• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dog owner responsibility

Should a dog owner be punished?


  • Total voters
    44
Over here we've had a recent incident where a dog escaped its yard, broke into the neighbours house and killed a 4 year old. Under current laws all the dog owner receives is a fine, and there's a debate over whether the owner should receive jail time or not. So what do you think, should there be a charge of negligent homicide or something like that for owners who allow their dogs to escape and cause death?

I would be hard pressed to say jail time. The dog, of course, needs to be put down and punishment does need to be handed out. But if it was a pure accident, then I wouldn't put someone in jail for that.
 
BTW, here in Ohio we do have a problem with people keeping wild animals, including predators. After the death of a repairman (by a "pet" bear), we passed a law prohibiting such behavior but grandfathering in all the wild animal "pets" then held.

I don't see the difference between a habit of keeping TNT unsafely stored in your garage and keeping a vicious animal ready, willing and able to kill. Someone dies, you're at fault.

Criminally and civily. IMO, this is the best possible example of "foreseeability".
 
Pitt bulls are not inherently vicious. Most of them are friendly and sweet and very easygoing towards humans.... unless they've been taught to be otherwise. There are rare exceptions though... I had a half-Pitt that was a one-family-dog, he loved me and loved my son, and wanted to eat the rest of the world. I have no idea why he was like that, it wasn't my doing. Most of them, though, are good dogs. They were deliberately bred for aggression towards other dogs, and NOT towards humans, normally.

The real problem with Pitts is that a bad Pitt is like a cross between a wolf and a crocodile. They're very strong and have incredibly powerful jaws, and when they're stirred up they tend to attack with great determination. I was on the receiving end of a Pitt attack once, and I ended up having to kill the dog to stop him. I didn't want to, I love dogs, but he wouldn't stop trying to tear my throat out.

To know whether the owner deserves jail time, I'd have to know a few things;
1. Did he deliberately train the dog to be vicious?
2. What precautions did he take to try to keep the dog contained?
3. Were there any previous incidents where the dog had gotten loose and menaced or hurt someone?

If the answers are Yes, Very Little, and Yes....then I'd say that is enough negligence that he needs to do some time.
 
Pitt bulls are not inherently vicious. Most of them are friendly and sweet and very easygoing towards humans.... unless they've been taught to be otherwise. There are rare exceptions though... I had a half-Pitt that was a one-family-dog, he loved me and loved my son, and wanted to eat the rest of the world. I have no idea why he was like that, it wasn't my doing. Most of them, though, are good dogs. They were deliberately bred for aggression towards other dogs, and NOT towards humans, normally.

The real problem with Pitts is that a bad Pitt is like a cross between a wolf and a crocodile. They're very strong and have incredibly powerful jaws, and when they're stirred up they tend to attack with great determination. I was on the receiving end of a Pitt attack once, and I ended up having to kill the dog to stop him. I didn't want to, I love dogs, but he wouldn't stop trying to tear my throat out.

To know whether the owner deserves jail time, I'd have to know a few things;
1. Did he deliberately train the dog to be vicious?
2. What precautions did he take to try to keep the dog contained?
3. Were there any previous incidents where the dog had gotten loose and menaced or hurt someone?

If the answers are Yes, Very Little, and Yes....then I'd say that is enough negligence that he needs to do some time.

I completely disagree. The configuration of a pitt makes it almost uniquely capable of deathly injury to a human, especially a child. This is not a breed I'd even consider owning, but if you do, IMO, it's on YOU to ENSURE no one gets injured or killed.
 
According to one report, the dog first threatened relatives standing in the driveway, and when they panicked and ran inside, the dog chased after them.

Pitbull owners stood back from attack on Ayen Chol, claim family | News.com.au

According to another, the homeowner was walking someone to the door. "The tragedy unfolded when a cousin, who owns the house, was walking a family friend to the door and the dog confronted them.

As they tried to run indoors, the pit bull attacked before setting upon the children who were watching television."

Ayen Chol, 4, killed in pit bull cross attack at St Albans | Herald Sun

I don't understand how people were walking to the door and trying to run back inside.
 
According to one report, the dog first threatened relatives standing in the driveway, and when they panicked and ran inside, the dog chased after them.

Pitbull owners stood back from attack on Ayen Chol, claim family | News.com.au

According to another, the homeowner was walking someone to the door. "The tragedy unfolded when a cousin, who owns the house, was walking a family friend to the door and the dog confronted them.

As they tried to run indoors, the pit bull attacked before setting upon the children who were watching television."

Ayen Chol, 4, killed in pit bull cross attack at St Albans | Herald Sun

I don't understand how people were walking to the door and trying to run back inside.


And why, if there were adults immediately on hand who knew the dog was in attack mode, didn't some grown person summon a pair of nads and go after the dog when it went after the kids?
 
That's a very good question. And whether the dog owner is convicted of manslaughter may depend on it. More facts are needed. It's not even clear to me whether the dog was a pitbull terrier or a pitbull mastiff. I've read both.

Oh, and the second article linked states that the little girl's mother ran out into the street for help.
 
Would the parents be partially responsible if they left the door open on their property and the child wandered away?

Yes.


What if a wild animal got inside?

No the parent would not be responsible if a wild animal got inside their house and mauled the child. besides that this story does not involve a wild animal. It involves one persons pet killing another persons child. It doesn't matter if that child is in the yard, inside the house, at the playground, on the porch or walking walking on the sidewalk with a parent or older sibling. Where the child is at or whether or not the door is open is irrelevant to the fact the dog's owner did not properly secure their dog. Now if the parents somehow put their child in the yard with the vicious dog or allowed the child to go into the yard with the vicious dog or opened the gate to the yard with the vicious dog in it so that the dog can get out then it would be the fault of the child's parents that the child got mauled to death. Saying oh the parents should not have left their door open amounts to saying that a victim of a car bomb attack should have paid attention to whether or not his car had a bomb strapped underneath driver's seat.
 
Last edited:
I completely disagree. The configuration of a pitt makes it almost uniquely capable of deathly injury to a human, especially a child. This is not a breed I'd even consider owning, but if you do, IMO, it's on YOU to ENSURE no one gets injured or killed.

20-30 fatalities (assuming that they were correctly identified as pits) a year in this country for 4.5 million known registered pitbull type breeds means that the animal is very safe. Percentage wise that is 0.0006666666666666666 according to this . If a dog is vicious it is because the owner made it that way not because of some stereotypes or wives tales people believe about some breeds.

Can you find the pitbull?
Pet Pitbull - Find the Pit Bull


How many Pit Bulls and Rottweilers are in America? - Yahoo! Answers
 
Last edited:
I would be hard pressed to say jail time. The dog, of course, needs to be put down and punishment does need to be handed out. But if it was a pure accident, then I wouldn't put someone in jail for that.

What if the owner was purposely neglectful in securing the dog and was responsible for the dog being vicious?
 
#16 and it took me 2 tries to find it.

Different article with a little info from neighbors

"Three of us were trying to revive the kid. We were trying to find a heart beat. There were a couple of beats initially but she was gone after that."
He said the owner of the dog had raced to the victim's home and dragged the animal home, before returning to the scene.
He said the dog's owner was "devastated" after the attack. The animal was later removed from the premises and was put down this afternoon.


Other neighbours said they had often heard the pit bull cross barking in the street, but few had seen the animal.

Anisah Mama, who lives next door to the house where the dog lives, said she had been scared in the past for her two children, aged nine and 13.
She had not seen the dog in the three years her family had been living in the home, but said they often heard barking. "Actually this dog is quite aggressive," she said.

"While the children play they hear the dog barking and they are scared sometimes. I said 'don't worry, he's inside'."

Answers a few questions about the owner, but not much there really. I haven't voted because I want to know all the specifics. In the panic of the moment, people do crazy things, such as the Mother running to the street for help. When I was 9 years old a neighbor had a German Shepard (ex-police dog), he'd been retired because of agression. The dog got out and attacked my friend (we were playing together in our yard), he was savaging her. My mother ran out of the house and bashed that dog in the head with a cast iron skillet a couple of times. I'm surprised the dog remained conscious, but he did. He staggered away. The neighbor shot the dog with his service revolver immediately (he'd heard the screaming and rushed outside, yes he was a cop). All of this happened within 3 minutes or so. My friend needed 88 stitches in her legs. This dog had jumped a 6ft wooden privacy fence, his owner had no idea he was loose, and he was devastated by my friends injuries. Lucky he was there to help stop the bleeding.

I've completely lost the plot (of the story I'm telling). :confused: I think I was trying to make the dual points that dog attacks happen, sometimes they're accidental (sometimes not) and punishment should wait until we know all of the facts.
 
California is a leash-law state, which means that if a dog gets loose for any reason and causes harm, the owner is responsible. The extent of responsibility depends upon circumstances. For example, if the small 3-1/2 foot fence at the link was supposed to keep the animal contained, it is grossly inadequate. The owner's criminal liability would be increased, unless he had a secondary containment area, such as a sturdy chain or a high, chain-link kennel. If the safeguards on the owner's property appear to be adequate and the dog had never before escaped, the owner would be fined and would be civilly liable for all medical bills and probably punative damages, unless he could mitigate his liability by showing that someone in the victim's house had negligently opened the door.

If this dog had any other complaints against it, the owner would no doubt be charged criminally and civilly, and would serve jail time if convicted. In both instances the animal would be euthanized.

There are too many unanswered questions and variables about this particular incident. So very, very tragic. :(
 
You constantly re-interpret the things I post or make assumptions about what I believe and then use them in the debate as if I actually said, thought, or expressed those things.

Nonsense. All i do is take people's faulty reasoning to its final conclusion. It's called logic. I have never claimed to know your thoughts. And i'm glad that I don't.

That is poor debating.

What is poor debating is your tactic of making claims, and then trying to weasel your way out of them. And you have a habit of bringing up unrelated topics and acting as if they are somehow relevant to a specific topic. Like the crap you wrote about wild animals. Complete nonsense. It's hard to even contemplate that people believe that ****.

I'm not dishonest just because you cannot comprehend that what I say is what I mean. I don't hide hidden meanings or speak in bull**** terms to get a point across.

:neutral:

If you would debate honestly and take what people say at face value instead of over-reacting and putting forth wild mis-representations of what people say there wouldn't be an issue at all.So maybe next time instead of flying off the handle and going after what people didn't say you could try asking for clarification or addressing what they did say.

As I have said, taking your faulty reasoning to its final conclusion is hardly a "misrepresentation."

The bolded is exactly why you can't have a genuine debate. You don't get it, so you just assume that the other person is illogical, mocking, or presenting an invalid argument. Disagreement does not a strawman make.

BS. No one has bothered to explain how leaving a door open could be relevant to this current discussion if not to cast doubt on who is responsible. And yes, the dog owner is most certainly responsible.
 
Last edited:
She had not seen the dog in the three years her family had been living in the home, but said they often heard barking. "Actually this dog is quite aggressive," she said.

had never seen the dog. but she knows it is quite aggressive simply because she heard it barking?

like dogs never bark for any other reason :roll:
 
As I have said, taking your faulty reasoning to its final conclusion is hardly a "misrepresentation."
.

actually it is. simply because you assume what the final conclusion is.
 
20-30 fatalities (assuming that they were correctly identified as pits) a year in this country for 4.5 million known registered pitbull type breeds means that the animal is very safe. Percentage wise that is 0.0006666666666666666 according to this . If a dog is vicious it is because the owner made it that way not because of some stereotypes or wives tales people believe about some breeds.

Can you find the pitbull?
Pet Pitbull - Find the Pit Bull


How many Pit Bulls and Rottweilers are in America? - Yahoo! Answers

Give it up...I cannot be persuaded. I don't think pitts are suitable for pet ownership but if a person is foolish enough to do so, the owe a duty to the humans around them to make SURE that animal never injures anyone.

There are breeds of dogs and hybrids I would outlaw altogether -- pitts are one.
 
Give it up...I cannot be persuaded. I don't think pitts are suitable for pet ownership but if a person is foolish enough to do so, the owe a duty to the humans around them to make SURE that animal never injures anyone.

There are breeds of dogs and hybrids I would outlaw altogether -- pitts are one.

there are breeds of people and hybrids that I would outlaw altogether. good thing you and I are not in charge
 
I voted for jail time. I'm no fan of the pit bull, and IMO, if people insist on owning one, they need to be strictly liable for keeping it under control.

That poor family; they had just lost their home a month before in a fire, or none of them would have been there.

Spoken like someone with no exposure to pitties.
 
who knows, the neighbors could've been taunting the dog for months and when it got the chance it took revenge. many years ago, we had a dog that was on a chain in our yard. one of the nighborhood brats liked to ride his bike by the yard and throw rocks at our dog. one day, he got a little too close and SURPRISE, SURPRISE our dog knocked him off his bike. Had my father not been outside, the dog probably would've chewed the kid up.


point being... there are too many unknowns in this story to knee-jerk squeal "throw the owner in jail".

Oscar, I said each case has to be investigated on its merits...in florida theres many pitbull breeders...constant reports of pitbulls running loose ripping people and other pets up.
Just recently a guy went out in the morning to get his paper in his mailbox two pits running loose attacked him...the attack went on long enough for his wife to hear his screams and call 911 AND when the deputies got there the dogs were still at him...the dogs turned on the deputies and they shot them dead....
The news report said the owners had been cited on a few occaisons and warned about the dogs running loose...this happens to damn much and the only way to try and stop it is alot harsher penalties...and again...I said each case needs to be investigated on its merits.
 
Give it up...I cannot be persuaded. I don't think pitts are suitable for pet ownership but if a person is foolish enough to do so, the owe a duty to the humans around them to make SURE that animal never injures anyone.

There are breeds of dogs and hybrids I would outlaw altogether -- pitts are one.

You would ban something that has a % 0.0006666666666666666 of killing someone?
 
There's a picture at the link of the fence around the property. It's not very high.

And some breeds, while not particularly aggressive towards humans (and pit bulls are generally very freindly to humans) are known to have a high prey drive (ie hunting instinct). When allowed to roam free, they can become over-excited and end up attacking humans. My dog is half Chow-Chow and they're known to have a strong prey drive. She is never off-leash except in a well-secured area

No dog should be allowed to roam free or left unattended in a place where they can escape.

PS - chain link fences aren't good enough. Some dogs can actually climb up a chain link fence. I once saw a Cocker Spaniel climb 5 feet up a tree.

Hell, when I was a kid I had a dog that could clear a six foot wall from a standing start. And he wasn't very big!
 
I'm kinda iffy on the poll too with the information given.

But generically, if ypu have a viscious dog and fail properly contain it and it kills somebody, then fines and civil penalties are called for, as well as euthanizing the animal.

Jail time should be reserved for gross negligence and any time a previous incident has taken place, however minor, involving the same owner. Because once can be an honest accident. Twice, not so much.

And on a side note. If a pit is attacking and its important enough to intervene, GET ITS FRONT FEET OFF THE GROUND. It is the difference between a bite and death to animals being attacked. Its the shake that kills. Watch Cesar on Dog Whisperer if you don't believe me. He does this.
 
I completely disagree. The configuration of a pitt makes it almost uniquely capable of deathly injury to a human, especially a child. This is not a breed I'd even consider owning, but if you do, IMO, it's on YOU to ENSURE no one gets injured or killed.

That is incorrect. The nature of the dog does allow for some to take advantage of its nature. But I have known quite a few pure pits in my day, and the owners (including one of my very good friends) were very good owners and the dog exceptionally well behaved. It's a matter of upbringing. You have to be wary of nature, true. But humans have already beaten wolf nature and made the dog; so we can control it if we train properly.
 
What if the owner was purposely neglectful in securing the dog and was responsible for the dog being vicious?

If you can prove that in a court of law, I would agree to stiffer punishment. Depending on the degree of neglect/abuse/"wrongful" training, you can reasonable up the punishment perhaps to include jail time.
 
Back
Top Bottom