SPAM This thread is for random spam!!

[Moriath]

Well, dogs don't just snap for no reason, generally if they have been brought up in a family environment they're quite soft/playful so I've got no idea what caused it to do what it did to the girl. I can only assume it wasn't treated right or the girl was really annoying it in which case the parents should have stepped in and told her to stop it.... either way the dog itself is huge, looking at that picture it could have fit most of the girl in its mouth its so big in comparison.

And as above they only had the dog for four weeks no way i would leave a kid smaller than a dog without knowing for sure what it could do.

 

[BloodOmen]

And as above they only had the dog for four weeks no way i would leave a kid smaller than a dog without knowing for sure what it could do.

4 weeks? christ, no telling where it came from, it could have been violently abused with its previous owners.

 

[Billargh]

I'm so confused.

 

[Scouse]

dogs don't normally just snap for no reason - just like humans - but they can

Fixed.

 

[soze]

I am. It's a tragic accident. The parents can't suffer much more really...

I agree poor judgement in buying maybe the wrong dog. But no intent has to mean no crime.

 

[Scouse]

no intent has to mean no crime.

Funny. This dog law has been brought in to prosecute people who's dogs kill children. Are you saying that there are enough people who intend their dogs to kill children to be worth a new law?

 

[Lamp]

The big fella could have just not retaliated...

 

[ileks]

 

[Scouse]

The big fella could have just not retaliated...

If a bloke had hit him then you'd have said "why not"?

Why should a woman get off scott free? If he'd been a small guy would that have been ok?

Equality.

 

[Lamp]

I love that gunpowdery/ozone/earthy/sulphurous smell from fireworks

Gunpowder mmmm....

 

[rynnor]

4 weeks? christ, no telling where it came from, it could have been violently abused with its previous owners.

And crossed with what? I would not take a dog that large into the house with unknown temperament and let my kids climb all over it (as you can see in the pics) or leave them alone with it - its just basic common sense.

I think some sentence as a deterrent to others would be a fair idea - people should not get giant fighting breed dogs as household pets - they had probably never walked it and it was going nuts with boredom tbh.

 

[Raven]

Deterrences or making examples of people don't work on Darren and Trace.

 

[rynnor]

'Looking after the dog for a friend' apparently - why does this happen to be the case in so many of these fatality stories?

 

[Moriath]

I agree poor judgement in buying maybe the wrong dog. But no intent has to mean no crime.

What happens if the child killed isn't theirs like inthe previous one ? They get away free and the child's parents suffer?

You need one rule to cover all. I think the be responsible for your pet is good. Fuck off you have a tiger as a pet you expect to be responsible for it and not have ppl in with it why not a dog that can be lethal too ?

You can't legislate for ever eventuality someone is going to lose some where but you have to protect the most people you can.

 

[Moriath]

Funny. This dog law has been brought in to prosecute people who's dogs kill children. Are you saying that there are enough people who intend their dogs to kill children to be worth a new law?

Not dogs who kill children, dogs who attack people on private property. As apposed to a park. Get your facts right or shut the fuck up!

 

[Ch3tan]

And crossed with what? I would not take a dog that large into the house with unknown temperament and let my kids climb all over it (as you can see in the pics) or leave them alone with it - its just basic common sense.

I think some sentence as a deterrent to others would be a fair idea - people should not get giant fighting breed dogs as household pets - they had probably never walked it and it was going nuts with boredom tbh.

A Bordeaux is not a fighting breed. Media bull, scouse is spot on with this, this new law does nothing to target the fighting dog breeders and irresponsible owners who raise protection dogs and banned breeds. This is simply another law to appease the brainwashed masses and win cheap votes.

 

[soze]

Funny. This dog law has been brought in to prosecute people who's dogs kill children. Are you saying that there are enough people who intend their dogs to kill children to be worth a new law?

To specifically kill children no. But a dog is a product of its upbringing. If you raise it to be super aggressive be it for dog fighting or just as a chavy attack dog and it kills a kid. It is a consequence on your actions.

 

[soze]

A Bordeaux is not a fighting breed. Media bull, scouse is spot on with this, this new law does nothing to target the fighting dog breeders and irresponsible owners who raise protection dogs and banned breeds. This is simply another law to appease the brainwashed masses and win cheap votes.

As before the law dose nothing of the sort mate. It opens the door up so they can charge fighting dog breeders. It is not a mandatory charge.

 

[Ch3tan]

As before the law dose nothing of the sort mate. It opens the door up so they can charge fighting dog breeders. It is not a mandatory charge.

There have been various programs in the past about the breeders, like the dog fighting clubs they operate outside of the law and won't care. This law will only ever target unfortunate dog owners whose dogs simply lose it.

If I had a fighting dog then it wouldn't be tagged and no one should be able to prove it was mine if it killed or attacked someone.

 

[Job]

Simples..just start breeding all dogs to have blunt teeth

 

[old.Tohtori]

I will have to go and agree on posts later, my views; - Dogs crimes aren't people crimes. - Dogs can have mental issues. - Bordeaux doggies aren't "big bad burly dogs", they're actually rather cuddly.

On the fella hitting the woman/girl; Feel free to retaliate on your own accord, i wouldn't hit a woman still(nor am i violent at all), but not judging his call either.

 

[old.Tohtori]

On a sidenote; fallout 1 done, fallout 2 in the barrel.

 

[soze]

There have been various programs in the past about the breeders, like the dog fighting clubs they operate outside of the law and won't care. This law will only ever target unfortunate dog owners whose dogs simply lose it.

If I had a fighting dog then it wouldn't be tagged and no one should be able to prove it was mine if it killed or attacked someone.

There have been plenty of programs where they go and find 15 dogs in a house they are fighting dogs and all they can charge the guy with is cruelty to animals. It is the people trying to tackle these idiots that wanted the law changed. And until you see Mr and Mrs Unfortunate go to prison because their 10 year old Alsatian that has previously one Docile Dog of the Year 8 years running kills a kid that kicked it 10 times you have no idea who this law will target.

 

[soze]

What happens if the child killed isn't theirs like inthe previous one ? They get away free and the child's parents suffer?

You need one rule to cover all. I think the be responsible for your pet is good. Fuck off you have a tiger as a pet you expect to be responsible for it and not have ppl in with it why not a dog that can be lethal too ?

You can't legislate for ever eventuality someone is going to lose some where but you have to protect the most people you can.

I do not think you can have owners who bought the wrong doing being charged the same as a guy who bought a Dangerous Dog and trained it to fight. They are different situations and need to be looked at as separate cases.

 

[Mabs]

and this is why i am not a "dog person", ive never known a cat snap and maul a small child

/shrug, they bring it on themselves, feel a bit sorry for the weens, 'adults' should know better

 

[old.Tohtori]

They get away free and the child's parents suffer?

Opens up an interesting side question; does there really have to be punishment, or justice, to all horrible events?

and this is why i am not a "dog person", ive never known a cat snap and maul a small child

Cats get violent too, more so then pet dogs i'd say, they just can't do sh*t.

 

[soze]

Opens up an interesting side question; does there really have to be punishment, or justice, to all horrible events?

No. If you are doing 20mph down a 30mph road and a 3 year old kids slips out of his harness and runs in front of you only to die under your car. That is tragic and horrible but no one should do time for that.

 

[rynnor]

A Bordeaux is not a fighting breed. Media bull, scouse is spot on with this, this new law does nothing to target the fighting dog breeders and irresponsible owners who raise protection dogs and banned breeds. This is simply another law to appease the brainwashed masses and win cheap votes.

Its not a Bordeux though - its a cross with something unknown - possibly a pit bull type by the look of it - that would make it a banned type.

 

[rynnor]

and this is why i am not a "dog person", ive never known a cat snap and maul a small child

/shrug, they bring it on themselves, feel a bit sorry for the weens, 'adults' should know better

Not fatally just due to size but many people are attacked by cats.

 

[Scouse]

Not dogs who kill children, dogs who attack people on private property. As apposed to a park. Get your facts right or shut the fuck up!

Dogs who attack people on private property whilst their owners are in Spain on holiday.

I guess if you own a dog you can't reasonably go on holiday now - for fear that your mutt may act completely out of character and use it's independent mind and decide that little rachel would look better in little bits.

To specifically kill children no. But a dog is a product of its upbringing. If you raise it to be super aggressive be it for dog fighting or just as a chavy attack dog and it kills a kid. It is a consequence on your actions.

The law doesn't say "only prosecute people who've brought their dogs up to be super aggressive - and which will prove they're chavs".

Also - how could you possibly prove in court beyond reasonable doubt that owners have "trained a dog to fight"? I'm pretty sure that's not part of the law either.

If the owners get done for this whilst they're on holiday it will be a miscarriage of justice.

Lets be honest here. As @Ch3tan said - the law has been brought in to placate the idiot masses who hate chavs with ugly dogs.