Sunday May 27, 2012

JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION

Should dog owners be prosecuted if their animal attacks someone?

Poll Aug. 22, 2011 - 03:40AM JST ( 40 )

Order by Time Order by Popularity

40 Comments

-4

noriyosan73Aug. 22, 2011 - 11:20AM JST

Absolutely. Weird people hide behind the strength of a dog. People do not understand how strong the jaws of a dog can be. This problem must be stopped now, otherwise it will not b safe to walk down a street. California is a perfect example. Since Japan does not allow handguns, it will be necessary to carry a large knife just to walk on public streets.
7

cleoAug. 22, 2011 - 11:42AM JST

I voted Yes, but let's be sensible. A vicious pit-bull allowed to roam free terrorising the hood is a whole different ball-game to a dog that tries to protect his master's property or person from a would-be burglar intruding uninvited into the home.

This problem must be stopped now, otherwise...

It's not that much of a problem in Japan. You very, very rarely see dogs off lead in the street here, and a 'status' dog here is an expensive little toy that will fit into a handbag, not a great drooling Cerberus barely under control. Japan is thankfully not California. It will never in our lifetimes be 'necessary to carry a large knife just to walk on public streets'.

People who carry large knives on public streets with the intention of harming law-abiding dogs should be prosecuted.
1

timeonAug. 22, 2011 - 11:54AM JST

similar stance with Cleo's. if the dog does something "illegal", such as attacking somebody on the street, getting on somebody's property and causing damage, etc., the owner should be liable. However, as with humans, if the dog is defending his property from an intruder, or defending his owner from an attack, the situation is different. as it is with humans
3

WeaselAug. 22, 2011 - 12:25PM JST

The notion of accountability of one's actions is is still a radical concept, even in the 21st century.
-6

Laurie AshwellAug. 22, 2011 - 04:32PM JST

The knee jerk answer is YES... but let's take a moment to think about the question. It doesn't define 'attack'. Of course, if it was a dangerous dog, not being handled safely in public, my answer would be yes. But would you prosecute someone if they were taking care of a rescue dog which had been abused, and keeping it locked up safely, it suddenly mauled a thief who broke into the house of an owner. Or even a well behaved dog that attacked someone in public because they were trying to give it a good kicking? The question is not defined well enough to give an answer.

Personally, I think all pit bulls and rott weilers should be destroyed, even if they havent attacked anyone. Viscious killers.
2

johninnahaAug. 22, 2011 - 07:44PM JST

How is it possible to answer YES or NO to this?

Supposing someone goads or teases the dog, gets bitten and then screams blue murder?

Or a dog bites a burglar entering a house.

And there are the obvious cases where the owner is clearly at fault.

I thought that was why we had a justice system - to apportion blame.

There should be a third possibility:

IT DEPENDS
5

hatsoffAug. 22, 2011 - 08:46PM JST

My answer is yes.

And I made up my own question: Should dog owners who dress their dogs up in 'cute' clothes and push them around in baby buggies be prosecuted? I vote yes for that too.
2

VirtuosoAug. 22, 2011 - 09:26PM JST

Likewise, people who abuse animals should also be prosecuted, their suffering animals impounded and sent to new keepers, and their future right to own animals permanently denied.
1

cleoAug. 22, 2011 - 10:05PM JST

Supposing someone goads or teases the dog, gets bitten and then screams blue murder?

It's the owner's responsibility to see to it that the dog does not get goaded or teased. If the dog is out in public then it should be under supervision, ie the or other responsible adult is there to protect the public from the dog and to protect the dog from the public.

Do not let idiots goad or tease your dog.
1

cleoAug. 22, 2011 - 10:06PM JST

ahem.

'the owner or other responsible adult'
-1

JapanGalAug. 23, 2011 - 12:07AM JST

@Laurie....people do not understand the meaning of rescue dog. They think it is a hero dog rather than a dog some kind family rescued from the shot to death. Fill them in. URL also
-1

astrogaijinAug. 23, 2011 - 01:52AM JST

The owner should know if the dog bites or not and if it does they should acomidate it so that it can not bite anyone. It should also have been trained not to bite and it is the onwers fault for not teaching this to the dog. The dog can not help it, its in its instincts to bite things and if it was not taught to not do it then you can not blame it. It is the owners fault for not correctly, or at all, teaching the dog.
-1

Greapper1Aug. 23, 2011 - 12:22PM JST

If you don't properly train your pet and it attacks someone you should definitely be liable.
-3

johninnahaAug. 24, 2011 - 12:05AM JST

Gosh, judging by the number of votes, this is a poll that seems to have grabbed the attention of the readers! (sarcasm)
1

ReformedBasherAug. 24, 2011 - 10:01AM JST

@cleo

I agree with your first comment completely.

Still feel very bad about my comments regarding the little girl who got killed the other day. I don't know what the exact chain of events were but I hope the owner meets suitable justice.
0

CosAug. 24, 2011 - 11:06AM JST

Sounds like a trivia pursuit question. The right answer is yes, no other way. You are responsible for any of your "properties", pets, minor kids, objects. Judges will decide if you did the necessary or not.

The problem in Japan is the law is not enforced. A dog owner in my mansion has been condemmned (in last appeal, she lost all appeals) to paying 30 million yen of damages. She has paid zero so far. It's local court. They do nothing to force her, only send her letters. And that was a "no dog" mansion from the time it was built. There was no legal way to force her to abide at any time.

Thanks to people like her, in a not too far future, there will be dog-free towns where bringing a dog will be declared totally illegal.
-1

Laurie AshwellAug. 24, 2011 - 11:25PM JST

People aren't allowed to keep tigers, so why are they allowed to keep pitbulls? Surely they could have been satisfied with a nice docile labrador? The answer to this whole problem is not through prosecution of the owners of dangerous dog attacks, that is still never gonna stop these attacks from happening. The debate should be over whether the breeding and, eventually, the keeping of dangerous dogs - Rotters, Pitbulls, Japanese Tosas - should be illegal or not.

The owners will always believe they are responsible owners until young Fido sees his chance and rips the throat out of the family's 2 year toddler.

Give a dog a bone, but preferably not one still inside a human being.
0

Laurie AshwellAug. 24, 2011 - 11:40PM JST

A rescue dog is a dog which has been abused by its owners - probably kicked around the living room, sat on, deprived of food, and then chucked out the car window when it pooed over the sunday roast in nervous agitation. Consequently, the poor pooch became quite anti-social with people it doesn't trust.... AKA people it doesn't know. But when some charitable do-gooder decided to give it a home and give it love and attention good 'ol Fido got a second chance at doggy happiness. He loves his new owner, but still can't quite feel comfortable around strangers and so has a tendency to LASH OUT. His new owner keeps him well muzzled when out. But one day kind charitable owner has popped down the conbini for a pack of smokes and a fish sausage - half for himself and half for Fido - but during that time yankee high school drop out wannabe gangster breaks in looking to steal charitable owner's wife's panties. Fido goes nuts and bites off more than he can chew. yankee high school drop out wannabe gangster goes home crying to mama via the hospital. Would you prosecute Fido's owner? Probably not.

However, I guess the question posed above is not really meant to be about this situation. Possibly I'm trying to be a bit awkward.
1

Rick EarlyAug. 25, 2011 - 06:02AM JST

Time for the "YES" people to watch "Dog Whisperer" Cesar Millan on NatGeoWild.
0

Rick EarlyAug. 25, 2011 - 06:05AM JST

"A rescue dog is a dog which has been abused by its owners - probably kicked around the living room, sat on, deprived of food, and then chucked out the car window when it pooed over the sunday roast in nervous agitation."

Not true. A "Rescue" dog is a dog that has been rescued from Animal Control, Dog pound or adopted from specific animal or dog rescue groups. Many, many different animal rescue groups exist. Like Huskies? Shepards? Pugs? Jack Russells? There are rescue groups for most all breeds and just plain old mixed breeds too. Google it if you don't believe me.
1

Rick EarlyAug. 25, 2011 - 06:09AM JST

When are people going to learn? IT's not the breed. It's the owner who hasn't had the dog properly trained or the owner isn't properly trained on how to be a leader. Dogs gravitate toward a "Pack Leader". If you aren't the leader, the dog will assert him/herself as the leader. That's when you have trouble. No ones afraid of a yappy little Yorkie who is "asserting" and being aggressive. But multiply that by about a factor of 10 and you have an assertive and aggressive Pit or Rottie who scares the bejesus out of everyone. Again if you don't lead properly, the dog will in all cases. It's in their DNA.
0

GurukunAug. 25, 2011 - 01:25PM JST

Rick, Great point. I can't stand people that think pit bulls are born to maul people. I always say that it's not the breed, it's the owner. I've seen toy breeds more vicious then pit bulls.
1

It"S MEAug. 25, 2011 - 01:36PM JST

While it may not be the breed perse but certain breeds are bred for certain traits and thus more likely to act on them given the right circumstances.

Hence, I would never have a certain dogs/breeds with kids as they are not fitted for them, even though many people reckon they would be suitable.

But even more than the breed it depends on the owner and how he keeps and raises the dog but no amount of training/care will get rid of the underlying traits from the breeding process.
0

smithinjapanAug. 25, 2011 - 04:20PM JST

A resounding 'yes', although exceptions should be made if it's discovered the dog had some disease (ie. rabies, or some brain disease, or what have you) that suddenly set it off.
0

MariaAug. 25, 2011 - 04:26PM JST

I am assuming that the question refers to random, unprovoked attacks, and not in response to trespass, or in defense. And I vote Yes. Even when a dog is on a leash, I've seen people - strangers, kids even - approach to pat it, and the owners have done nothing to stop them. People should not try to touch a dog they don't know, and owners shouldn't let strangers pat their dogs.
-1

cleoAug. 25, 2011 - 05:22PM JST

exceptions should be made if it's discovered the dog had some disease (ie. rabies

In that case the owner should be prosecuted for failing to get the dog the annual rabies injections the law says they should have. There is NO reason for any dog in Japan to suddenly come down with rabies.
-2

tideofironAug. 25, 2011 - 06:07PM JST

I always walk my dog unleashed and it once nipped at a little girl who got too aggressive with her petting but there have never been any other problems. As long as you don't go provoking them and treat them with the proper respect, there should never be any problems with animals in the first place.
0

cleoAug. 25, 2011 - 06:24PM JST

tideofiron, it's your responsibility to protect your dog from 'aggressive' little girls as much as it is to protect little girls from your short-tempered dog.

As for walking your dog off-lead, I hope you live way out in the countryside where you can walk in the fields, well away from traffic. If not you're gambling your dog's life every time you take him out, because you cannnot guarantee that he will never decide to chase a cat across the road (yes, the cat shouldn't be out on the street, but ...) or that some fool will think it's funny to fire off a firecracker or BB gun or anything else that makes a loud noise and could panic him into the road.

If you love your dog, 'It should be OK' simply isn't good enough.
1

7777777Aug. 26, 2011 - 12:34AM JST

I voted no b/c it would be too limiting of a law. If the owner knows the dog bites or attacks ppl and does nothing to prevent this (no muzzle, no leach, makes no effort to stop the dog, or always takes the dog to a populated area rather than an isolated one), then if the dog attacked I would say prosecute the person because they knew the potential of the dog and did nothing to prevent it.

However, if the dog has never shown aggression and is a good natured dog with a responsible owner and the dog snaps for some unknown reason, I would not prosecute the owner. The owner would be responsible for any medical bills but this would not be a criminal offense.

Also, if the dog is not aggressive but someone showed aggression to the owner and the dog protected the owner or someone was provoking the dog and the dog bit the person, in either case I would not prosecute the owner because the provoking person is responsible for the attack. Owners have to be responsible but people also have to be responsible around dogs just like we have to be responsible around property. We cant let our kids jump around and climb on the shelves in the wine section of the grocery store lest the shelves fall over and our children get cut and injured from the broken wine bottles. Is it the grocery stores fault if our children are injured in such a case or our fault for letting our kids do this risky behavior around wine shelves? The same is with dogs. People can`t tease dogs or let their kids tease dogs or run up and jump on a dog without taking some risk. So the responsibility goes two ways.

Therefore, if you have a law that says a dog that bites or attacks another person the owner will be held criminally responsible, then there`s no room for looking at each case from a common sense standpoint. With laws we need to have room to look at the circumstances and use common sense before making a judgement or arrest.
0

7777777Aug. 26, 2011 - 01:01AM JST

"I can't stand people that think pit bulls are born to maul people. I always say that it's not the breed, it's the owner. I've seen toy breeds more vicious then pit bulls."

Gurukun, I completely agree with this. I once got a throw away pit bull who from an illegal dog fighting ring. One would think a dog from this background especially a pit bull should be put down with no exception but this was the sweetest dog in the world. She was NEVER once agressive to anyone and I could have anyone over to my house and other dogs and cats around her. She was just a good dog. She wasnt possessive or territorial. She was as sweet as they come. So I dont think people should have prejudices against certain breeds, but I do think the stronger breeds need to go with experienced owners who understand dogs. Therefore the sellers have a responsibility to make sure potential owners are getting a dog that they can manage and meet its needs. Some people buy dogs having no idea of a dog`s nature and needs. They just pick the cutest face so a seller needs to steer buyers away from this mentality and help them make a good companion match.
1

GurukunAug. 26, 2011 - 06:53AM JST

but I do think the stronger breeds need to go with experienced owners who understand dogs

Exactly!!

.
-1

horizon360Aug. 26, 2011 - 02:38PM JST

Japan's decade long pet boom and population explosion of miniature dog breeds has created problems with noise pollution - but no risk of harm from dog attacks. Accounts of vicious biting by dauchsands, pomeranians and poodles are rarely heard. What really needs attention are effective regulations on pet owners who fail to reasonably control barking. Leaving pets home alone while the owner is away to work generally results in neuratic barking which continues for hours at a time. Whole apartment buildings and suburban communities across the country are impacted by this trend. Owners who are away while their dogs are home alone are oblivious to how their darling pet has become a public nuisance. Compounding this problem is the cultural tendency of benign non-interference with any sort of anti-social behavior in Japanese communities. Everyone suffers but no one wants to take a stand and do the right thing - i.e. complain. Afterall, the little darlings are actually blameless and anyone who dares say otherwise must be insensitive to the perfect love of furry family members.
0

OracleAug. 27, 2011 - 01:16PM JST

cleoAug. 22, 2011 - 10:05PM JST

Do not let idiots goad or tease your dog.

The practical details of this are causing me some trouble. Dog leash in one hand and baseball bat in the other?

One should of course use one's voice to full effect, but a voice is still just a voice. Feet only move so fast, etc.
0

cleoAug. 27, 2011 - 02:10PM JST

Oracle, it isn't rocket science. Just stay away from the idiots. Don't let little girls 'aggressively' pet your animal, don't let obasans squealing kawaiii inflict unwanted fondling on him. My own pet peeve is the macho middle-aged man who encourages the dog to jump up on him and pushes his fist into the dog's mouth because 'I can handle dogs'. Just say No. If No doesn't work, walk away.

Strangers should no more be fondling your dog without permission than they should be fondling your pre-nubile daughter, or walking into your house and rifling through your drawers and cupboards.
0

OracleAug. 27, 2011 - 03:46PM JST

Just stay away from the idiots.

Just? They tend to just appear, are not always easy to spot (don't wear idiot uniforms) and they can follow you.

Don't let little girls 'aggressively' pet your animal,

Okay. So if a little girl starts out okay but gets aggressive, employ baseball bat?

don't let obasans squealing kawaiii inflict unwanted fondling on him.

Unwanted by the dog? Sometimes you can tell and sometimes you can't until after the dog snaps.

Just say No. If No doesn't work, walk away.

Helpful yes. Cure all? No.

Strangers should no more be fondling your dog without permission than they should be fondling your pre-nubile daughter

That comment indicates you may be from another planet. There is a way people treat dogs, pretty much everybody. That being the case, I think the shoe you point to is on the other foot. People should not treat dogs in ways that get them attacked, and if they do, and if they are adults responsible for their actions, then it may well be their own fault for violating the space bubble around a dog and its owner and being stupid.
0

cleoAug. 27, 2011 - 04:34PM JST

So if a little girl starts out okay but gets aggressive, employ baseball bat?

It don't need no baseball bat. Just tell her 'That's enough, the doggie's had enough now'. And either walk away, or get the parent to take the child away.

Unwanted by the dog?

Unwanted by the owner. I don't want any idiots messing with my animals.

There is a way people treat dogs, pretty much everybody.

Only if you let them. The way people treat my dogs is my way, otherwise they don't treat them at all.

People should not treat dogs in ways that get them attacked, and if they do, and if they are adults responsible for their actions, then it may well be their own fault for violating the space bubble around a dog and its owner and being stupid.

I couldn't agree with you more. BUT when an idiot goes over the top fooling with someone's dog and the dog retaliates with a much-deserved bite, it's still always the dog that gets the blame, especially if it's a big dog. By stopping the idiots messing with your dog in the first place it's not the idiots you're protecting, it's your dog.
0

SeawolfAug. 27, 2011 - 10:48PM JST

30 years ago, back in the German countryside, we had a Rottweiler as a Family dog. It was our kid's job to walk her 3 times a day, sunshine or rain. She loved to shred cardboard boxes to little pieces, she could jump on my bigger brother's shoulder without any problem; and she always knew when daddy would be back from work, standing in the doorway, waiting for her treats. Sometimes we would go to the super market and leash her up outside without any problem. She never did any harm and passed away at about 8 years old. Now it's written down in law in most German states,which breeds are deemed dangerous, Rottweiler being on most of them. I think it is a real pity that you have to prove that your dog is not harmful to humans. Would love to have a dog again, preferably Boxer, or White Shepard and than walk up and down the Karuizawa Ginza to see the reactions of all those people with their toy dogs, lol!
0

TriumvereAug. 28, 2011 - 12:55AM JST

Depends. Is the owner negligent? Then by all means, prosecute them.
-1

shinaykahnSep. 03, 2011 - 01:55AM JST

The dog should be prosecuted.
0

FarmboySep. 20, 2011 - 12:07PM JST

Well, I knew a family that had a dog in the city. It was in a fence, and neighborhood kids would throw rocks at it. It never bit them, but I can't say I would have been so sad if it had, though I suppose that is a character flaw.

I at least hope that anyone who is thinking about prosecuting dog owners looks at the whole situation before making a decision, rather than trying to enforce a blanket rule.