suggest in the scenario outlined above, that the kids were, in effect, asking for it and that people should be able to walk their dogs off the leash with impunity?? Really?

[Michael Palaeologus]

Um, well yes - well behaved dogs should be allowed to walk without a leash in appropriate areas. Any animal will protect itself wen under attack and the behaviour that PGC describes would appear to a dog to be an attack.

If dog-owners should be expected to supervise their dogs and also be resonsible for the actions of their dogs - why not parents? Humans, even small ones, are more intelligent than dogs and are able to develop a better understanding of right and wrong behaviour, mostly.

[SeanMacGabhann]

I just don't see Peckham Rye as a "suitable area" - I've been walking through there and had a dog give me the skunk eye with a view to having a go - ok my size and the fact that I'm old enough to know how best to behave meant nothing passed off but had I been drunk/less aware/more naive I'm not so sure...

I just don't like loose dogs - they have attacked me in the past, they continue to attack people today and blaming the behaviour of the victims isn't on..

[Michael Palaeologus]

Deleted because of repetition and I amused myself more the second time round.

[Michael Palaeologus]

All dogs are not bad, but all are animals and behave as such, the Rye is a public space and surely people should be able to use it as they wish? - within the bounds of law. However dogs and children should be supervised, kept on a leash if need be and possibly muzzled.

As for you Mr MacGabhan - seek an alternative route home from William Rose to avoid unwanted canine attention perhaps?

[SeanMacGabhann]

No-one is surely suggesting that all, or even most, dogs are bad

But they are powerful and often behave arbitrarily - I'm never going to just agree that they should be unleashed. Not anywhere with a London postcode anyway

Funnily enough, watching Amores Perros last week - a film where most of the main characters are defined by their relationship with their dogs - brought most of this back home. It's probably why I'm being more (ahem) dogmatic in my responses

[Michael Palaeologus]

"But they are powerful and often behave arbitrarily" - ditto many children. Tiny bit of an over-generalisation perhaps? Many of muts on Peckham Rye are toy dogs that would give a nasty suck at best.

Its a wuff life Sean, as you say, one shouldnt be dogmatic, that would be catastrophic.

Enough now.

[LizzygotDizzy]

Are you now saying it is the dogs who have priority now when out in public places and small children have no right to go run in the park and have fun themselves? Are you saying it is up to the parent to supervise the small child as opposed to the owner supervising the dog? Try teaching a 2 year old to stand still when a dog leaps out of nowhere, and decides it would be fun to chase said child? Muzzle the dogs when they are out and then even if they do (as is often the case with poorly trained dogs decide to run a mockers and chase anything that dares to move in the park), the most damage it will cause is a few nasty scratches when it jumps up, that in itself is not good enough to be honest but in comparison much better than having a thigh/hand/arm bitten. I agree as soon as children are old enough teach them to be wary and respectful of dogs in park and not to approach them, but hey, I'll tie up my 2 year old child and prevent her from having fun so your dog can run free and enjoy the park erm....

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

LgD - the dog I was walking comes from a family of 6 children, two of whom are under 5. All I was trying to point out was that the best natured dog, used to toddler excess, can revert to instinct when surprised. That is, I concede, an argument to keep a dog on a lead at all times.

However, the corollary is that parents also have a duty to supervise their children. It could have easily been another child that they ran up to and threw stones at. The father of the children was so busy having a chinwag, he didn't even see the incident.

[LizzygotDizzy]

I take mine (when I feel he needs a really good run) out to fields or forests where there are not likely to be children or families trying to enjoy the same space, let him run through fields and streams and completely wear himself out, but in the city I have to adapt and keep him muzzled and on a long leash, he is well trained anyways and would pose no threat and stops and drops at a whistle! Wasn't hard to do! although I have to say growing up on a working farm in Scotland did help in the training! we had loads of sheep and 4 dogs that were working.

[LizzygotDizzy]

Point taken PGC - I get really annoyed when parents are too busy doing their own sh*t to keep an eye on their kids too. Mine is well trained but I still think of other people who may be alarmed whilst out in busy public places.

[Dulwich_ Park_ Fairy]

Some unbelievably inane stuff being written on this thread. The bottom-line is that if you think that your dog is potentially a threat to children (whether provoked or unprovoked, whether the kids were being properly supervised or not) then don't let it run loose in a busy public park. Dogs do not, and never will have, priority over children in public spaces, not even children who have flaky parents and therefore apparently deserve to get bitten......