Australian girl, 4, killed by pitbull-mastiff

So it's another country and no "where were the parents?" comments yet.

Poor kid. And her cousin deserves a medal. Does not matter where they come from or what color they are.

I seldom see stories about fatalities involving Dachshunds or Cocker Spaniels. Perhaps its time for the authorities to either ban ownership outright or require those who insist on owning a pit bull to take out a comprehensive liability insurance policy for each animal they keep.

Virtuoso, money does bring kids back to life.

I say ban the dogs. No need for this kind of dog to be owned in suburbia.

Lots of "safe" breeds bite too but these are bred to be killing machines.

Sorry, money "does not" bring kids back to life. Or anyone else.

This is a terrible. Pitbulls are banned in the UK and rightly so.

Back home these animals are illegal for a reason. I had to fight one with my dad to stop it from killing someone in front of my house a few months ago. Good thing the guy was strong enough to fight back, till he lost balance. If it was my mother watering her flowers...

ReformedBasherAug. 18, 2011 - 11:21AM JST

So it's another country and no "where were the parents?" comments yet

Why should there be? The dog belonged to the neighbor, and the dog entered their house. It looks like the older cousin was babysitting. The parents were probably away. Come on, its not like the kids were playing by the river!

The dog, which belonged to a neighbor, is expected to be put down.

I think a death sentence is a bit harsh. I would sooner support it for the dog's owner. I think the dog should get life, and the owner about ten years.

I think the dog should get life,

Oracle@ as nicely as I can put it, that's got to be the silliest remark I've ever heard. Most pets spend their entire lives in enclosures or at the end of leashes. Isn't that "life" already? The animal is being put down because it's already been proved it is a danger to human beings.

VirtuosoAug. 18, 2011 - 12:05PM JST

Most pets spend their entire lives in enclosures or at the end of leashes. Isn't that "life" already?

This dog is not "most pets". You do know that, don't you? There is reason to believe this dog had some freedom, even if its the freedom from watchful eyes so that it can dig a hole under the fence.

My idea was it would be a proper kennel, and not be returned to the idiots that owned it and let it go kill a child.

And if you are going to use the logic of killing for the dog, does it also not work for people? Not going to agree to that, especially since we don't know what role people played in making the dog as it is. It seems some people have the responsibility and ability to keep pit bulls without incident. It seems you can't keep them like collies anymore than you could a lion. I am not dog expert, but then, neither are you. I think there is reason to believe the dog's owners are also to blame here, and why should the dog die if so?

Oracle - Life sentence for a dog, eh? Should it also get conjugal visits and parole after 25 years?

The dog owner should be treated as the murderer. You want to own one of those killing machines, you take the responsibility. Hole-in-the-fence or whatever other excuse should not fly. Period.

no "where were the parents?" comments yet

More like Where was the owner. Some people swear pitbulls make excellent house pets, others think it's cool to train them to be scary 'weapon dogs'. I think it's pretty obvious that a pit bull is not a fluffy cuddly lap dog, and given the (human-designed) genetics it's the height of irresponsibility on the part of the owner to let the dog run free and unsupervised so that it can get in to neighbours' homes and attack children.

Put bluntly, the owner is 100% responsible for everything a dog does. In this case, that makes the owner liable to face charges of homicide and grievous bodily harm. Maybe if a few more owners were made to face the consequences of terrorising the community with a vicious dog, it would make owning these dogs less 'cool'.

There are plenty of other breeds eminently more suited to life in the suburbs. It should be a legal requirement for all dogs to be registered and undergo a course of basic training with their owners.

My thoughts go to the family of the little girl, who do not deserve to be put through this. I hope the two who received injuries recover quickly.

The cousin deserves a commendation.

The owner deserves a jail sentence.

hoserfellaAug. 18, 2011 - 12:32PM JST

Oracle - Life sentence for a dog, eh? Should it also get conjugal visits and parole after 25 years?

Always looking for an angle, and a chance to sneer. Too bad you can't have a decent sense of humor instead. It was simply light-hearted way of saying the dog should be locked up permantly by people who can handle the task.

People who wish to own a dog that is known for aggressive habits are aggressive people too. Really how often must we read about ANOTHER Pit-bull attack. It's a dog that should be banned (they enjoy killing) and this one putdown owners charged with an offense equating with a fire arms offense. All moot now for a poor little girl shredded by some Idiots dog.

If you own it you are responsible for it, if it kills you are responsible.

the dog should be locked up permantly by people who can handle the task.

With a hefty fine imposed on the owner to pay for the dog's keep for the rest of its natural life.

The kind of people who want to own these dangerous breeds are the problem. The owner should certainly be charged with manslaughter.

So it's another country and no "where were the parents?" comments yet

????!

What on earth does this have to do with negligence on the part of the parents? It already states in the article the Father was away working in Sudan, and the Mother WAS there and fought the dog when it was attacking the 5 year old, and then it turned on her own daughter. I fail to see how she could have done more.

The fault lies 100% with the owner of the dog. Period. I hope he is charged with homicide. Manslaughter just doesnt seem to cut it here, given that he knowingly reared a killing machine and let it run loose.

RIP poor little girl. My heart goes out to you and your family.

One more point: the Pit Bull Terrier Association guy said that Breeds dont kill, individual dogs kill. He is right to a point, but why is it that there are certain breeds that crop up time and again in these stories, especially pitbulls. I never hear of anyone mauled to death by a collie.

Reformed Basher: "No 'where were the parents comments' yet?"

Doesn't the clearly say that after the owner put the dog out it chased a relative of the family (who was playing outdoors) into the house and, "It pulled the child from the mum... the girl died". Father was in Sudan, true, but seems like the rest of the family and a relative were home -- unless I'm reading this wrong.

Anyway, I hate to say it, but this is the strongest point in the article: "American Pit Bull Terrier Club of Australia president Colin Muir said the issue was not about a particular breed but the wider problem of responsible ownership of dogs."

I can see how you immediately want to blame the dog for what happened, but you can't blame the cause of the dog's actions on it, only the owner. I don't thing banning the dogs is the answer. Add more regulations and check the backgrounds of people who wish to own them, and make it clear to them that any incidents like the above where the owner can be considered negligent will result in prison (and if it's indicated the owner was training the dog to be a 'fighter' and lived in a residential area, the penalty should be even higher).

In any case, RIP to the little girl, and shame on the owner of this dog.

oracle

I think the dog should get life, and the owner about ten years.

Nicky WashidaAug. 18, 2011 - 02:05PM JST

What on earth does this have to do with negligence on the part of the parents?

Article has been stealth updated...again...you know...as it is such an aid to discussion to make people believe that other posters can't read. Groan.

Nicky WashidaAug. 18, 2011 - 02:07PM JST

He is right to a point, but why is it that there are certain breeds that crop up time and again in these stories, especially pitbulls. I never hear of anyone mauled to death by a collie.

Some forms of insanity are genetic and run in the family. A dog breed is very much like a family of inter-marrying cousins.

American Pit Bull Terrier Club of Australia president Colin Muir said the issue was not about a particular breed but the wider problem of responsible ownership of dogs.

While I can see that the dog breed itself does not kill, statistics do show that most dog attacks resulting in death are done by pit bulls and rottweilers. In fact, in a study done by DogsBite.org, in 2009, during a three-year period alone, 59% of deaths from dog attacks were from pit bulls, and 14% from rottweilers. It shows that some dogs have more of a natural tendency to be mean and attack people. After all, these dogs were bred to fight. They weren't bred to be cuddly.

"It shows that some dogs have more of a natural tendency to be mean and attack people."

Corelation does not imply causation.

The problem is that violent idiots are drawn to owning pitbulls and rottweillers than other breeds. It's the owners with the bad natural tendencies. And for that reason, ownership of these animals should be legally restricted and should require a special license.

It shows that some dogs have more of a natural tendency to be mean and attack people.

I was going to reply and then saw that taj had beaten me to it, and eloquently.

It's the owners with the bad natural tendencies. Couldn't have put it better myself. It's a bit like guns - the people who want them are on the whole the very people who aren't fit to have them.

Add more regulations and check the backgrounds of people who wish to own them, and make it clear to them that any incidents like the above where the owner can be considered negligent will result in prison (and if it's indicated the owner was training the dog to be a 'fighter' and lived in a residential area, the penalty should be even higher).

Yes.

Remind me never to hire you masterminds as babysitters.

If you live next to a pit bull, it's also up to YOU to make the kids safe.

I wouldn't move next to a place that had such a dangerous animal. In fact, I sold my old house and moved to protect my son after next door was rented out to somebody with a savage dog.

If I did not move, I would have put up secure fencing and made sure I always knew the kids were safe if they were outside. I probably would have taken legal action to get the dog removed too.

As for the owner, it's the same as murder. Go directly to jail.

Some of you are so eager to bash the Japanese but the fact is stupid people exist around the world. Thanks for proving that by the way.

These dogs are a threat to society and should be banned, as in the UK. People who want to own these types of dangerous dogs should be arrested and forced to live with each other as punishment.

No right to own a violent dog takes precedence over the life of a child. Clearly, you cannot have both as weekly reports from around the world indicate.

Nicky Washida:

" One more point: the Pit Bull Terrier Association guy said that Breeds dont kill, individual dogs kill. "

Of course "breeds don´t kill" (a "breed" being an abstract classification), but I would like this Pit Bull Terrier Association guy to list the last couple of cases where, say, a Labrador Retriever attacked people out of the blue.

This is kind of political correctness turned to dogs, isn´t it?

ReformedBasherAug. 18, 2011 - 02:59PM JST

In fact, I sold my old house and moved to protect my son after next door was rented out to somebody with a savage dog.

As a Sudanese immigrant, that must have been difficult for you, what with your other half still working in Sudan.

More information from the Aussie media -

The family were staying temporarily with cousins after their own home had burned down last month.

The 30-year-old owner of the dog 'may face charges'.

A neigbour who came running to help when he heard screams said he had never seen the dog in the street before.

We have such dog-half pitbull and half I don't know what. My parents got him as an adult dog , because his previous owners couldn't take care of him anymore. When he came, he had no training and was wild and obviously dangerous. Then my mother started training him, and now he is an embodiment of love. He is maybe the most friendliest dog in the town. He doesn't even bark at strangers-someone could rob us and the dog will lick his face for goodbye. Dogs and cats have personalities too. The way you raise them, care for them, treat them will shape these personalities. If you leave it, every animal will follow its wild nature. If you show them that they are members of the family and the society and have their responsibility, they will understand. The owner trained his dog as a weapon, and this weapon was mishandled. He must be tried for manslaughter.

list the last couple of cases where, say, a Labrador Retriever attacked people out of the blue.

http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=46922 3-Year-Old Savaged by Labrador

http://www.dogsbite.org/blog/2007/12/labrador-attacks-boy-day-before.html Labrador Attacks Boy Day Before Christmas

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2003849/Boy-3-left-horrific-facial-injuries-Labrador-savages-Poole-Harbour.html Boy, three, left with horrific facial injuries as Labrador savages him while his mother strokes puppy

And I love labs. But no dog should ever be left alone with a small child, or let out unsupervised.

"breeds don´t kill"

Dogs of certain breeds are more likely to kill than others. Remember, dogs are genetically inclined to bite for certain purposes: collies, to nip when herding; retrievers, not to bite at all (hence their soft mouths so as not to damage the birds); pit bulls, to incapacitate. While most breeds will release when threatened, a pit bull will not: that is precisely what it has been bred NOT to do.

Sasoriza, good on you for taking in a problem dog. Warning, though: dogs gain the vast majority of their sensory input through their nose, and olfactory messages are often off. Pit bulls are known to attack the elderly, pregnant women and children precisely because they don't smell like what they consider to be "normal" humans. Even my whippet, a sight hound, needs to approach an object close enough to smell it to satisfy his hunch of what it is. So no matter how sweet any pit bull might seem, extreme care needs to be taken around strangers and those who may not smell "normal."

I just don't see why it's worth the risk, though. Plenty of wonderful breeds offer one thousandth of a chance of attack.

“A breed doesn’t do these things, an individual dog does, and it’s irrelevant what the breed is,”

I completely agree with this statement. I used to have two bull-terriers and everybody who saw them in the street were startled at them. However, all my neighbours and friends considered them as the prettiest dogs in the world. The breeds have nothing to do with it. If you judge dogs by their breeds it the same thing as being a racist.

Cyrillic name;

" If you judge dogs by their breeds it the same thing as being a racist. "

LOL, that is what I was saying. This insistence that there are no dog breeds, only individual dogs, is kind of human political correctness applied to dogs.

With dogs, of course, it is patently ridiculous. Dogs obviously have been bred for many generations for specific purposes. And that has been done, precisely to achieve results.

Десу Грачкин, respectfully, anticipating a dog's tendency by its breed has nothing to do with racism. Dogs are man's first and longest-running genetic experiment, perhaps 40,000 years in the running. During that time, dogs which through genetic disposition exhibited desired traits were kept; those which did not were most likely eaten. The result is that dogs of different breeds are statistically likely to display certain types of behavior. Humans did not evolve in such a systematic way, with different "races" conditioned to respond differently to a given stimulus; to compare the two is simply nonsense.

Dogs depend entirely on humans; they are unlikely to survive long without an owner and certainly would not be happy in that condition. Their drive is to be a "good doggie" - a positive response from their owner, after all, is all that keeps them out of the pot, as far as they know. What constitutes a "good doggie," though, is far beyond canine cognition; after all, can man truly discern what constitutes a "good man" from, say, God's point of view? Certainly, training is very important, and dogs instinctively learn to replicate behavior which brings praise. But never underestimate the power of inbred behavior; it can appear in a flash and fully overpower even the best of training.

So, yes, in general, dogs not only can but should be evaluated by its breed.

Whether or not these breed of dogs are dangerous or not, the owners of this dog should be charged with third-degree murder, as well as two or three counts of assault. Of course, putting down the dog is justifiable as well. The owners of this dog has no excuse whatsoever for their extreme negligence.

“There cannot be a more tragic situation than to see a young child like this, in these circumstances, killed in this horrible, horrible way,” the Herald-Sun quoted Victorian Premier Ted Baillieu as saying.

I totally agree. I cannot begin to imagine the trauma of seeing your child viciously ripped from you and mauled to death before your very eyes. RIP young Ayen Chol.

LagunaAug. 18, 2011 - 04:14PM JST

to compare the two is simply nonsense.

No, it isn't, and your own statements about dog breeds proves it much more than the one idea that "traits were chosen" denies it. Natural selection also chooses traits. The problem is people making too much of it and thinking its a basis for hate. Its not. Not even all pit bulls are the same.

Laguna, you're right, breeds are groups of dogs with a number of features that people wanted to them to have. But any living creature does not inherit these features, it inherits only the norm of reaction, the possibility of a feature to be developed. Here comes the background (master,nutrition,training) that determines, whether your dog becomes cruel or not.

WilliB, what's wrong with my name? So you want to justify that there's no guilt of the owner, who bought a blood-thirsty dog (or brought it up) and overlooked its the fact it was a monster? As it was said before, dogs are very dependent on people and they keep up to their expectations. If this dog killed a child, it just acted according to the value system its owner (or trainer) raised it with. Dogs are not wild animals — people can change them. And if you ask, why there is no news about Labrador Retriever killing people, i'll say that retrievers are supposed to be family dogs or companions and are usually purchased by families with children or good-tempered master, whereas pit bulls are bought by aggressive or unstable people. I'm sure, that if you beat a retriever every day and humiliate it, it will hate peoople and kill one or two.

Every creature has evolved with a particular skill that allows him to dominate a certain niche - every creature except for humans, who are about as zoologically wimpy as animals come, short in tooth and claw and slow in feet; the particular skill humans evolved was the ability to reason abstractly, and that happened before humans left Africa - that enabled humans to leave Africa, to colonize every possible ecological niche on this planet above water. While physical distinctions for most animals indicate adaptations to new niches and separate them from their cousins, for humans, conversely, our physical and cultural distinctions only serve to bond us: we have thrived in this niche because we can thrive in any niche, and we can do so because we are human. Amongst animals, humans exhibit one of the least diverse set of physical characteristics, by the way.

Dogs evolved a particular skill which has made them very successful: learning to do what humans want them to do. Dogs do not, though, have particularly large brains; their brains have actually shrunk in comparison to wolves since the two separated long ago. A wolf will try to figure out how to get out of a situation; a dog will typically wait for his owner to do the figuring out for him. Dogs only act to a certain - rather low - percentage on training; most of what they do is what is in their DNA, what worked for their fathers and grandfathers all way back to when a man decided he wanted a dog who could herd, or could fetch, or could guard the house, or who could fight bears or bulls for sport.

You'd have to treat an average retriever very badly to make him a killer, but even the most adored pit bull can become one on a dime. It is in his DNA.

It is not the breed, but the owner. It is like a car, a speed boat, jet ski. Some people own these things because the really love them. Others just do it because they need a penis- extent ion because their egos lack something. You can blame a dog breed, or a Harley Davidson or whatever. If the owner is a dreg of society, then it is not the dogs fault.

You can't blame the breed.

Reformed Basher: "If you live next to a pit bull, it's also up to YOU to make the kids safe."

So you have to lock your kids in a panic room for their entire lives because of a responsible idiot next door? Your putting the blame entirely in the wrong place here. This is not at all the fault of the family.

That's TWICE you've reference to 'Japan bashing' on this thread when no one is bashing them whatsoever. Have you got something on your mind, reformed basher?

Make a law that says those kinds of dogs have to have their teeth removed. It would work.

This little girl died clinging to her mothers leg while several members of the family tried in vein to fight of the animal. Just the most awful scene. The mother and several other adults were there - doesn't seem to have mattered. So sad.

It is not the breed, but the owner.

While I agree that the owner is mostly at fault here, I also have to say that there are some breeds of dog which need to be more tightly regulated than others. I feel that the pit bull qualifies as such as dog. After all, tigers and lions are breeds of cats, but you wouldn't treat them as the same as a Persian, or an American Shorthair, would you?

why there is no news about Labrador Retriever killing people,

But there is, see my 3:23 post.

a dog will typically wait for his owner to do the figuring out for him

Unless he's been trained to think for himself. (Like a lot of people, some simply don't have what it takes...)

It reminds me of all those endless arguements about gun legalization: do people kill or the guns they possess.

It's the same argument: no one in a civilised society needs a lethal weapon, whether it's made of gunmetal and bullets, or fur and teeth.

My advice to anyone face with a violent dog is to get down and get close to it and grab its muzzle, and as you are doing that shift get over its back as you can get a very good grip there. I cannot say I ever wrestled with an insane pit bull, but most dogs will just lose their fight after a while. This takes speed and dexterity, but if you think you can grab your kid and run away, guess again. You have to be on top of the thing and not trying to swat at it from a distance. You have to fully engage it to protect your kids.

Another move is just thrust your fist down its throat. You might get your hand scratched up by teeth going down, and moreso pulling back, but going down is not so bad if the owner has not filed the teeth or anything. Do that and the dog can't bite, can't breath and will feel sick to its stomach. This also takes the fight out of them and all they will want to do is get away. Shoving a stick down its throat will really hurt the dog, but you might not have one available. Remember, the main weapon of a dog is its mouth, and it will be open a lot so its a pretty easy target and so is the inside of the throat. This is especially true if the dog already has a hold of your hand. You just shove it right on down.

The owner should be punished , send him 50 years to prison.. It is like a Car accident kills someone , The driver should be punished not the Car.

Owners of any breed of dog are responsible totaly for their pets control, whether it is a Pitbull or a Corgi .By control I mean training and supervision at all times.A Poodle is just as likely to attack as is a German Sheperd the only difference is the amount of damage inflicted upon the victim. Responsible ownership requires that fencing of the animals domain is suffice to contain the dog or dogs within their boundary. How many times do you hear the owner of an unleashed dog who approaches a person in a public place barking with its hackles raised call out , its ok it wont hurt you.. I have owned rescue animals for many years, all of them have been trained successfully, but they remain animals with all the unpredictability that this entails.The Pitbull responsible for the horrific attack will be put down, I hope the animals owners will be charged but it is a poor concellation for the 5 year olds family.

I was going to say the owner should be sentenced to a pitbull mauling, but then that would cost taxpayers dearly, so the sentence should be to pay compensation to the dead girl's family, at least a half year in prison and community service for life.

I hate in Australia how they walk around with their dogs down the streets unleashed, as if Im supposed to trust the mutty animal, and the owners training. And I hate how here that they have shopping trolleys especially for dogs in shopping centers, as if they rate the same as a child. I hate that animals are treated the same as a human. Kill the dog, lock up the owner. WHo cares the breed, what difference really is it going to make. Have you seen them ugly looking rat like dogs here, their little sharp teeth give me the creeps, and Id be happy to kick em inthe butt. Oh by the way I do have dogs, they work for their feed and keep. They are mild mannered play with my kids, but I never ever treat them like theyre human. In fact I should try taking my mutts in one of them trolleys! Bwhahahaha! Im sure nobody would like it, they wouldnt smell too good, Id get the aisle to meself thats for sure.

Bull mastifs our AmStaffs are dangerous enough without cross-breeding them. What a stupid idea.

Obviously there will always be the moment of madness from a dog that snaps despite good ownership, but for all the other ciases these people should be sent to prison for their dogs crimes, after the destruction of the dog.

This will end up a new way for at least our Euro governments to pass legislation for costly permits or even dog taxes if the dog attack trend continues. Another blight for us responsible dog owners.

Oracle reply, certain breeds of dog such as Pitbulls, mastiffs bulldogs ect lock their jaws once they gain purchase on their victim, then proceed to violently shake at the area of infliction. It is therefor impossible to get a fist down the animals throat. Once such a dog attacks the sounds of screaming and shouting excites the animal further. The animal is out of control. It is not possible for even the owner to control and stop the attack at this stage.A table was not even able to stop the animals ferocious attack. Anyone is able to purchase these breeds of dog irregardless of their ability to care for them in a reponsible way. No doubt there are owners of these breeds who will protest that their dog is the gentlest creature on earth, it is still an animal and therefor unpredictable.

@Oracle

As a Sudanese immigrant, that must have been difficult for you, what with your other half still working in Sudan.

Fair call. We are assuming the family is poor which is kind of racist but unfortunately true in a lot of cases. I wonder if they really understood the danger. If they have been living in Australia for 7 years, how long were they living next to the idiot with the dog?

I should mention in all honesty the entire neighboorhood where my house was just too rough. The dog just gave us added incentive to move away.

No matter, the vicitim and her family certainly don't deserve this to happen to them, in any country.

@Smith

So you have to lock your kids in a panic room for their entire lives because of a responsible idiot next door?

Secure fencing <> panic room. Calm down and absorb more.

Your putting the blame entirely in the wrong place here. This is not at all the fault of the family.

Of course it is partially the fault of the parents. A lot more so the owner of the dog, but the parents have responsibility too. Not legally, just common sense. I sure as hell would NOT let 4 and 5 year old kids play outside with a pit bull next door unless they were protected by secure fencing. (See? I can use capital letters too)

Unfortunately this little girl has paid the price. And her cousin will be scarred for life too.

Don't get me wrong, the parents more than deserve pity for their loss. And the dog owner more than deserves jail.

ReformedBasherAug. 18, 2011 - 09:44PM JST

I sure as hell would NOT let 4 and 5 year old kids play outside with a pit bull next door....

ReformedBasher: The article says:

"A four-year-old girl was mauled to death by a neighbor 's pitbull-mastiff cross... "

A neighbor could mean 10 doors down the street in the same neighborhood... not next door.

On another note, don't know if it's true, but I've heard before that the best way to "subdue" a pit bull or the like from a deadly attack (not if he/she just nips at you) is to grab each of its front legs, and pull them outwards (this may kill the dog depending on how far you pull though).

how long were they living next to the idiot with the dog?

The family of the girl who died had been in the house just a few weeks, since their own house burned down last month.

Christina O'NeillAug. 18, 2011 - 09:34PM JST

Oracle reply, certain breeds of dog such as Pitbulls, mastiffs bulldogs ect lock their jaws once they gain purchase on their victim, then proceed to violently shake at the area of infliction. It is therefor impossible to get a fist down the animals throat.

Have you tried? A dog's teeth curve backward, and are designed to prevent things from escaping, not pushing forward. The usual response of a victim is to pull, but that only helps the dog get its teeth in deeper. Pretty much only a human has the ability to over-ride that reflex to pull and instead stuff its throat full of fist, and I bet it could be done on any dog, even if, depending on how much twisting you had to and how painful that would be. But its better than dying or having your kid die.

I say I think it could be done to any dog, and I have done this to dogs, but granted not a pitbull or the dogs you mention, and they were not super nutso dogs. I think only one situation was serious, and the dog was angry but not insane.

ReformedBasherAug. 18, 2011 - 09:44PM JST

This I can agree with. But just to clarify, it does seem the dog invaded the house and the children were not outside. I would guess the door was wide open though. A dog could break through a screen door, but it seems unlikely a dog would conceive of it. May have been a pet door?

Also, we don't know if the dog was chained or in a pen or how secure either of those were. You see a dog in a kennel, and if you know nothing of dogs, you assume they can't get out. I grew up with dogs, and I know better. I have known them to break chains, pull stakes out of the ground and dig holes under kennels and fences that were very shallow, yet they got under, and even dogs climbing out of kennels with no ceiling. Best bet (though cruel) is concrete floor and chain link all around and above too. But even then, some fool will forget to lock it.

And my impression is that African people (and I mean born there) in general don't know much about dogs anyway. Correct me if I am wrong.

cleo, before you give me a scolding for the treatment of the dogs, they were not mine. They belonged to others in the family or neighbors and I was too young to see the wrong or do anything about it.

It's never a pet and always the owner. The worst combination however is a mail man from Sudan. Very tempting for any dog.

1 terrible incident and government is trying to pass the law of 20 years in prison for dangerous dog ( whatever that means) owner in future case. As usual ,the whole society with millions and millions responsible dog owners will have to pay for mistake of somebody else. Sad.

tclh:

" for dangerous dog ( whatever that means) "

That means those breeds that are known to be dangerous. Come on, there is no reason for us to pretend to know nothing. You can be sure they are not thinking about dangerous Chihuahuas.

just thrust your fist down its throat

How do you do that when it already has a mouthful of toddler? Shove the toddler down its throat?

Most dogs that bite latch on and dig in, so you have a chance to grab its muzzle and try all those things you suggest; but a crazed pitbull will shake, causing intense pain and severe damage long before a calm human comes up to shove something down its throat.

it does seem the dog invaded the house and the children were not outside.

The kids were outside, came in when they saw the dog and the dog followed them in. I wouldn't be surprised if the kids ran in the house shouting, which would stimulate the dog even more.

Oracle, I won't scold you for what others did to dogs long ago (it was different when I was a kid, too) but I will scold you for advising people to do dangerous things like trying to grab the muzzle of a dog on the rampage.

@Tahoochi

A neighbor could mean 10 doors down the street in the same neighborhood... not next door.

True. But I would sure hope not.

@Cleo

The family of the girl who died had been in the house just a few weeks, since their own house burned down last month.

I was not aware of that. I feel even more sorry form them.

@Oracle

And my impression is that African people (and I mean born there) in general don't know much about dogs anyway.

We can only speculate. From what I know about Sudan, it would seem dogs are one of the lesser worries but I would imagine there are a few roaming around.

Okay. Cleo says they were there for only a week. It's possible they were unfamilar with dangerous dogs and possibly didn't even know about the dog in question.

If this is true, I'm totally wrong. I don't mind admitting it.

What annoys me is that we posters (including me) have this knee jerk reaction when we hear about accidents and assume the worst about the parents without really knowing the facts. Unless it is truly obvious the parents were irresponsible, they don't deserve strangers around the world passing judgement. (My 14 year old is having x-rays of his back taken after falling off a wall doing parkour, last time it was a broken arm. I fell off a wall too at that age, my parents were upstairs having lunch - at that age it's completely my own stupidity to blame)

This is entirely different when it comes to parents that abuse kids though. How adults can do that to any kid, especially their own is beyond my comprehension. They fully deserve harsh punishment.

These dogs are not pets, and no good as working dogs either. The breed should be allowed to die out. Any dog can snap and bite, but these dogs are capable of locking their jaws and far more likely to kill. Dobermanns, pit bulls, staffies, Toza etc are not pets and should not be allowed to be kept as such.

cleoAug. 19, 2011 - 07:30AM JST

How do you do that when it already has a mouthful of toddler? Shove the toddler down its throat?

No need to be stupid. My advice was general and not tailored to this situation. If a dog had hold of my child I would look for gaps in the dogs mouth toward the corners and shove my fingers in there and keep going until I could get my hand in. If the dog was shaking my child I would jump on the dogs back to hold it as steady as possible. Like I said before, a dog's primary and practically only weapon is its mouth. So if its mouth is full you be all over the dog and it can't really do anything. Yet, people treat dogs like have porcupine quills on its back but it doesn't. You can grab and break legs. You can pick it up and swing it around. You just got to keep clear of the mouth, but if its full, you are good to go until the dog drops it.

In any case, you will have to grapple with the dog. No choice. You cannot box with it. You cannot run from it.

long before a calm human comes up to shove something down its throat.

Well I cannot very well offer advice that turns time back on itself. Still better to act as quickly as possible by knowing what to do, then stand around considering options you don't have.

The kids were outside

Yes, the article changed.

but I will scold you for advising people to do dangerous things like trying to grab the muzzle of a dog on the rampage.

I did not say to go chasing dogs that weren't bothering you. Of course I meant a dog that was after you or your kids. I am talking a situation were safety is already gone, and you must deal with the danger. I am not talking about being a daredevil. Isn't it obvious?

If you cant get into the dog's mouth would going for the eyes work at all, Oracle?

One of the rare good things about Japan was that these dangerous dogs are few and far between. I have seen a man with a Doberman at a shopping centre in central Tokyo. If that thing wanted to rampage he would have stood no chance of stopping it. Big dangerous dogs, no matter how good the owner thinks they are at controlling them are not safe to be in public places. If I had my way Dobermann, German Shepherds would only be allowed as working dogs for trained individuals, and aggressive breeds with no working use be allowed to die out.

I hope the parents find some measure of peace.

goinggoinggone

" If I had my way Dobermann, German Shepherds would only be allowed as working dogs for trained individuals, and aggressive breeds with no working use be allowed to die out. I hope the parents find some measure of peace. "

Agreed.

goinggoinggoneAug. 19, 2011 - 01:20PM JST

If you cant get into the dog's mouth would going for the eyes work at all, Oracle?

Technically,I cannot see why not. However, some people are too squeemish for that. Its not enough to just push on the eyes. A dog's eyelids are pretty thick when closed up tight. You would have to use a lot of pressure to force the lids open and most likely if you do that in a fight you would damage the eyes enough that they would leak or pop and that would be pretty nasty. Most people are just not equipped to go for the eyes in a manner that would actually work.

I have no practical experience with that because I did not want to damage the dog. But if I could not save myself or another by putting something down its throat, I would not hesistate to rip its eyes out sure.

If I had my way Dobermann, German Shepherds would only be allowed as working dogs for trained individuals, and aggressive breeds with no working use be allowed to die out.

Dobermanns, pit bulls, staffies, Toza etc are not pets and should not be allowed to be kept as such.

Utter rubbish, poppycock, balderdash, claptrap, hogwash, baloney, tommyrot, garbage, eyewash drivel and twaddle.

The best dog I ever had was a dobie. The next best was a German Shepherd. Both were intelligent, faithful, obedient, well-trained and non-aggressive. I think it's offensive and ignorant to lump those excellent breeds in with dogs bred for brainless fighting and kept by brainless twerps.

Big dangerous dogs, no matter how good the owner thinks they are at controlling them are not safe to be in public places

You seem to be suggesting that big and dangerous necessarily go together. They don't. Any dog is potentially dangerous, regardless of size, and on the whole larger breeds tend to be more placid than little dogs. The owner makes all the difference; some idiot who thinks his status pitbull/staffie with studded collar and chain lead makes him 'cool' is not the type who's going to train his dog up to Good Canine Citizen standard.

You seem to be suggesting that big and dangerous necessarily go together

Going is suggesting dogs that are both big and dangerous.

The dobermann is noted for its aggressive nature, it is part of the breed, as it its size and energy. Keeping a dog like that happy and busy would be a huge job for someone keeping it as a pet, and people have no right to subject others to dogs equipped to damage.

You cannot compare a lab who snaps, to a dobie who is bred as an aggressive large working dog. To say ALL dogs are equally dangerous is balderdash.

People might fool themselves they are the 'right' owner' to keep and 'control' this kind of dog. There is no excuse for a civilian to keep a dobermann, they are a dangerous dog whose use is not as a pet, but as a working dog, and certainly not a pet that can be let off a leash in a public area safely, no matter of the owners delusions of safety of their particular dog.

A dachshund, poodle, spaniel is not capable of killing a person. Anyone can beat them off a child if they attack. I dont think I could tear a dobermann off a person, it is too strong and aggressive. I know I could deal with a spaniel and any normal small to middle sized dog, bred as a pet. A dobermann is capable of killing. Why keep such animals as household pets? I rarely see these dogs in Japan, but in my home country you cant go for a walk without having your small dog attacked by a dobie, staffie or the like. Ive had a family pet attacked by one of these large breeds by an owner who was telling me, as the animal was preparing to attack, that his dog was 'fine', when it was clearly not fine.

Thanks Oracle. I would think if a dog were attacking someone I would not care if it was unpleasant, I would just want it off the person or animal.

In this case, the animal chased people into the house, where the child was in the living room, and then tore the child from the mother's legs and killed her. This is not a pet, it needs to be put down, and the owners charged with manslaughter.

With the best will in the world, there is no such thing as the 'right' owner of a large dog such as a pit bull or dobermann as a pet, and it is antisocial to inflict that dog on other pet owners in public spaces, no matter if you think you are better than the average pit bull or staffie owner. The right owner for a dobermann is the armed forces or the police.

cleo:

" Any dog is potentially dangerous, regardless of size "

Now, THAT is Utter rubbish, poppycock, balderdash, claptrap, hogwash, baloney, tommyrot, garbage, eyewash drivel and twaddle. (And codswallop, with a nod to Nessie) ;-)

Going is suggesting dogs that are both big and dangerous.

Some dogs are big. Some dogs are dangerous. Some dogs are both. Some are big but not dangerous. Some are dangerous but not big.

I should not have left out codswallop, but you gotta stop somewhere.

The dobermann is noted for its aggressive nature, it is part of the breed

The one I had must have been a fake dobie, then, because she did not have an aggressive bone in her body. Neither did her Mum who was a big slobbery thing, nor my friend's dobie who is also a softie and was obtained after said friend got to know my sweetie and fell in love with the breed.

Keeping a dog like that happy and busy would be a huge job for someone keeping it as a pet

She was nothing but an asset to my life and to the family. Looking after her was not a 'huge job'; she was the easiest dog to train I have ever come across, and a joy to be with.

dobie who is bred as an aggressive large working dog

Now, there is a kind of breeder who breeds aggressive lines. Most of them are European type. Most breeders of the American type (that I've come across, at any rate) breed for intelligence and sweetness of character, not for aggression.

To say ALL dogs are equally dangerous

You put the 'equally' there, not me. Little dogs might not be able to do much damage to a big strong man willing to gouge its eyes out, but they can cause lots of harm to little kids and babies.

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-404494.html(Dachs put down after mauling baby)

http://www.herald-dispatch.com/x808409177(Jack Russell terrier kills baby)

The right owner for a dobermann is the armed forces or the police.

A Dobie yearns to be with its owner; it is not happy and does not do well left alone in a cage or kennel for long periods of time; indeed, if left to its own devices it could well turn into the kind of aggressive animal you so fear. To suggest that a well-bred, well-trained Dobie does not make the perfect family pet is not only codswallop but also nonsense, rubbish, claptrap, balderdash, blather, moonshine, garbage, rot, tripe, jive, hogwash, baloney, drivel, bilge, bunk, eyewash, piffle, phooey, twaddle, malarkey, gobbledygook, mumbo-jumbo, bunkum and tommyrot.

Not to say that the kind of idiot attracted to the pitbull wouldn't be able to make a pig's ear out of a Dobie. Or a poodle.

"breeds don´t kill"

I have never heard of a fatal attack on a human by a chihuahua or a Maltese Terrier though. Make no mistake: Pit Bull Terriers, Mastiffs, Japanese Tosa dogs (among others) are killing machines. There is no need to have them, other than as an illegal fighting dog (very big business in many places) or an attack weapon. They have been bred to fight to the death. People are not allowed to keep Crocodiles in their backyard - they should not be permitted to keep these killing machine dogs.

We in Australia are pretty hopeless on the issue - most states require that the dogs mentioned above all be neutered, wear muzzles and are restrained - but this does not stop irresponsible morons who own them thumbing their nose at the law. Heck, the maximum penalty the owner of this dog faces is a $4500 fine. Fortunately, this dog has been destroyed, but the poor little girl cannot be brought back. Rest in Peace.

What a horrible, horrible news. Poor little girl! Escaping from war torn Sudan to end up getting killed by a stupid pit bull?? My grandpappy used to breed pit bulls back in California, bought the pair from an American Indian, mean, mean dogs, it is in their blood, my grandmas poodle got too close to the mother pitbulls dog house one day, to get some food, the mother pitbull jumped out and BIT THE POODLE IN HALF! My grandma came out with a broom to beat the pitbull, not a very good idea, and she made my grandpa get rid of all of the pitbulls, which I am not sure, but were being bought by gang members for illegal dog fights, where people bet $$$$ etc...I do not trust pitbulls, especially not around small children. I can not even begin to try to imagine the pain and sorrow the family of this little girl must be going through. RIP little girl and may this dog burn in hell and so too the stupid, idiot useless OWNER of this pitbull!

Sorry Cleo, happy you love dogs, but sorry, I love HUMANS first, kids over puppies. Too bad so many people care more about dogs than their own kids or other humans, see it all the time here in Japan and it makes me SICK!!! Not saying that you, Cleo, care more about dogs, but dobermans, one attacked my dog in my own front yard, just as my father was coming back home from work, we were just little kids and were so surprised the neighbors dog jumped over the fence then began to attack our little dog, no muzzle no nothing, these neighbors were real low lives too, all on welfare different dads one always pregnant mom, but anyway, my dad picked up a nice big stone, got that doberman right in its spine, maybe broke it or almost broke it to protect our little innocent dogs and us kids too, last time those stupid neighbors ever let their lousy doberman run around loose in their own front yard and we had just moved to that house, I think they got the hint and move the hell out of out new neighborhood there in California. Not saying all dobies are evil but this one well messed with the wrong little dog and the wrong Mexican father coming back home from a hard day of construction work in the hot California sun. Again, I will pray for this little girl who was killed by a stupid dog down there in Australia.

dobermans, one attacked my dog in my own front yard, ...... these neighbors were real low lives too,

The key is not the breed of dog but the quality of the owners. Like you say, low-lifes raise their dogs to be dangerous. My first dog in Japan, a totally laid-back Lab, was attacked by a Corgi. So do I think all Corgis are dangerous, vicious animals? No. I think that particular neighbour had no control over his dog and he's lucky that my much bigger dog was well-trained and under control, otherwise there would have been a fight and his dog would have lost, possibly with drastic consequences.

There is a kind of person who thinks owning a dog that will frighten other people - whether it be a pit bull, rottie, dobie, German Shepherd or whatever - makes them 'cool', and that kind of person should not be allowed to own any kind of dog.

I realise that a Dobie isn't for everyone, but that's why there are so many different breeds of dog, so that people can choose what's best for them. When people ask me for advice on choosing a new puppy, in most cases I do not recommend a Dobie, not because it isn't a wonderful dog but because it isn't best for that particular family. If people need to ask advice....... But best for me will always be my beautiful, beloved Dobie.

Put pit bulls in zoos and go love them there.

Too bad so many people care more about dogs than their own kids or other humans,

Elbuda Mexicano: Me too. I'm really sick of that. I remember when I was living in California, I often saw this eccentric owner walking her chihuahua who had some serious bling. Not sure how much it cost, but it was still way too much for a little itty bitty dog. But that's the norm there. I've even seen some owners who spray painted parts of their dogs pink or baby blue. Poor dogs. Not to mention the ton of money they must spend on dog massages, dog hotels, etc. Granted, some of these owners have no kids, but some do and to give a dog bling, but not their kids, is pretty whacked if you ask me.

to give a dog bling, but not their kids, is pretty whacked if you ask me.

Neither kids nor dogs need bling.

Funny how it's fine for people to spend money on flash stereo sets, big houses, cars, holidays, fashionable clothes - but spending your own money on your dog is somehow evil.

Neither kids nor dogs need bling.

Yeah, but to give dogs bling, when the money could be better spent on kids food and education doesn't quite sit right with me.

Yeah, but to give dogs bling, when the money could be better spent on kids food and education doesn't quite sit right with me

Its their money and therefore their choice to spend it on what they want. Doesnt have to sit right with you me or anyone else.

erikaj - I couldn't agree with you more, whether it's bling for the dog, beer and boz toyz for Dad, LV bags and perfumes for Mum or whatever; so why pick out only blinged-out dogs? Any evidence that the people who are dressing their dogs in expensive bling are also starving their kids and keeping them out of school?

Assuming that one's responsibilities are met first, what does it matter what people choose to spend their money on - so long as they do spend it and thus bolster the economy?

Best to make the breed "restricted ownership". Sometimes Americans brought these "dogs" to Okinawa. Then allowed them to roam free. Many an innocent Okinawa person has suffered by these "dogs". No this breed bests belongs only in a zoo.

cleoAug. 23, 2011 - 07:39AM JST. The key is not the breed of dog but the quality of the owners.

I keep hearing that but somehow, I don't believe that. This is too frequent of a problem and even the tame ones seem to attack their quality owners without cause. Maybe the goverment should classify "Pit Bull" as a wild animal, similar to coyote and restrict the ownership and have stiffer fines for people that fail to register properly. Few weeks ago, a pregnant Pacifica, California woman was mauled and killed by her dog at her home. The victim's husband had come home from work and found their 2-year-old pit bull hovering over his wife's body. Officers began performing CPR and pronounced her dead at the scene.

This was not a pit bull. It was not a mastiff. It was a mongrel, a mix. It may be possible to ban certain breeds, but can you ban mongrels. This a breed known to have attacked and killed humans mixed with a breed known for its size and strength.

Probably, the true danger is not the breed or the mix. It is more likely the mix of the type of dog known for violence and the type human who chooses a dog because it has a reputation for violence and wants a tough dog. On Youtube, there is a video of a pit bull gently playing with a kitten. That pit bull must have a very different owner.

Having said that, it is true that some breeds are more dangerous than other, and some dogs, just like some Japanese and some foreigners, but not all, are dangerous. A pit bull is more likely to be a danger than a sheep dog that instinctively herds are a chihuahua which is small and weak.

The previous posts by Cleo show an understanding of the problem and dogs.

I would like to point out that in Japan, dogs are usually mistreated and kept tied up all day on a leash. This mistreatment, which is required by law, produces a dangerous dog that can never be let off the leash. Also, a trained dog is a rarity here. A dog is a social animal and needs be part of a family, whether canine, human or a mix including cats.

A loving family will have a loving dog if the dog is treated properly and trained. However, too much love and too little understanding can produce the wrong type of dog. The owner should be the head of the family and the dog should be low in the pecking order. Only that way can a dog be controlled.

Ownership of pit bulls (and pit bull mixes) should be restricted, because the type of person who wants to own a a big tough dog with a reputation for being scary and dangerous is exactly the type of person who should not be in charge of such a dog. Heck, I'd like to see a system where every dog is registered, and every potential owner is vetted and given a license to own a certain range of breeds, dependent on their living environment, ability to care for and train the dog, past history of dog trouble/violence etc.

It may be possible to ban certain breeds, but can you ban mongrels.

I understand that in the UK the Dangerous Dogs law refers to 'pit-bull-type dogs', which would include mixes and mongrels.

Few weeks ago, a pregnant Pacifica, California woman was mauled and killed by her dog at her home.

The husband shut the dog in a back room, from where it escaped into the garden and was shot by police. The fact that the dog was able to get into the garden suggests that the house was not properly dog-proofed and that there was a lackadaisical attitude to dog control. The dog in question was a young intact male, kept in the house with an intact female. Add in a pregnant human, and who knows what mix of hormones was in the air. I don't want to seem unfeeling about the man's loss, but I cannot help shaking my head and wondering What was he thinking....?

I would like to point out that in Japan, dogs are usually mistreated and kept tied up all day on a leash. This mistreatment, which is required by law, produces a dangerous dog that can never be let off the leash. Also, a trained dog is a rarity here.

Dogs in Japan are NOT 'usually mistreated'. The vast majority of dogs live happy pampered lives with their owners. There are still far too many dogs kept chained outside, but thankfully not as many as there used to be (still far, far too many dogs sent to the pound when they become 'inconvenient'). It is NOT the law that dogs 'must be mistreated and tied up all day outside'. The law is that dogs must not be allowed to roam loose and unsupervised outside, which strikes me as being perfectly reasonable and what a responsible owner does anyway.

And for that reason, ownership of these animals should be legally restricted and should require a special license.

Sure. Just like with gun ownership. We want our lethal toys, don't we?

presto345.

" Sure. Just like with gun ownership. We want our lethal toys, don't we? "

Well, I understand that even the gun lobbies don´t want free ownership of machine guns. And those dog breeds are the equivalent of that. Outlaw them, and alow them to disappear from the gene pool.