• LAVA Moderator: Shinji Ikari

Pets MEGA Cats VS Dogs - POLL!

The Big Question - Cat v's Dog


  • Total voters
    171
and i know about re-homing him etc. But point blank he's a proven threat. sorry. But honestly...he wont know what hit him. Easily more humane perhaps than punishment and segregation. And guaranteed he wont harm....even kill...another child. period.
 
chemicalone-

seems a lot of your fellow bluelighters have the same opinion.....

i must reiterate once again.....the state i live in does not allow an animal to be put down for one bite.

thing is, i am starting to think there is a very good reason for this.

some animals are not actually viscious. they may have health issues or mental issues that cause them to act out....

this is why the state requires the animal to be evaluated (please read back to the previous post)....

harry has an appt with a vet/behaviorist monday at 4pm.....
 
your state doesnt allow u to put them down due to health/etc issues? While i know states may not make it mandatory i find it hard to believe its not even allowed. Please don't advise the OP to commit any illegal acts. -pw

ands granted...a child-less adoption situation is ideal....but can u guarantee in such a situation that contact with children will never happen? if not then any resultant injury is in default your fault. are u ok with that? putting another parent thru what your going thru?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
some animals are not actually viscious. they may have health issues or mental issues that cause them to act out....

true. and sad but true many humans have a similar condition that still makes them incompatible with society. it becomes an arguement for the greater good...if u will. sad....yes.....painful...yes.....but definately the responsible solution. and while i'm an agnostic....whose to say we're not sending them to a better place? obviously their brains are conflicted.....why not send them to a place(out of love) where they wont be conflicted again?
 
ChemicalOne said:
your state doesnt allow u to put them down due to health/etc issues? While i know states may not make it mandatory i find it hard to believe its not even allowed. and thats not even taking into consideration the fact that the state doesnt even have to know.

ands granted...a child-less adoption situation is ideal....but can u guarantee in such a situation that contact with children will never happen? if not then any resultant injury is in default your fault. are u ok with that? putting another parent thru what your going thru?

well, when i called his vet to enquire about the options, that is what she told me. she even said no vet in ohio would put him down without an evaluation.....she is an animal behaviorist, so he will be evaluated by her on monday. he has been seeing her for 5 years and she has always said how calm and gentle he was during his appt's...

and, yes i have considered very avenue...i have contacted lab rescues.....thought about re-homing him...talked to family and friends....no shelter will take a dog that has bitten....it will take divine intervention to re-home him.....if you had read thru all my post, you would know this. sorry, but i'm a bit stressed and annoyed that people are not thoroughly reading thru the postings....i do not have the time or patience to post the same statements over and over again....

if the vet decides that he is not an inherentely aggressive dog, we will have to buy a cedar kennel.....keep him outside during the day and bring him in at night to sleep in his cage......he and amelie will never be in the same dwelling again....
 
ChemicalOne said:
true. and sad but true many humans have a similar condition that still makes them incompatible with society. it becomes an arguement for the greater good...if u will. sad....yes.....painful...yes.....but definately the responsible solution. and while i'm an agnostic....whose to say we're not sending them to a better place? obviously their brains are conflicted.....why not send them to a place(out of love) where they wont be conflicted again?

i have sent a beloved dog to that place before....but he had a brain tumor. he was in pain and would not have lived much longer...if he did, he would have been in immense pain .....this is a very different situation and the state has recognized that.....they will not allow euthanisation without evaluation...
 
A friend of mine tonight told me that she has heard many times that no baby can be left around a dog without close supervision because dogs have a tendency to attack babies, for whatever reason. Her belief is that this danger is present in every dog and doesn't indicate that a dog otherwise has a propensity to attack. She doesn't know any more than the rest of us about the subject, but is generally very intelligent and informed. This is the opposite viewpoint to what I stated above, which is that a given dog does or does not have a predisposition to be dangerous. If she's right, any dog can attack a baby and not be any more dangerous than any other dog. But I don't know if she's right.

She also said that the level of risk depends on whether the dog was in the family first, or the dog was added to the family after the baby (first situation has greater risk).

She believes that the risk diminishes when the baby becomes a toddler, but her reasoning for this (that the baby can walk and/or protect herself), was not as solid as the rest of her position.
 
i know he's difficult/impossible to re-home consdidering having bitten a baby. thats my point. and i have read this entire thread.

point is...the whole situation sucks. i know it. i feel for u honestly. But i still feel like u have a very easy decision to make. Baby or dog. I'm not under-cutting your pain....but given the choice.....seems relatively easy. Relative being the key term. Your daugher is first and foremost. and honestly....Please don't advocate breaking the law. -pw

I love Sasha.....but if it came to that i gotta 9mm for her....for the greater good. both hers and mine. sorry...but thats just how i feel.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think if theres a state law against it, and vets, who are the professionals, wont euthanize the dog, theres probably a good reason for it. Sorry, I know people have strong opinions about this, as do I, its just getting really annoying to see that come up over and over again, its been talked about, and ali already has an appt for an evaluation, I wish people would quit bringing it up.
 
Johnny1 said:
A friend of mine tonight told me that she has heard many times that no baby can be left around a dog without close supervision because dogs have a tendency to attack babies, for whatever reason.

it's usually because the sounds babies/children make, and i'm not talking about the cute bubbly ones. i'm talking about the ear piercing shrilling some of them do from time to time. remember, dogs have much better hearing than us, and sounds that are ear piercing to us are probably pretty painful for dogs.
 
Mz_Thizzle said:
I think if theres a state law against it, and vets, who are the professionals, wont euthanize the dog, theres probably a good reason for it. Sorry, I know people have strong opinions about this, as do I, its just getting really annoying to see that come up over and over again, its been talked about, and ali already has an appt for an evaluation, I wish people would quit bringing it up.

QFT.

People are actually encouraging her to break the law to kill the dog. We don't allow that in other forums, so please don't do it here.

I'm sure you feel strongly about it, but once you have stated your opinion, there's no need to harass the OP into doing what you think should be done.
 
pennywise said:
QFT.

People are actually encouraging her to break the law to kill the dog. We don't allow that in other forums, so please don't do it here.

I'm sure you feel strongly about it, but once you have stated your opinion, there's no need to harass the OP into doing what you think should be done.

Agreed. If we don't allow people to advocate breaking the law in other forums, we should probably delete the posts that advocate killing the dog in this one.
 
Killing a dog for being a dog is ridiculous.
Dogs instinctively set up an invisible "fight or flight" boundary around themselves. The size of this boundary depends on his level of confidence and tolerance. A fearful dog will give itself a wider area than a more stable one. When someone who the dog perceives as threatening or unwelcome enters that area, the dog has two choices -- it can run away or it can defend itself. If it feels that it can't run away, it will fight instead, no matter how afraid it might be. Some dogs will choose to fight first, rather than run.
A small child that's petting or hugging a dog has already intruded well within the dog's flight or fight boundary, the dog's safety zone. If the dog has tried to leave or has issued a warning with no response from the child, the dog (in his mind) has no other recourse -- he bites. This is normal, instinctive behavior -- to the dog. He is responding to what he perceives as a threat and is doing what his instincts tell him to. Remember that dogs don't think in the same way that people do. A child's innocent action, petting the dog, can be provocation for a bite when seen through the eyes of the dog.
There are other circumstances that can provoke a dog to bite a child. Running, playing, screaming kids can trigger an instinctive predator-prey reaction in some dogs. Children who rough house and wrestle with dogs unknowingly encourage them to use their teeth. Dogs equate this kind of play with littermates or other dogs where using teeth is allowed. Startling a sleeping dog or petting him when he's eating can also provoke a bite.

The child is new; the dog is showing his dominance over the baby. I see this all the time with my dogs. When I got a German shepherd puppy my other German shepherd for no reason bit the pup, to let the pup know that he was the alpha dog. I immediately beat my dog and scolded him for it to let him know that I was the boss and he never went after the pup again. When my wife and I had our child. I introduced the baby very slowly and under close supervision. Both my dogs stayed on their leash and my wife held on to them. When my dogs did something that was to aggressive we would do what’s call a snap release on the dog. After about 2 weeks we let the dogs be in the same room with our son. We would be watching TV, and if the dogs got to aggressive I could just say no in a sharp voice and they would stop. My son is now 20 month old and he and the dogs get along great. Those dogs would kill someone if they tried to hurt him. So my point is that the dog is not to blame here, he was just doing what dogs do. With proper training and discipline the dog will be fine with a child. I have had dogs my whole life. I have been bitten by my dogs before but it only happened once and after that the dog knew better then to even think about biting me again. It comes down to the owner being the Alpha dog and the dog respecting your authority not the other way around. When you see people getting pulled around by their dog on a leash the dog is in control and the alpha, that’s wrong. My dogs don’t need to be on a leash because they are well trained and listen and know not to walk more than 5 feet in front of me.
 
Kyk said:
Agreed. If we don't allow people to advocate breaking the law in other forums, we should probably delete the posts that advocate killing the dog in this one.

Give me a break. Posting an opinion saying that a dog who nearly kills a baby should be humanely euthanized is not advocating "breaking the law." 8)

The OP is the parent and the owner of the dog. She'll make whatever decision she makes. She posted here and got a lot of opinions that she can choose to give credence to or to ignore.
 
bravo-6 said:
Killing a dog for being a dog is ridiculous.
Dogs instinctively set up an invisible "fight or flight" boundary around themselves. The size of this boundary depends on his level of confidence and tolerance. A fearful dog will give itself a wider area than a more stable one. When someone who the dog perceives as threatening or unwelcome enters that area, the dog has two choices -- it can run away or it can defend itself. If it feels that it can't run away, it will fight instead, no matter how afraid it might be. Some dogs will choose to fight first, rather than run.
A small child that's petting or hugging a dog has already intruded well within the dog's flight or fight boundary, the dog's safety zone. If the dog has tried to leave or has issued a warning with no response from the child, the dog (in his mind) has no other recourse -- he bites. This is normal, instinctive behavior -- to the dog. He is responding to what he perceives as a threat and is doing what his instincts tell him to. Remember that dogs don't think in the same way that people do. A child's innocent action, petting the dog, can be provocation for a bite when seen through the eyes of the dog.
There are other circumstances that can provoke a dog to bite a child. Running, playing, screaming kids can trigger an instinctive predator-prey reaction in some dogs. Children who rough house and wrestle with dogs unknowingly encourage them to use their teeth. Dogs equate this kind of play with littermates or other dogs where using teeth is allowed. Startling a sleeping dog or petting him when he's eating can also provoke a bite.

The child is new; the dog is showing his dominance over the baby. I see this all the time with my dogs. When I got a German shepherd puppy my other German shepherd for no reason bit the pup, to let the pup know that he was the alpha dog. I immediately beat my dog and scolded him for it to let him know that I was the boss and he never went after the pup again. When my wife and I had our child. I introduced the baby very slowly and under close supervision. Both my dogs stayed on their leash and my wife held on to them. When my dogs did something that was to aggressive we would do what’s call a snap release on the dog. After about 2 weeks we let the dogs be in the same room with our son. We would be watching TV, and if the dogs got to aggressive I could just say no in a sharp voice and they would stop. My son is now 20 month old and he and the dogs get along great. Those dogs would kill someone if they tried to hurt him. So my point is that the dog is not to blame here, he was just doing what dogs do. With proper training and discipline the dog will be fine with a child. I have had dogs my whole life. I have been bitten by my dogs before but it only happened once and after that the dog knew better then to even think about biting me again. It comes down to the owner being the Alpha dog and the dog respecting your authority not the other way around. When you see people getting pulled around by their dog on a leash the dog is in control and the alpha, that’s wrong. My dogs don’t need to be on a leash because they are well trained and listen and know not to walk more than 5 feet in front of me.

i would like to adress all your statements here......i am just feeling super tired and stressed....

one thing i would like to say is that harry knows i am alpha....he does not need a leash....he has been very submissive and gentle since the day i found him....

my general idea about harry's motive is that he sees amelie as a puppy and she invaded his space....i was so close and i did not see her touch him at all...she just crawled up next to him....he must have been feeling vulnerable and he just lashed out.....they have never been left alone....i did research when i was pregnant as to how i should introduce her to him...i let him smell the diapers....i left blankets/clothes around with baby powder on them....when she did come home, i made sure to hand her to a family member and greet him before introducing her into the home.....maybe these suggestions i read where wrong....or maybe harry is having some other issues....

we will know more tomorrow.....
 
Johnny1 said:
Give me a break. Posting an opinion saying that a dog who nearly kills a baby should be humanely euthanized is not advocating "breaking the law." 8)

The OP is the parent and the owner of the dog. She'll make whatever decision she makes. She posted here and got a lot of opinions that she can choose to give credence to or to ignore.

in this case it would be breaking the law if the vet put him down without evaluation....

my vet stated that if she deems him to be aggressive, he will be put down....

i found a female dog about 2 years ago and i drove her to a 'no kill' shelter an hour away.....they evaluated her and found her to be agressive, so they put her down....i asked them if i could come get her back and they refused....they said if she bit me or anyone else, they would be responsible....i never noticed any aggressive behavior in her, but the test they ran proved otherwise...

i suppose the laws are pretty strict around here...
 
i would also like to include harry's rescue story...

i had pitched a tent on my friends farm...stayed for a few months....i was packing up my tent/belongings to go home for christmas....it was pouring freezing rain....i turn around to put something in my truck and there's this pup wagging his tail....i said to him"where did you come from?" and he immediatley sat down and stayed...

2 months later i returned to the farm to get him....he did have some issues riding in the truck.....he shivered the whole time and vomited a few times....when i finally got him home, he jumped out and followed me in the house...

i was so amazed at his behavior from that point on....it was like he understood every word i said.....he obeyed like no dog i had ever had....

that was 5 years ago.....his only issue since then has been that he could jump the fence for the first couple years....he would go after squirrels....but, as soon as i would run after him and call him he would come back....

i don't know what compelled me to include that...i feel like maybe it will help you guys better understand harry's background....

even his vet was dumbfounded at this situation....she has always said how well behaved he was during exams.....
 
Top