Thursday, August 18, 2011

A Confluence of Animals

I am absolutely horrified when I hear of a parent reversing their car over one of their own children and killing them. It happens often enough. If it was me, I think I would kill myself because of the guilt. It would surely be an experience for a parent to endure that is beyond imagination.

But in the same basket I would add your four year old child clinging to your leg and being mauled by a dog until she was dead. That happened in Melbourne yesterday. I may well have some mother readers. Can you even imagine that?

Our state government makes sound noises in response, increased penalties lala lala lala.

It is not hard. Ban these dog breeds. Oh, it has been done already, but in a typical politician way. The breed was banned, but not the cross breeds.

Big powerful and potentially killer dogs have no place in our present society. Even my most ocker Tradie Brother is rather fond of little yappers and he is about to see his second Lab to death at an old age.

I just looked at my post back in 2009 about the same matter. I think it is great to encourage people to write, never mind how bad their writing is. I don't dis people for bad writing, but for once I shall snobbishly elevate myself in a superior manner, so do read the ill educated comments from the working class who don't work and have a packet of Winnie cigs stuck up their tee shirt sleeves and may just own one of these dog types.

Oh, the confluence. The confluence became bigger after I started to write this post and I spoke to Sister. Explain later.

11 comments:

  1. I agree with the person from the 2009 comments who said something about extensions. I could be mistaken but most of the mean dogs seem to be owned by males of the not so bright macho type.

    On the other hand, I've never understood how people can leave their kids in the car, back up over them, or be anywhere close to one of those dogs. I think for most mothers, your child is like an extension of yourself and you simply don't forget them. Ever.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Andrew, did read the comments on your previous post. Oh dear. Reminds me of the bumper sticker "guns don't kill people, but I do".
    "Other people's dogs bite but mine don't. I'm also the only person I know who can do drugs and alcohol and drive along Lygon Street at 160kmh without hurting anybody. I and my dogs are the exception to any rule."

    The biggest problem with these breeds and x breeds is not that SOME lose it occasionally, it is that when they attack their jaw locks and it is impossible for even the dog to let go. Other breeds can also be obnoxious but if they are in attack mode a desperate swift kick will give a child a fighting chance.

    It could be said the problem is not the dogs but owners who don't contain them, but unfortunately even a secured dog can turn on its own family. Saw a dog turn on a good owner once and later discovered the dog was riddled with cancer. I don't blame the dog but it's a reminder we all have a legal obligation to allow for reasonable possibilities.
    Gosh, I've even lost my composure myself once or twice.

    Every time I read about dog attacks it makes me sick to the pit of my stomach [no pun intended].

    ReplyDelete
  3. I really don't know why parents have pets (of any type) around children.

    Do kids truely listen to their parents?

    Do pets even KNOW what their owners are talking about all the time?

    We can kid (sorry bad pun) ourselves that we are in control of every/any situation but the reality is, kids so not listen to parents, and certainly not pets either.

    We need to get rid of that god complex just because we're 'supposedly' on top of the food chain.

    We do die too.

    Regards
    Michael

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hello Andrew:
    Although in the UK there is much talk of banning these dangerous dogs it always seems to us that there are plenty of them out and about, often handled by a particular type of owner whom you describe so well here.

    Some people just seem to be beyond the law without much thought for others at all. The recent riots in the UK are testament to this we fear.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Andrew, I'm with you on this; I don't know how that mother is going to get up out of bed today, tomorrow and forever more.
    My normal route to work used to be over the West Gate bridge and after Darcey Freeman lost her life from the bridge, that incident was frequently on my mind when I'd cross the bridge; I don't know how she goes on either.
    At least those two mothers have other children, and you can't fall over when there are others relying on you. What about Farquarson (sp?) the pig who drove his 3 boys into a dam and let them drown?
    It just makes me sad. Absolutely sad. And I know I've focussed on the parent part of your blog, not the dog part, but that is the focus for me; how does the parent move on?
    As for the dog/dogs/breed - I don't like these sorts of dogs, never have. And we always had dogs when I was a kid, but you were always told to be careful and not do certain things around them and etc. That poor little soul did not stand a chance against that horrid creature.
    And again I come back to her mother. So very sad.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Oh, sure...explain later! (smile)
    I stopped by from Linda's blog at her suggestion.

    Through a friend of a friend thing, I know someone who did back over his grandson. I cannot imagine the pain, guilt, etc..
    ~Mary

    ReplyDelete
  7. I do not smoke Winnie Blues, Reds or even Horizon 50s; but I own two large dogs, one is of the dangerous breed that was 'green dreamed' by a commentor in your earlier post. I suppose that makes me one of those inbred hick types?

    Now to this ridiculous notion that small yappers are somehow less dangerous. Erm... no they're not. They are nervous little runts and can be quite snappy. They're capable of causing major injuries to a child.

    Golden rule with kids and dogs - never leave children unnattended with dogs. Any dog, whatever its size, has the capability of maiming a small child.

    Also, large dogs are not the problem. Idiot owners are the problem.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Linda, I think if you have a few young kids, it might be hard to keep tabs on them all at once, but around cars, you really need to. Yes, I expect our owners of such dogs are similar to yours.

    FruitCake, I wasn't aware of the jaw locking. It is very much the potential of such dogs and the damage they can do.

    Quite true Michael. We are smart, but not invincible.

    Same in the UK then JayLa. I really don't understand why they aren't banned. I can't see a government losing votes over it.

    Raelene, it is just awful that some people can do that to innocent children. Of course then there was that beautiful boy Daniel Morcombe too. One cardinal rule around dogs was to not go near them when they were eating. I just had to discover the danger for myself though, hence a scar on my little finger.

    Hi Mary. Welcome. It must be awful.

    I simply cannot agree that a small dog is as dangerous. Yes, we have all experienced nasty snappy little dogs, but I know what size and breed of dog I would rather get bitten by. Idiot owners may well be the problem but sadly they have not and will not breed themselves out of existence and it will be an ongoing problem.

    ReplyDelete
  9. There's a few assumptions being made in the comments here, let's clear one of them up. The dog was not owned by the family of the child. It ran in through their open door, a house they were living in because a few months earlier their own house burned down and they lost everything. The poor mother, whilst her child was being ripped from her, was screaming to the owners to get the dog, the owners merely called the dogs name and did not intervene. This is after they fled from Sudan. The whole thing is highly distressing & it makes me completely sick to think about it. As if that family had not had enough fleeing from their home country.

    All dogs have the capacity to be dangerous. I think a law should be passed that makes it a criminal offence for the owner if their dog attacks another person. Currently it is not.

    Dangerous dog breeds and crosses such as this dog are bound by tight restrictions. Unfortunately these are enforced by local councils who may or may not do their job.

    These dogs are meant to be kept in an enclosure in the yard at all times, with a sign on the fence saying a dangerous breed is present. They are also to be muzzled when out in public, as well as being sterilised and micro chipped. It is also illegal to import these dogs from interstate or overseas.

    Unfortunately a lot of owners of such breeds are not exactly responsible. The Govt is talking about a dob in a dangerous dog hotline, and I support that fully. How else are they meant to know where these dogs live?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Where's a smart lawyer when you need one? Is there some way to prove some liability, given the circumstances of trespass, negligence, lack of control etc etc?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Fen, I did not pick up that people weren't aware that it was not the family's dog. Thanks. I should have linked it to a newspaper.

    I can't generally agree with the dog attack criminal offence if it is a first offence. A dog has to offend first before it can be judged. If someone is aware of the vicious character of their dog, then that is a different matter. I was once bitten by a dog when I was a kid. It was a stray and I went near it when it was eating. My fault. My own dog bit me once when he got stuck in the catflap and I was trying to free him.

    There is little incentive for local councils to pursue the issue. Some only react. Imagine how many dangerous dogs there might be in City of Brimbank.

    I too like the idea of a hotline so that the data is quickly available to all authorities.

    Red, I would be surprise if a smart lawyer has not been in contact already. But if the owner fits the steorotype, no blood from a stone.

    ReplyDelete

Whenever I wish I was young again, I am sobered by memories of algebra.