Eye-witness tells of dog attack horror (From Echo)

All Dogs except Police Dogs should be muzzled when in a public area and kept on a leash, even the most placid Dog can turn.

I think the blame for this preventable incident can be split 50/50 between the owner that shouldn't have left his dog at the mercy of what, or whoever; and the parent of the child for allowing it to happen!

Test Tickle wrote:
All Dogs except Police Dogs should be muzzled when in a public area and kept on a leash, even the most placid Dog can turn.

The plain fact is - if we can believe the report - the the girl grabbed the dog by it's neck.

The poor dog is going to be startled - it probably thought that the girl was going to hurt it.

It's busy by that Tesco's usually, plus all the noise and traffic.

I don't agree at all with people taking their dogs shopping, I don't take my dogs shopping, they go out for their walk first, then I leave them at home and go to the shops.

You read so often that dogs have been stolen from outside shops and never found or worse.

You wouldn't leave a child on it's own outside a shop, so don't leave a dog, then incidents like this hopefully wouldn't happen.

Parent of child at fault here, not the dog. Perhaps all children should be leashed in public?

Nice to see Essex Police found five cars to send, though. Maybe they were hoping for another Essex Lion?

probably coincided with that afternoon's doughnut run

Soouthchurch59 wrote:
I think the blame for this preventable incident can be split 50/50 between the owner that shouldn't have left his dog at the mercy of what, or whoever; and the parent of the child for allowing it to happen!

I tend to agree with you about the blame ratio and the fact this could have been prevented, I still believe Dogs should wear muzzles when out in Public, it would protect all partys, the owner from prosecution, the potential victim from injury and the dog from the possibility of being destroyed by court order.

JuliaM wrote:
Parent of child at fault here, not the dog. Perhaps all children should be leashed in public? Nice to see Essex Police found five cars to send, though. Maybe they were hoping for another Essex Lion?

Nope..... The dog owner is also at fault here.

It's about time that all dogs should be licensed/registed and be on a lead and muzzled at all times when in public.

Russ13 wrote:

JuliaM wrote:
Parent of child at fault here, not the dog. Perhaps all children should be leashed in public? Nice to see Essex Police found five cars to send, though. Maybe they were hoping for another Essex Lion?

Nope..... The dog owner is also at fault here.

It's about time that all dogs should be licensed/registed and be on a lead and muzzled at all times when in public.

child parents are wrong here sorry.
she should have been looking after her kid not letting her run round. she should be in a pram or holding her mums hand.
the poor dog was just trying to protect itself.

I think it is 50/50 I always tell my children to ask before approaching a dog and if there is no owner in sight then stay away but concidering the place it happened the owner shouldn't have left the dog outside the shop I think both parties have a lesson to learn

Eric Whim wrote:
probably coincided with that afternoon's doughnut run

They give us everything including their lives if required...the least you could do is give a little respect back!

The dog should be put down. The dog owner fined for leaving a dog unattended .

Very misleading headline, I think. The eye witness didn't actually witness the attack!

Doesn't sound like the girl was actually 'attacked' - more like the dog reacted instinctively to what it thought was an unprovoked attack itself.

If the dog had been muzzled or, at least, not left unattended this would never have happened. The muzzle would have prevented the bite and if the owner had been in attendance they could have warned the child off. It is not the dogs fault that it was feeling insecure and lashed out the only way it knows how. It may not even intended to cause the injury and the girls face may just have happened to be in the way. However, at the same time, kids will be kids and cannot, in any way, be wrapped in cotton wool 24/7. Anyone who says that they know what their children are doing every waking second is lying. The only way to ensure the safety of children is to take measures to ensure their surroundings and everything they have contact with is made as safe and secure as possible.
Like it or not, we live in a human world and this world is moulded for our benefit, including the domestication of once "wild and dangerous" animals. You cannot, therefore tie up a childs hands or tether the child to their parents waste until they are 16. You can, however, take other preventive measures to contribute to their safety. If this includes muzzling all dogs when in public then so be it.

southendfanman wrote:
The dog should be put down. The dog owner fined for leaving a dog unattended .

So if somebody grabed you round the throat you would not react would you?

Max Impact wrote:

southendfanman wrote:
The dog should be put down. The dog owner fined for leaving a dog unattended .

So if somebody grabed you round the throat you would not react would you?

southendfanman what would you do to the child mother for not looking after her kid?
if she was not running around without her mum keeping an eye on her this would not have happened

emcee wrote:
If the dog had been muzzled or, at least, not left unattended this would never have happened. The muzzle would have prevented the bite and if the owner had been in attendance they could have warned the child off. It is not the dogs fault that it was feeling insecure and lashed out the only way it knows how. It may not even intended to cause the injury and the girls face may just have happened to be in the way. However, at the same time, kids will be kids and cannot, in any way, be wrapped in cotton wool 24/7. Anyone who says that they know what their children are doing every waking second is lying. The only way to ensure the safety of children is to take measures to ensure their surroundings and everything they have contact with is made as safe and secure as possible.
Like it or not, we live in a human world and this world is moulded for our benefit, including the domestication of once "wild and dangerous" animals. You cannot, therefore tie up a childs hands or tether the child to their parents waste until they are 16. You can, however, take other preventive measures to contribute to their safety. If this includes muzzling all dogs when in public then so be it.

"The only way to ensure the safety of children is to take measures to ensure their surroundings and everything they have contact with is made as safe and secure as possible."

It's up to parents to ensure the safety of children, not for everyone else to run around looking for potential dangers. Good grief!

JuliaM wrote:

emcee wrote:
If the dog had been muzzled or, at least, not left unattended this would never have happened. The muzzle would have prevented the bite and if the owner had been in attendance they could have warned the child off. It is not the dogs fault that it was feeling insecure and lashed out the only way it knows how. It may not even intended to cause the injury and the girls face may just have happened to be in the way. However, at the same time, kids will be kids and cannot, in any way, be wrapped in cotton wool 24/7. Anyone who says that they know what their children are doing every waking second is lying. The only way to ensure the safety of children is to take measures to ensure their surroundings and everything they have contact with is made as safe and secure as possible.
Like it or not, we live in a human world and this world is moulded for our benefit, including the domestication of once "wild and dangerous" animals. You cannot, therefore tie up a childs hands or tether the child to their parents waste until they are 16. You can, however, take other preventive measures to contribute to their safety. If this includes muzzling all dogs when in public then so be it.

"The only way to ensure the safety of children is to take measures to ensure their surroundings and everything they have contact with is made as safe and secure as possible."

It's up to parents to ensure the safety of children, not for everyone else to run around looking for potential dangers. Good grief!

Well said

Good grief, can the Echo stoop any lower in its quest to scrape the barrel bottom for lowest common denominator sensationalism?

JuliaM wrote:

emcee wrote:
If the dog had been muzzled or, at least, not left unattended this would never have happened. The muzzle would have prevented the bite and if the owner had been in attendance they could have warned the child off. It is not the dogs fault that it was feeling insecure and lashed out the only way it knows how. It may not even intended to cause the injury and the girls face may just have happened to be in the way. However, at the same time, kids will be kids and cannot, in any way, be wrapped in cotton wool 24/7. Anyone who says that they know what their children are doing every waking second is lying. The only way to ensure the safety of children is to take measures to ensure their surroundings and everything they have contact with is made as safe and secure as possible.
Like it or not, we live in a human world and this world is moulded for our benefit, including the domestication of once "wild and dangerous" animals. You cannot, therefore tie up a childs hands or tether the child to their parents waste until they are 16. You can, however, take other preventive measures to contribute to their safety. If this includes muzzling all dogs when in public then so be it.

"The only way to ensure the safety of children is to take measures to ensure their surroundings and everything they have contact with is made as safe and secure as possible."

It's up to parents to ensure the safety of children, not for everyone else to run around looking for potential dangers. Good grief!

Parents are, indeed, the first line of security and safety for these kids but it is for society to provide the saftey nets should that first line fail.
The best parents in the world can and do often take their eye off the ball. Any parent who says different is lying. It is, therefore, up to society to provide an environment with as few dangers as can be controlled. Ensuring dogs are safe is one of these "society" led safety measures. If that means muzzles on dogs, then so be it.

The headline screams, "Eye-witness tells of dog attack horror"

Then the story says, "A woman from Southend, who was in the store at the time but did not want to be named, said the dog was tied up outside while the owner was inside doing some shopping.

SHE DIDN’T WITNESS THE ATTACK, but rushed outside when she saw and heard the commotion."


So this is just more poorly researched sensationalist cr@p from the Echo. Again.

emcee wrote:

JuliaM wrote:

emcee wrote:
If the dog had been muzzled or, at least, not left unattended this would never have happened. The muzzle would have prevented the bite and if the owner had been in attendance they could have warned the child off. It is not the dogs fault that it was feeling insecure and lashed out the only way it knows how. It may not even intended to cause the injury and the girls face may just have happened to be in the way. However, at the same time, kids will be kids and cannot, in any way, be wrapped in cotton wool 24/7. Anyone who says that they know what their children are doing every waking second is lying. The only way to ensure the safety of children is to take measures to ensure their surroundings and everything they have contact with is made as safe and secure as possible.
Like it or not, we live in a human world and this world is moulded for our benefit, including the domestication of once "wild and dangerous" animals. You cannot, therefore tie up a childs hands or tether the child to their parents waste until they are 16. You can, however, take other preventive measures to contribute to their safety. If this includes muzzling all dogs when in public then so be it.

"The only way to ensure the safety of children is to take measures to ensure their surroundings and everything they have contact with is made as safe and secure as possible."

It's up to parents to ensure the safety of children, not for everyone else to run around looking for potential dangers. Good grief!

Parents are, indeed, the first line of security and safety for these kids but it is for society to provide the saftey nets should that first line fail.
The best parents in the world can and do often take their eye off the ball. Any parent who says different is lying. It is, therefore, up to society to provide an environment with as few dangers as can be controlled. Ensuring dogs are safe is one of these "society" led safety measures. If that means muzzles on dogs, then so be it.

Maybe we should put railings all along roadsides too in order to stop children running into the road and getting run over.

mark-986 wrote:

Russ13 wrote:

JuliaM wrote:
Parent of child at fault here, not the dog. Perhaps all children should be leashed in public? Nice to see Essex Police found five cars to send, though. Maybe they were hoping for another Essex Lion?

Nope..... The dog owner is also at fault here.

It's about time that all dogs should be licensed/registed and be on a lead and muzzled at all times when in public.

child parents are wrong here sorry.
she should have been looking after her kid not letting her run round. she should be in a pram or holding her mums hand.
the poor dog was just trying to protect itself.

sorry but children should not be running up to dogs in the first place it could startle the dog, if a child wants to stroke a dog then use there manners and ask if its OK to stroke your do and if the owner said no then walk away that's the last thing a dogs needs someone pulling there ears it can give them canker.

the picture i'm building is that a great many dog owners are clinically insane. when you take your pet for a walk in a busy public place or leave it tethered outside a supermarket you are not operating in a vacuum. events will happen that are outside of your control. whether or not the animal is provoked would you want your pet mauling a child....i'm guessing in most cases the answer would be "no" but i'm beginning to wonder?

asbo. just the truth wrote:
the picture i'm building is that a great many dog owners are clinically insane. when you take your pet for a walk in a busy public place or leave it tethered outside a supermarket you are not operating in a vacuum. events will happen that are outside of your control. whether or not the animal is provoked would you want your pet mauling a child....i'm guessing in most cases the answer would be "no" but i'm beginning to wonder?

but it was the girls mum fault for not looking after her daughter. the dog was tied up so could not move! the dog was protecting itself. this is down to bad parenting.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
Good grief, can the Echo stoop any lower in its quest to scrape the barrel bottom for lowest common denominator sensationalism?

It sells papers.

mark-986 wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:
the picture i'm building is that a great many dog owners are clinically insane. when you take your pet for a walk in a busy public place or leave it tethered outside a supermarket you are not operating in a vacuum. events will happen that are outside of your control. whether or not the animal is provoked would you want your pet mauling a child....i'm guessing in most cases the answer would be "no" but i'm beginning to wonder?

but it was the girls mum fault for not looking after her daughter. the dog was tied up so could not move! the dog was protecting itself. this is down to bad parenting.

the dog was left unattended. you are responsible for your dog's actions at all times. as i say in a public place you are not in a vacuum. not a difficult concept to grasp surely.

mark-986 wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:
the picture i'm building is that a great many dog owners are clinically insane. when you take your pet for a walk in a busy public place or leave it tethered outside a supermarket you are not operating in a vacuum. events will happen that are outside of your control. whether or not the animal is provoked would you want your pet mauling a child....i'm guessing in most cases the answer would be "no" but i'm beginning to wonder?

but it was the girls mum fault for not looking after her daughter. the dog was tied up so could not move! the dog was protecting itself. this is down to bad parenting.

your response confirms the answer to the question i asked. for you it is ok for the child to be mauled by your dog if it's the child's or the parent's fault.

asbo. just the truth wrote:

mark-986 wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:
the picture i'm building is that a great many dog owners are clinically insane. when you take your pet for a walk in a busy public place or leave it tethered outside a supermarket you are not operating in a vacuum. events will happen that are outside of your control. whether or not the animal is provoked would you want your pet mauling a child....i'm guessing in most cases the answer would be "no" but i'm beginning to wonder?

but it was the girls mum fault for not looking after her daughter. the dog was tied up so could not move! the dog was protecting itself. this is down to bad parenting.

your response confirms the answer to the question i asked. for you it is ok for the child to be mauled by your dog if it's the child's or the parent's fault.

the dog was tied up so it did not approach the girl. as said before the girl was allowed to walk up to the dog a pull the poor thing. this girl is 4 years old she should not be wondering around. it is the parents fault for not keeping an eye on her kid. when i was a kid i was not allowed to leave my parents side just shows how parents these days are so bad at it. it's why we get these teenagers causing trouble. Bad parenting.

mark-986 wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

mark-986 wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:
the picture i'm building is that a great many dog owners are clinically insane. when you take your pet for a walk in a busy public place or leave it tethered outside a supermarket you are not operating in a vacuum. events will happen that are outside of your control. whether or not the animal is provoked would you want your pet mauling a child....i'm guessing in most cases the answer would be "no" but i'm beginning to wonder?

but it was the girls mum fault for not looking after her daughter. the dog was tied up so could not move! the dog was protecting itself. this is down to bad parenting.

your response confirms the answer to the question i asked. for you it is ok for the child to be mauled by your dog if it's the child's or the parent's fault.

the dog was tied up so it did not approach the girl. as said before the girl was allowed to walk up to the dog a pull the poor thing. this girl is 4 years old she should not be wondering around. it is the parents fault for not keeping an eye on her kid. when i was a kid i was not allowed to leave my parents side just shows how parents these days are so bad at it. it's why we get these teenagers causing trouble. Bad parenting.

so no qualms about the child being mauled. quality. and you own a staffie?

Surely parents must teach their children not to approach dogs like that, its crazy, the kiddie knows no better at 4, they should have parental guidance(buggy/holdi
ng hands) especially in a busy area like that anything can happen in a split second, and it did thats if the 'only turned her back for a second' quote is to be believed.
and 5 cars to the scene is a bit OTT.

asbo. just the truth wrote:

mark-986 wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:
the picture i'm building is that a great many dog owners are clinically insane. when you take your pet for a walk in a busy public place or leave it tethered outside a supermarket you are not operating in a vacuum. events will happen that are outside of your control. whether or not the animal is provoked would you want your pet mauling a child....i'm guessing in most cases the answer would be "no" but i'm beginning to wonder?

but it was the girls mum fault for not looking after her daughter. the dog was tied up so could not move! the dog was protecting itself. this is down to bad parenting.

your response confirms the answer to the question i asked. for you it is ok for the child to be mauled by your dog if it's the child's or the parent's fault.

I suppose you let your rats run loose and do whatever they want without any parental guidance, so it's no surprise you don't see why this is the parents' fault and not the dog owner's fault.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

mark-986 wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:
the picture i'm building is that a great many dog owners are clinically insane. when you take your pet for a walk in a busy public place or leave it tethered outside a supermarket you are not operating in a vacuum. events will happen that are outside of your control. whether or not the animal is provoked would you want your pet mauling a child....i'm guessing in most cases the answer would be "no" but i'm beginning to wonder?

but it was the girls mum fault for not looking after her daughter. the dog was tied up so could not move! the dog was protecting itself. this is down to bad parenting.

your response confirms the answer to the question i asked. for you it is ok for the child to be mauled by your dog if it's the child's or the parent's fault.

I suppose you let your rats run loose and do whatever they want without any parental guidance, so it's no surprise you don't see why this is the parents' fault and not the dog owner's fault.

confirmation if any were needed that you're as barking mad as the irresponsible, unfit mutt maniacs. the owners are foaming never mind the dogs.

irresponsible parenting - isn't that a left wing philosophy?

JuliaM wrote:
Parent of child at fault here, not the dog. Perhaps all children should be leashed in public?

Nice to see Essex Police found five cars to send, though. Maybe they were hoping for another Essex Lion?

Idiot, when are you going to realise the Police have responsibilities you could only dream of, in your fantasys.

Let me put to rest all your assumptions about what happened i am the person who was first on scene after unfortunatly witnessing the attack from the moment that poor little child was approaching the dog.I see the dog throw her around like it was in a fight with another dog untill it let her go i felt so helpless as i was about 20 metres away and could do nothing. I was in shock myself as to what i had just seen and ran towards the mother and child as soon as i see the little girls face i nearly cried myself.im 32 years old and a very mentally strong man.that should give you all some idea of her injuries.i called the emergency services,helped mum and jessica, kept the dog owner at scene and was there through out the incident the dog was not full labrodor breed to clear that up too.correct 5 police cars and yes no paramedic.so stop the stupid comments and total bull. Im a dog lover myself and owned a doberman and im a father also.so i can relate to all your feelings about this incident.but i can assure you all that the little girl did not grab or hold the dog in any way she approached it yes when the dog was tied/chained to post/bin unattended. no other option the animal should be put down.hope your questions and wild accusations will now stop.my thoughts are with jessica and parents.and if they see this to please maybe get my number from the police to put my mind at peace and let me know how jess is getting on.Michael.xx many thanks to every body who felt like having a good look but not helping. Cheers could of been you.Many thanks to the tesco staff who were very helpfull and assisted when asked by myself for first aid for the girl.And also accomodated mum and jess untill being taken to hospital.

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

mark-986 wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:
the picture i'm building is that a great many dog owners are clinically insane. when you take your pet for a walk in a busy public place or leave it tethered outside a supermarket you are not operating in a vacuum. events will happen that are outside of your control. whether or not the animal is provoked would you want your pet mauling a child....i'm guessing in most cases the answer would be "no" but i'm beginning to wonder?

but it was the girls mum fault for not looking after her daughter. the dog was tied up so could not move! the dog was protecting itself. this is down to bad parenting.

your response confirms the answer to the question i asked. for you it is ok for the child to be mauled by your dog if it's the child's or the parent's fault.

I suppose you let your rats run loose and do whatever they want without any parental guidance, so it's no surprise you don't see why this is the parents' fault and not the dog owner's fault.

confirmation if any were needed that you're as barking mad as the irresponsible, unfit mutt maniacs. the owners are foaming never mind the dogs.

Really? So a parent doesn't pay attention to a four year old child, letting them run loose while they chat, then blames others when that four year old gets hurt? Parental responsibility.

But if you want a nanny state then you carry on expecting the rest of the world to look after your kids for you.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

mark-986 wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:
the picture i'm building is that a great many dog owners are clinically insane. when you take your pet for a walk in a busy public place or leave it tethered outside a supermarket you are not operating in a vacuum. events will happen that are outside of your control. whether or not the animal is provoked would you want your pet mauling a child....i'm guessing in most cases the answer would be "no" but i'm beginning to wonder?

but it was the girls mum fault for not looking after her daughter. the dog was tied up so could not move! the dog was protecting itself. this is down to bad parenting.

your response confirms the answer to the question i asked. for you it is ok for the child to be mauled by your dog if it's the child's or the parent's fault.

I suppose you let your rats run loose and do whatever they want without any parental guidance, so it's no surprise you don't see why this is the parents' fault and not the dog owner's fault.

confirmation if any were needed that you're as barking mad as the irresponsible, unfit mutt maniacs. the owners are foaming never mind the dogs.

Really? So a parent doesn't pay attention to a four year old child, letting them run loose while they chat, then blames others when that four year old gets hurt? Parental responsibility.

But if you want a nanny state then you carry on expecting the rest of the world to look after your kids for you.

a dog muzzle = nanny state? confirmation if any were needed that you are a clown of the highest order.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

mark-986 wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:
the picture i'm building is that a great many dog owners are clinically insane. when you take your pet for a walk in a busy public place or leave it tethered outside a supermarket you are not operating in a vacuum. events will happen that are outside of your control. whether or not the animal is provoked would you want your pet mauling a child....i'm guessing in most cases the answer would be "no" but i'm beginning to wonder?

but it was the girls mum fault for not looking after her daughter. the dog was tied up so could not move! the dog was protecting itself. this is down to bad parenting.

your response confirms the answer to the question i asked. for you it is ok for the child to be mauled by your dog if it's the child's or the parent's fault.

I suppose you let your rats run loose and do whatever they want without any parental guidance, so it's no surprise you don't see why this is the parents' fault and not the dog owner's fault.

confirmation if any were needed that you're as barking mad as the irresponsible, unfit mutt maniacs. the owners are foaming never mind the dogs.

Really? So a parent doesn't pay attention to a four year old child, letting them run loose while they chat, then blames others when that four year old gets hurt? Parental responsibility.

But if you want a nanny state then you carry on expecting the rest of the world to look after your kids for you.

so a child is fair game for any foaming mutt because the parent might have turned their back for a second... no confirmation of your idiocy was required but you gave it to us anyway.

mikeytilly wrote:
Let me put to rest all your assumptions about what happened i am the person who was first on scene after unfortunatly witnessing the attack from the moment that poor little child was approaching the dog.I see the dog throw her around like it was in a fight with another dog untill it let her go i felt so helpless as i was about 20 metres away and could do nothing. I was in shock myself as to what i had just seen and ran towards the mother and child as soon as i see the little girls face i nearly cried myself.im 32 years old and a very mentally strong man.that should give you all some idea of her injuries.i called the emergency services,helped mum and jessica, kept the dog owner at scene and was there through out the incident the dog was not full labrodor breed to clear that up too.correct 5 police cars and yes no paramedic.so stop the stupid comments and total bull. Im a dog lover myself and owned a doberman and im a father also.so i can relate to all your feelings about this incident.but i can assure you all that the little girl did not grab or hold the dog in any way she approached it yes when the dog was tied/chained to post/bin unattended. no other option the animal should be put down.hope your questions and wild accusations will now stop.my thoughts are with jessica and parents.and if they see this to please maybe get my number from the police to put my mind at peace and let me know how jess is getting on.Michael.xx many thanks to every body who felt like having a good look but not helping. Cheers could of been you.Many thanks to the tesco staff who were very helpfull and assisted when asked by myself for first aid for the girl.And also accomodated mum and jess untill being taken to hospital.

Thanks for that info: although I stand by my previous post and reiterate that the blame for this very unfortunate (but preventable) event must be equally apportioned between the owner of the dog (which, unsurprisingly, isn't a proper lab!) and the parent of the child.

Would the mother have turned her back if a lion had been tethered to a post - I think not.

By the same token; the dog owner should not have abandoned his dog to the whims of any passing loon/thief.

I hope the little girl’s recovery is swift (full) and painless.

Dog cr@p on the streets, dogs attacking people, dog owners shouting at dogs in parks, dogs running around jumping on people. If owners think we all like dogs think again. Muzzel them all and hang a basket between their legs. Dirty unpleasant animals.

How many times have people seen a kid run up to a dog and start stroking it without the parents asking first if it is safe to do so.

Responsibility lays with both the dog owner and the parents of the child, neither knew what was going to happen but BOTH should have thought about what COULD happen.

If the dog had been muzzled or left at home whilst the owner went to the ship it would not hace happened.

If the child's mother had kept full control of the child and held her hand so she could not wander off to the dog it would not have happened.

There is fault on BOTH sides, sadly hindsight is a wonderful thing, but that is only something we see after an event once it is too late and the incident is over.

Of course I am saddened by the child's injury. However, nothing would persuade me to leave my dog(s) tied up outside a shop. I care too much for them to leave at the mercy of a thief.

susie5 wrote:
Of course I am saddened by the child's injury. However, nothing would persuade me to leave my dog(s) tied up outside a shop. I care too much for them to leave at the mercy of a thief.

how about a gristle meat pie?

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

mark-986 wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:
the picture i'm building is that a great many dog owners are clinically insane. when you take your pet for a walk in a busy public place or leave it tethered outside a supermarket you are not operating in a vacuum. events will happen that are outside of your control. whether or not the animal is provoked would you want your pet mauling a child....i'm guessing in most cases the answer would be "no" but i'm beginning to wonder?

but it was the girls mum fault for not looking after her daughter. the dog was tied up so could not move! the dog was protecting itself. this is down to bad parenting.

your response confirms the answer to the question i asked. for you it is ok for the child to be mauled by your dog if it's the child's or the parent's fault.

I suppose you let your rats run loose and do whatever they want without any parental guidance, so it's no surprise you don't see why this is the parents' fault and not the dog owner's fault.

confirmation if any were needed that you're as barking mad as the irresponsible, unfit mutt maniacs. the owners are foaming never mind the dogs.

Really? So a parent doesn't pay attention to a four year old child, letting them run loose while they chat, then blames others when that four year old gets hurt? Parental responsibility.

But if you want a nanny state then you carry on expecting the rest of the world to look after your kids for you.

so a child is fair game for any foaming mutt because the parent might have turned their back for a second... no confirmation of your idiocy was required but you gave it to us anyway.

This wasn't a 'foaming mutt'. It was a dog, properly tied up. Still not surprised to see you abrogating your parental responsibilities.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

mark-986 wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:
the picture i'm building is that a great many dog owners are clinically insane. when you take your pet for a walk in a busy public place or leave it tethered outside a supermarket you are not operating in a vacuum. events will happen that are outside of your control. whether or not the animal is provoked would you want your pet mauling a child....i'm guessing in most cases the answer would be "no" but i'm beginning to wonder?

but it was the girls mum fault for not looking after her daughter. the dog was tied up so could not move! the dog was protecting itself. this is down to bad parenting.

your response confirms the answer to the question i asked. for you it is ok for the child to be mauled by your dog if it's the child's or the parent's fault.

I suppose you let your rats run loose and do whatever they want without any parental guidance, so it's no surprise you don't see why this is the parents' fault and not the dog owner's fault.

confirmation if any were needed that you're as barking mad as the irresponsible, unfit mutt maniacs. the owners are foaming never mind the dogs.

Really? So a parent doesn't pay attention to a four year old child, letting them run loose while they chat, then blames others when that four year old gets hurt? Parental responsibility.

But if you want a nanny state then you carry on expecting the rest of the world to look after your kids for you.

so a child is fair game for any foaming mutt because the parent might have turned their back for a second... no confirmation of your idiocy was required but you gave it to us anyway.

This wasn't a 'foaming mutt'. It was a dog, properly tied up. Still not surprised to see you abrogating your parental responsibilities.

you probably should familiarise yourself with the eye witness account produced further up the thread

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

mark-986 wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:
the picture i'm building is that a great many dog owners are clinically insane. when you take your pet for a walk in a busy public place or leave it tethered outside a supermarket you are not operating in a vacuum. events will happen that are outside of your control. whether or not the animal is provoked would you want your pet mauling a child....i'm guessing in most cases the answer would be "no" but i'm beginning to wonder?

but it was the girls mum fault for not looking after her daughter. the dog was tied up so could not move! the dog was protecting itself. this is down to bad parenting.

your response confirms the answer to the question i asked. for you it is ok for the child to be mauled by your dog if it's the child's or the parent's fault.

I suppose you let your rats run loose and do whatever they want without any parental guidance, so it's no surprise you don't see why this is the parents' fault and not the dog owner's fault.

confirmation if any were needed that you're as barking mad as the irresponsible, unfit mutt maniacs. the owners are foaming never mind the dogs.

Really? So a parent doesn't pay attention to a four year old child, letting them run loose while they chat, then blames others when that four year old gets hurt? Parental responsibility.

But if you want a nanny state then you carry on expecting the rest of the world to look after your kids for you.

so a child is fair game for any foaming mutt because the parent might have turned their back for a second... no confirmation of your idiocy was required but you gave it to us anyway.

This wasn't a 'foaming mutt'. It was a dog, properly tied up. Still not surprised to see you abrogating your parental responsibilities.

you probably should familiarise yourself with the eye witness account produced further up the thread

An unverified post on a website.? How credulous do you think I am?

well he appears to be in possession of all the facts where you on the other hand...

hellen wrote:

mark-986 wrote:

Russ13 wrote:

JuliaM wrote: Parent of child at fault here, not the dog. Perhaps all children should be leashed in public? Nice to see Essex Police found five cars to send, though. Maybe they were hoping for another Essex Lion?

Nope..... The dog owner is also at fault here. It's about time that all dogs should be licensed/registed and be on a lead and muzzled at all times when in public.

child parents are wrong here sorry. she should have been looking after her kid not letting her run round. she should be in a pram or holding her mums hand. the poor dog was just trying to protect itself.

sorry but children should not be running up to dogs in the first place it could startle the dog, if a child wants to stroke a dog then use there manners and ask if its OK to stroke your do and if the owner said no then walk away that's the last thing a dogs needs someone pulling there ears it can give them canker.

The parent should have had a better grip on the situation but dogs should not be left unattended either.

Unfortunately "doggy" people have such a blinkered view of their beloved pets who'd never do harm to anyone.

How many times to we hear of dog attacks on the news where some poor soul has been killed or left with life changing injuries and the owner comes out with the classic line:

"I can't believe my fi-fi trixabelle did this, she was such a lovely animal and wouldn't hurt a fly"

The point is, they are animals and are unpredictable no matter how good/placid they seem or how well they are trained.

I'm not anti-dog, I like dogs in fact my favourite breed are German Shepherd Dogs who have a bit of a bad rep like other big dogs.

The problem with big dogs is that if they "turn" or have a bad day they have a lot more mass/power and do more damage.

Deciding whether or not a dog should wear a muzzle based on size/breed is impractical, for example a toy dog is unlikely to be able to bite a full grown adult with enough power to do any lasting damage but couls cause injury to a small child.

southendfanman wrote:
The dog should be put down. The dog owner fined for leaving a dog unattended .

The dog should NOT be put down at all - how heartless is that!
The kid grabbing the dog around the neck - if that is indeed correct - made teh dog defend itself - end of story.

"The dog involved was a Labrador, a breed not commonly associated with mauling humans or being aggressive."

Source for that little diamond bullet of information, Echo?

I thought not.

If you want the truth (which is a dirty word on this site) you should check out this article - http://www.petyak.co
m/Dogs/Training/Arti
cles/What-Type-of-Do
gs-Bite-the-Most/

Which indicates that Labs bite quite often, thank you very much.