Diablo

Nothing is clear in your posts. You don't go to jail for fondling strange dogs, so still waiting for an answer to my question Now add to that, stealing or using other people's property doesn't equate either I will leave you to your strange ponderings before my brain melts. Try this one Gareth..........if it doesn't belong to you...........leave it alone, keep your hands off it

There is too many versions of this incident to really know.............it's been suggested also that the child hit her face on the floor and the dog didn't touch her???

I fondle other people's dogs all the time. I would in no way place it in the same category as fondling the dog's owner! Then you fondle someone else's dog uninvited to do so at your own risk You missed the point. As I stated, I would love to know how you can equate fondling a strange dog to interfering with/fondling a strange person I made that clear to begin with Gareth..........dog's deserve their personal space plus...........they are someone elses belonging. Do you see a nice car parked on the side of the road and jump in to see how it feels behind the wheel???........of course not and the same applies with someone else's dog which is not for the general public's pleasure.

I fondle other people's dogs all the time. I would in no way place it in the same category as fondling the dog's owner! Then you fondle someone else's dog uninvited to do so at your own risk ;) Rule one when i was a child. YOU NEVER TOUCH someone's dog, unless they say you can! whatever happened to good manners. as well not all dogs think everyone is their new best friend. our first chihuahua chippie, i couldnt belive the behavour of total strangers. we would be out shopiing with him in either a handbag or carried in our arms and total stangers would walk up and even without making eye contact, start patting him on the head. his neck was taking the shock, the inpact was so much that it went right through him into my arm as well my arm would be aching by the time we got back to the car. his poor little head would be slammed into his shoulders, over and over again. lucky he didnt have a molera. he took it in good humour for about 2 years. till one day he decided enough is enough. the next hand that came at him was greeted with a full mouth of snarling teeth. he had had enough. embarrassing as it was, he took up "smiling" at all and sundry, and we were finally left to do our shopping in peace. That's exactly what I was taught as a child and still applies to this day with me The amount of times on walks I have had kids charge up to us wanting to pat my dog where I have had to tell then in a stern voice NO NO you can't pat my dog........my boy tolorates strangers and I wouldn't take the chance with strange kids. I have watched these kids approach the next dog walker in the same fashion and their parents just allow them to do it???

Speaking of dogs in work places, a friend of ours had a mechanical workshop and a Doberman bitch they took to work each day. The dog had her bed in the corner of the workshop that she would lie on and was chained up at various times through the day to prevent her escaping out the door. One day, a customer of theirs who's car was in the workshop on the hoist arrived with his 3 or 4 year old daughter to pick up his car. Seeing the car still on the hoist and wanting to enquire with the mechanic working on it as to when it would be ready to go, with his daughter, they lifted the chain across the doorway that had as sign attached, "strictly no admittance, all enquiries to office" and proceeded into the workshop. The little girl spotted the dog yelling out "oh doggy" she ran directly towards it. The Dobe sprang up and lunged aggressively at the approaching child reaching the end of it's chain about an inch from the little girl's face, obviously a scary scene and moment for everyone involved. The child's father yelled and carried on like a pork chop blaming the dog's owner for his daughter's "near miss". The point was, he shouldn't have been in the workshop and ignored the signs, and secondly, he should have taught his daughter how to behave around strange dogs and had better parental control of her in the first place. You can't always safeguard a dog against parental irresponsibility.

I fondle other people's dogs all the time. I would in no way place it in the same category as fondling the dog's owner! Then you fondle someone else's dog uninvited to do so at your own risk

I don't think what happened to your child in the coffee shop Slk, is what happened in the hair salon where the dog approached the child to bite her???. A dog biting an innocent child doesn't automatically deem the dog's at fault. It's up to the parents to teach a child how to behave around other peoples dogs like I was taught to leave them alone.

I agree Dog's deserve the right to their own personal space and too many times, people just can't resist the temptation not to leave other people's dogs alone. Public place or not, you can't interfere with another person...........you can't walk into a hair salon and fondle a hairdresser that takes your fancy.........why should anyone believe they have the rights to fondle someone elses dog then scream if the dog reacts???. I was taught from a very early age that we had our own dog to pat and to leave other peoples dogs alone.

Hi Moosmum, I didn't respond to what you had written, at the time of adding to Kristina's post I hadn't read your post...........I apologise if my post appeared to have contradicted your experiences which wasn't the intention Dogs are extremely intelligent creatures........one can never know the extent of their abilities good or bad, but many a time have we had discussions about dogs protecting when needed, and many believe that their dog will. Someone had a working line GSD and was attacked by a drunken offender and the dog ran away and deserted them in a time of need???. A GSD is a renowned protection breed that ran away was the basis of the thread. I can't speak for other breeds, but from my experience with GSD's the natural untrained protectors are generally aggressive towards anything outside of their family/pack, sharp and alert and willing to chase away or attack to eliminate threats which can be towards anything that doesn't belong in their territory. Expose them to a public street or park and the entire area becomes their territory with a natural reaction to chase away anyone who appears giving the perception of wanting to bite everyone and are difficult to control and train to behave for the inexperienced owners. The training of the natural protector is teaching them not to react and behave through extreme obedience conditioning. The softer more friendly GSD's can't be relied upon to react untrained and most will run away if challenged. You certainly know if a GSD is natural protector as most of your training efforts are teaching them not to react........they are a serious handful of dog to control.

Furthermore to what Kristina has mentioned, people will tell us about their own dog or a dog they know/knew supposed to be a terrific protection dog that will step up to the plate in defence if a threat arises and in the mean time, possess all the magical traits of a therapy dog from a childrens hospital, loves everyone, welcomes strangers in and plays with all the neighbourhood kids. What a super dog that we would all love to own, but the truth is, these dogs rarely exist if at all. Dogs with the fighting courage that will defend and bite for real are not easy dogs to handle and takes experience to train and mould them to behave around strangers and in a public place. It takes time and consistant training to create a true protection dog which is not an easy process to attain. There are no untrained natural protectors that possess the qualities that some people lead us to believe. The love everyone friendly happy pet will run away in the crunch, and the natural protector untrained will be locked away not trusting what and when he may consider to be a threat and react unpredictably. There may be these magical super dogs that you hear of, but I am yet to ever see or find one in 27 years of owning and training GSD's.

If the kid fell onto the dog, he could have reacted out of pain/surprise. Why should he have a DD order on him if that was the situation? Under SA legislation, it would be clear cut case of provocation. It makes no difference if the child fell onto the dog or intentionally pulled it's tail, the dog was mistreated and reacted. The dog has the right to sit in peace without being hurt or startled by misadventure. Because the victim was a defenceless child, doesn't make the dog anymore at fault in the circumstances.

Good post Nannas, that summerises the situation very well, I agree

Being a SMART ASS ain't going to get you anywhere For the record I ain't got rose coloured glasses on, and neither am I In denial of anything! The APBT brigade as you call it, know their breed, know their history and know what they are capable of doing in the wrong hands! Now you tell me how Is that In any shape or form being in denial?? They also know that a well bred well socialized and trained APBT make great family pets, and have done so In many generations. Tell us what they are capable of doing in the wrong hands RottnBullies, educate me on the subject, no one else is very forthcoming on that issue..............it's generally, oh it couldn't be a Pit, how did they determine breed, all the cover up's imaginable which amounts to denial. So now is your chance for some transparency into the APBT, lets hear it please

Hmmmm, that puts an interesting spin on things ...........no one actually saw or heard a reaction from the dog and an assumption has been made???. A dog is an animal and can't be 100% predictable in it's behaviour at all times which is true, but any good responsible owner spending all day and every day with their dog in a hair dressing salon being a constant meeting place for strangers of all different shapes, sizes and ages, the dog owner would have a fairly good idea how the dog reacts and behaves. No one in their right mind would keep a dog in a salon that had a history of aggression or nastiness and if the dog has been there for a few years, it would have reacted previously...........someone would know if it has aggressed before and has a story to tell about the dog which hasn't been forthcoming.........only support for the dog with claims of docility. In the circumstances, the dog should be released and an order if it's not already in place that dogs in a work place of public access must be islolated in my opinion. Ultimately, they need conclusive evidence that the childs injuries was in fact inflicted by the dog and not as suggested from contact with a marble floor/steps etc. As for impounding the dog and locking it away............that's just plain cruelty and could ruin a dog suddenly forced to live in that environment. Either the dog is aggressive or it's not which can be determined by the ranger in 30secs

In SA, you can keep restricted breeds, must be desexed and can't be bred, leashed and muzzled in public with a dangerous dog sign on your gate.

No denial. No debate needed. I have stated in previous posts that they have to be watched with strange dogs and other animals. Their are exceptions, but mostly that is the rule with the APBT and AmStaff and to a lesser extent the SBT. So what? I'm surprised you haven't picked on my beloved Rotties. Did you know they rank consistantly high up in the attack per capita lists. Higher than Pit Bulls. But then so do many other breeds. Like I said no denial here. WHAT SORT OF BREED DO YOU OWN??? Be honest and up front. What annoys me with the majority of APBT owners and supporters is the rose coloured glasses they wear for the breed which is denial, no question or debate. I love GSD's which can also be bloody dangerous dogs in the wrong hands without effective training and are not nice gentle souls that love everyone, like the APBT brigade try and lead everyone to believe with their breed of choice. Of course with a well bred APBT, well trained and owned by responsible people there will be some terrific dogs and trustworthy family pets that don't deserve to be effected by BSL, but there are also some horrible examples of the breed out there attractive to people who want to own a dangerous dog and choose the APBT for the wrong reasons to contend with too. I don't like hearing of GSD attacks either, but in the wrong hands for the wrong reasons, they can be very dangerous, but seriously, if the desire is to get anywhere with the APBT and BSL, a charade of how wonderful the breed is and how out of character it is for a fighting dog to fight etc etc, is really a stupid argument. The "TRUTH" along with open education about the breed would have in my opinion a greater chance of being addressed in a manner of some credability. The GSD was once a banned breed and their supporters got off their bums and promoted the breed heavily in a favourable light with patience and dedication to lift the ban sucessfully. The APBT supporters could do the same if they had the motivation to do so???. No one is in denial, what's with the rose coloured glasses thats just a joke. As for fighting BSL its all going good maybe you should take some time to read my posts and website .. Any breed can be dangerous in the wrong hands."ANY BREED'' tybrax Great Tybrax, PM me when you overturn the BSL

No denial. No debate needed. I have stated in previous posts that they have to be watched with strange dogs and other animals. Their are exceptions, but mostly that is the rule with the APBT and AmStaff and to a lesser extent the SBT. So what? I'm surprised you haven't picked on my beloved Rotties. Did you know they rank consistantly high up in the attack per capita lists. Higher than Pit Bulls. But then so do many other breeds. Like I said no denial here. WHAT SORT OF BREED DO YOU OWN??? Be honest and up front. What annoys me with the majority of APBT owners and supporters is the rose coloured glasses they wear for the breed which is denial, no question or debate. I love GSD's which can also be bloody dangerous dogs in the wrong hands without effective training and are not nice gentle souls that love everyone, like the APBT brigade try and lead everyone to believe with their breed of choice. Of course with a well bred APBT, well trained and owned by responsible people there will be some terrific dogs and trustworthy family pets that don't deserve to be effected by BSL, but there are also some horrible examples of the breed out there attractive to people who want to own a dangerous dog and choose the APBT for the wrong reasons to contend with too. I don't like hearing of GSD attacks either, but in the wrong hands for the wrong reasons, they can be very dangerous, but seriously, if the desire is to get anywhere with the APBT and BSL, a charade of how wonderful the breed is and how out of character it is for a fighting dog to fight etc etc, is really a stupid argument. The "TRUTH" along with open education about the breed would have in my opinion a greater chance of being addressed in a manner of some credability. The GSD was once a banned breed and their supporters got off their bums and promoted the breed heavily in a favourable light with patience and dedication to lift the ban sucessfully. The APBT supporters could do the same if they had the motivation to do so???.

The salon dog is not a truely dangerous dog for the simple reason that you couldn't keep a dangerous dog in a salon as it would go everyone who walked in left unsupervised to roam around. If the dog has never reacted aggressively towards the amount of strangers that a salon would encounter for several years of it being there, the dog sounds of stable temperament. Perhaps the child may have interfered with the dog.........did the child do something to provoke the dog prior to the attack and the dog was wary of her and snapped on the second encounter..........too much information is missing to form any credible judgement on the situation. Children poke at and annoy dogs just as much as a dog will snap in retaliation???. It's sensationalism that an unpredictable aggressive dog suddenly tore an innocent little girl's face apart in an unprovoked attack.............but she could have poked her finger in the dog's eye when he approached for a pat........we don't know that???

I disagree. Why? From the latest information, the child wasn't near the dog, and there may not have even been food. So a dog can get up, approach a child and attack and there still isn't anything wrong with the dog? When kids annoy dogs and get a snap I don't think the dog should be blamed, but in what way do you think this is acceptable behaviour for any dog? Are you saying the child provoked the dog just by being there? What happens the next time the dog doesn't like the look of someone standing near it? All the published media information claimed that the child approached the dog.........someone says otherwise, but we don't really know what happened for sure and certain???.

Have just checked the Yellow Pages listings for hairdressers. Cant find one in there that says "We have a loose dog here - don't bring children". Get real Diablo - the dog was not supposed to be there! Souff Only the law determines if the dog should have been there or not. As far as I aware, there are no laws preventing it and no breach has occurred in that regard. There are also complex laws regarding what is defined as a public place as the dog was contained in it's own premises. Customers have the choice to assume that the dog should be ok or that it may not be and have the choice to either accept the conditions of entry or chose another salon........pro-active risk assessment is the point of my post Souff???. Personally, I have absolutely no trust whatsoever with dogs I don't know and would assess the risk accordingly. For the record, we have taken our dog/s to work for 20 years but they are isolated from public areas to prevent any possibilities of unsupervised misbehaviour.

The other side of the coin is that people can make some risk assessments for themselves too. We can all blame the dog owner for the incident but there is no necessity for anyone to expose a toddler to a salon with a dog???. If the dog belongs there and wanders around amoungst the customers..........there has to be some form of common sense to use that salon at your own risk. Laying blame and the dog being PTS is too late to undo the trauma that the poor little girl suffered.

There could be enough angle to save the dogs life, but at a risk assessment level the shop owner hasn't addressed the situation effectively with a dog loose in the salon which is effectively a public place. To be safe with dogs in the workplace, they need to be kept in an area restricted to the public.

That's like the coke can test Nek, step on and squash a can next to the puppies. The one's that startle and bolt.........we don't want them, the one's who shy away then come back for a look or even pick up the squashed can is the better prospect. Old school temperament test ;)

Good post, I agree

That really depends on the laws if the dog should have been there or not. If the law in that area prevents dogs being in the workplace accessable by the public the dog owner has breached the law. If not, the situation is arguable.