And another toddler mauled to death by a dog?

[i-need-a-martini]

2 years old and killed by a mastiff cross.

The grandmother managed to free the boy from the dogs jaws and rushed him inside. The dog followed her in and grabbed the baby right out of her arms because he wasn't finished.

By all accounts a well cared for dog with no history so we can't blame the owners here.

Why do we continue to allow these dogs to be kept in homes??

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/town-unites-behind-family-of-mauled-toddler-20130806-2rc22.html

[cherry*135]

It was a horrific thing to happen. The dog did not belong to the Grandmother, it was one of her grandson's dog.

Will blaming the Grandmother make the outcome change? The family don't blame her, why would we?

[monman12]

More background to this tragic event, in my opinion,  is in this reported comment from the family: "the pet was usually tied to a tree but, on this rare occasion, was free in the backyard "

That is a recipe for disaster with any dog,  and compounded  with a large breed such as a bull mastiff.

Who should NOT own a bullmastiff?

  A person who intends to keep the dog outside chained up in the back yard.

Can A bullmastiff be an outside dog?

A bullmastiff likes people and needs contact with his family.

They may develop temperament problems if isolated too much

Can a bullmastiff be an inside dog?

Very definitely. They should all be inside at least part of the time so they bond with people.

I have had  dogs for many years including large breeds, and at the risk of castigation here,  have  observed that there is often an  apparent  tendency for some people to own dogs that might reflect themselves, and by extension  a few might  not be be concerned with socialising/training of their (tough) dog.

The Australian Veterinary Association

Breed-specific legislation ignores the human element whereby dog owners

who desire this kind of dog will simply substitute another breed of dog of similar size,

strength and perception of aggressive tendencies

[rabbitearbandicoot]

---

@am*3 wrote:

It was a horrific thing to happen. The dog did not belong to the Grandmother, it was one of her grandson's dog.

Will blaming the Grandmother make the outcome change? The family don't blame her, why would we?

---

It doesn't matter WHO the dog belonged to - a 2-year-old child SHOULD NOT BE LEFT ALONE with a dog - ESPECIALLY if the child is eating something! Naturally, the dog will want some of the food and, if the dog is not socialized to know it's position in the pack/family, then the dog will do what's natural for it and fight for the food.

I just read above that the dog was usually tied up - so NO SOCIALIZION - NO TRAINING - NO GUIDANCE as to it's position in the pack - so, what does it boil down to? OWNER PROBLEM - AGAIN!

[rabbitearbandicoot]

make that SOCIALIZATION ...

it is imperative that a dog be socialized with both humans and other dogs - and any other animals that the owner has. 

[cherry*135]

My post 5 on this thread:

I guess one thing that would prevent similar is not to leave small children alone in the yard with a dog.

As for the blame game and views in hindsight:

[rabbitearbandicoot]

---

@am*3 wrote:

---

You disagree with what? That it's imperative that a dog (especially a large powerful dog) be trained and socialized?

[cherry*135]

Sorry, see edited post.

[cherry*135]

The law has no issue with the male that owned the dog. The dog was registered and not on a list of banned dogs.

[rabbitearbandicoot]

---

@am*3 wrote:

The law has no issue with the male that owned the dog. The dog was registered and not on a list of banned dogs.

---

so, it's OK for me to have dogs with NO TRAINING - NO SOCIALIZATION - KEEP THEM CHAINED UP - NO CONTACT WITH ANYONE ELSE - AS LONG AS I HAVE THEM REGISTERED? The dogs will attack anything that moves - but they are registered so it's OK. I see.

[cherry*135]

I have no intention of posting anything else on this thread after this post.