Woman mauled by dog (From Thisisdorset)

l'anglais wrote:
A dog like a gun, is a dangerous weapon in the wrong hands.
No dog should be allowed off its lead in public.

saynomore wrote:
It should be compulsory to have dogs trained with a certificate to prove it,it would also help if owners were trained as well it might stop morons owning one.

Loo_44 wrote:
@PooleParky "Let's not, however, jump the gun into assuming this is a human aggressive dog, it may not be."

Did you miss the part of the article about the WOMAN being mauled!? Yes I know she got attacked trying to split up the dogs fighting but the dog still went for her!

retry69 wrote:
Many people criticise the Echo comment option but it so full of factual information such as"any dog is 99% wolf and always will be" a real classic and another indication of the type of person who maybe standing next to you at any time lmao

ILOVEBOURNEMOUTH wrote:
Maybe this will be a wake up call to all you "dog-lovers" out there that let them poop all over the pavements and now this. Humans first, pets 2nd!

mark1987 wrote:

retry69 wrote:
Many people criticise the Echo comment option but it so full of factual information such as"any dog is 99% wolf and always will be" a real classic and another indication of the type of person who maybe standing next to you at any time lmao

Throughout history, the grey wolf has been referred to as Canis lupus whilst the domestic dog has been referred to as Canis familaris. It is only recently that research has determined that both species should be referred to under one heading; Canis lupus familaris.

It is commonly known & accepted that all domestic dogs, from Chihuahua to Labrador, are the direct results of the domestication of the grey wolf that occurred as long as 17,000 years ago. When we say '99% wolf' we are referring to the genetics of the dog. Although they are not genetically identical, a dog shares 99% of its DNA with a wolf and interbreeding between the two can and does occur.



Article Source: http://EzineArticles

.com/6234494

Thank you very much smart a$%£
Do your research before making stupid comments!

retry69 wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

retry69 wrote: Many people criticise the Echo comment option but it so full of factual information such as"any dog is 99% wolf and always will be" a real classic and another indication of the type of person who maybe standing next to you at any time lmao

Throughout history, the grey wolf has been referred to as Canis lupus whilst the domestic dog has been referred to as Canis familaris. It is only recently that research has determined that both species should be referred to under one heading; Canis lupus familaris. It is commonly known & accepted that all domestic dogs, from Chihuahua to Labrador, are the direct results of the domestication of the grey wolf that occurred as long as 17,000 years ago. When we say '99% wolf' we are referring to the genetics of the dog. Although they are not genetically identical, a dog shares 99% of its DNA with a wolf and interbreeding between the two can and does occur. Article Source: http://EzineArticles .com/6234494 Thank you very much smart a$%£ Do your research before making stupid comments!

So you really believe that all our domesticated dogs are 99% wolf because of something thats been written by possible someone similar to your way of thinking,When we say wolf its not we its you! are you an AFCB supporter by any chance

mark1987 wrote:

retry69 wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

retry69 wrote: Many people criticise the Echo comment option but it so full of factual information such as"any dog is 99% wolf and always will be" a real classic and another indication of the type of person who maybe standing next to you at any time lmao

Throughout history, the grey wolf has been referred to as Canis lupus whilst the domestic dog has been referred to as Canis familaris. It is only recently that research has determined that both species should be referred to under one heading; Canis lupus familaris. It is commonly known & accepted that all domestic dogs, from Chihuahua to Labrador, are the direct results of the domestication of the grey wolf that occurred as long as 17,000 years ago. When we say '99% wolf' we are referring to the genetics of the dog. Although they are not genetically identical, a dog shares 99% of its DNA with a wolf and interbreeding between the two can and does occur. Article Source: http://EzineArticles .com/6234494 Thank you very much smart a$%£ Do your research before making stupid comments!

So you really believe that all our domesticated dogs are 99% wolf because of something thats been written by possible someone similar to your way of thinking,When we say wolf its not we its you! are you an AFCB supporter by any chance

Sorry i fail to see the link to football from factual way of thinking!

just go back to your low IQ life and let the people with valuable comments have an input.

retry69 wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

retry69 wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

retry69 wrote: Many people criticise the Echo comment option but it so full of factual information such as"any dog is 99% wolf and always will be" a real classic and another indication of the type of person who maybe standing next to you at any time lmao

Throughout history, the grey wolf has been referred to as Canis lupus whilst the domestic dog has been referred to as Canis familaris. It is only recently that research has determined that both species should be referred to under one heading; Canis lupus familaris. It is commonly known & accepted that all domestic dogs, from Chihuahua to Labrador, are the direct results of the domestication of the grey wolf that occurred as long as 17,000 years ago. When we say '99% wolf' we are referring to the genetics of the dog. Although they are not genetically identical, a dog shares 99% of its DNA with a wolf and interbreeding between the two can and does occur. Article Source: http://EzineArticles .com/6234494 Thank you very much smart a$%£ Do your research before making stupid comments!

So you really believe that all our domesticated dogs are 99% wolf because of something thats been written by possible someone similar to your way of thinking,When we say wolf its not we its you! are you an AFCB supporter by any chance

Sorry i fail to see the link to football from factual way of thinking! just go back to your low IQ life and let the people with valuable comments have an input.

Because of you resorting to personal comments it is similar to the Eddie Mitchell mass hysteria that is usually posted on the football threads.Your Wolf comment belongs with Bournemouth becoming the murder capital of the south and most cyclists will go out cycling because of fear complete and utter rubbish,of course that is only my opinion

mark1987 wrote:

retry69 wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

retry69 wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

retry69 wrote: Many people criticise the Echo comment option but it so full of factual information such as"any dog is 99% wolf and always will be" a real classic and another indication of the type of person who maybe standing next to you at any time lmao

Throughout history, the grey wolf has been referred to as Canis lupus whilst the domestic dog has been referred to as Canis familaris. It is only recently that research has determined that both species should be referred to under one heading; Canis lupus familaris. It is commonly known & accepted that all domestic dogs, from Chihuahua to Labrador, are the direct results of the domestication of the grey wolf that occurred as long as 17,000 years ago. When we say '99% wolf' we are referring to the genetics of the dog. Although they are not genetically identical, a dog shares 99% of its DNA with a wolf and interbreeding between the two can and does occur. Article Source: http://EzineArticles .com/6234494 Thank you very much smart a$%£ Do your research before making stupid comments!

So you really believe that all our domesticated dogs are 99% wolf because of something thats been written by possible someone similar to your way of thinking,When we say wolf its not we its you! are you an AFCB supporter by any chance

Sorry i fail to see the link to football from factual way of thinking! just go back to your low IQ life and let the people with valuable comments have an input.

Because of you resorting to personal comments it is similar to the Eddie Mitchell mass hysteria that is usually posted on the football threads.Your Wolf comment belongs with Bournemouth becoming the murder capital of the south and most cyclists will go out cycling because of fear complete and utter rubbish,of course that is only my opinion

Dear o Dear it gets better! your on a roll with the bull£$%£

why are you arguing with proven fact it makes no sense. Comments like bournemouth becoming the murder capital of the south are made from people like yourself that have no factual grasp on life! i do not hold those thoughts.

you are making yourself look pathetic to the readers on here so you should just stop!

the fact that people on here are agreeing with me and not you should put this issue you have to bed!

mark1987 wrote:

retry69 wrote:
Many people criticise the Echo comment option but it so full of factual information such as"any dog is 99% wolf and always will be" a real classic and another indication of the type of person who maybe standing next to you at any time lmao

Throughout history, the grey wolf has been referred to as Canis lupus whilst the domestic dog has been referred to as Canis familaris. It is only recently that research has determined that both species should be referred to under one heading; Canis lupus familaris.

It is commonly known & accepted that all domestic dogs, from Chihuahua to Labrador, are the direct results of the domestication of the grey wolf that occurred as long as 17,000 years ago. When we say '99% wolf' we are referring to the genetics of the dog. Although they are not genetically identical, a dog shares 99% of its DNA with a wolf and interbreeding between the two can and does occur.



Article Source: http://EzineArticles

.com/6234494

Thank you very much smart a$%£
Do your research before making stupid comments!

BmthNewshound wrote:

saynomore wrote:
It should be compulsory to have dogs trained with a certificate to prove it,it would also help if owners were trained as well it might stop morons owning one.

Perhaps the same should apply to parents, it might stop morons breeding and producing another generation of feral kids with anti-social tendancies.
.
Fortunately attacks like this are rare, and a lot less frequent than attacks on innocent members of the public by drunken or drugged up thugs.
.
The majority of dog owners are responsible and most dogs are well behaved. But they'll always be a minority who give the majority a bad name and no amount of draconian legislation will change this, just like parents with ASBO kids.
.

retry69 wrote:
So it could be a gorilla or a wolf that made that hole that the unfortunate man fell down.The school holidays will be over and then perhaps the comment section will be returned to the adults.Talking of adults where is Pete Woodley ?

mark1987 wrote:

retry69 wrote:
So it could be a gorilla or a wolf that made that hole that the unfortunate man fell down.The school holidays will be over and then perhaps the comment section will be returned to the adults.Talking of adults where is Pete Woodley ?

Excellent so you will be going back to school then ?

If you want to make comments now to cover your childish ways of thinking then go ahead, the fact is you have been proven wrong over and over and you cant accept it. i understand.

your a prime example of how education can have no effect on some people.

Franks Tank wrote:
I understand that humans share around 50% of their DNA with a cabbage. It's clear this percentage varies from person to person though.

KitKatPuss wrote:
Any living creature whether it be a dog, cat or human being can be vicious. Does it really matter where dogs originated from?

mark1987 wrote:

KitKatPuss wrote: Any living creature whether it be a dog, cat or human being can be vicious. Does it really matter where dogs originated from?

Yes!! to understand the actions of an animal it is important to understand where the behaviour manifests from! in the case of a dog understanding that the behaviours and actions originate from that of a wolf give people a better understanding, rarther than picturing the nice soft pooch that we find in many homes you can picture a brutal hunter survivoir such as the wolf to understand dogs! As i have stated before dogs are 99% wolf!

Franks Tank wrote:
I understand that humans share around 50% of their DNA with a cabbage.
It's clear this percentage varies from person to person though.

throatwarbler wrote:
with all these wolves around i think it's high time i got myself a tiger. Tigers predate wolves in the wild. must be one going free in Essex or somewhere.

mark1987 wrote:

throatwarbler wrote: with all these wolves around i think it's high time i got myself a tiger. Tigers predate wolves in the wild. must be one going free in Essex or somewhere.

sorry but no the first wolf is dated back 10 million years ago. Tigers were only truely known as tigers 2 million years ago. Before anyone disagrees the sabre tooth tiger is named this because of its look it is not linked to the tiger family as we know it.

KitKatPuss wrote:
Seriously people, take a step back and breathe. We are now way off the track with regards to this story. Instead of insulting each other how about sticking to the actual story.

retry69 wrote:

Franks Tank wrote:
I understand that humans share around 50% of their DNA with a cabbage.
It's clear this percentage varies from person to person though.

Frank tell me thats really true, that only confirms what i said in my original post these threads are full of facts i only hope that one of the contributors on here had nothing to do with the big **** cat scare that went on

KitKatPuss wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

KitKatPuss wrote: Any living creature whether it be a dog, cat or human being can be vicious. Does it really matter where dogs originated from?

Yes!! to understand the actions of an animal it is important to understand where the behaviour manifests from! in the case of a dog understanding that the behaviours and actions originate from that of a wolf give people a better understanding, rarther than picturing the nice soft pooch that we find in many homes you can picture a brutal hunter survivoir such as the wolf to understand dogs! As i have stated before dogs are 99% wolf!

Ok then....what about human history which is full of bloodshed and persecution? We all descend from people who lived during the Medieval and Tudor eras. I understand what you are trying to say but it is like saying that a human could commit violence because their ancestors burned herectics at the stake!

retry69 wrote:

retry69 wrote:

Franks Tank wrote: I understand that humans share around 50% of their DNA with a cabbage. It's clear this percentage varies from person to person though.

Frank tell me thats really true, that only confirms what i said in my original post these threads are full of facts i only hope that one of the contributors on here had nothing to do with the big **** cat scare that went on

That should read puss*cat

KitKatPuss wrote:
Let's stick to the story; This poor woman was badly injured, I hope she gets better soon. It is never a good idea to get in the middle of two dogs fighting as there is a very high risk of being bitten. Will the owner of the attacking labrador be bought to justice for not having control over their dog? As a responsibile dog owner I think all dogs should be kept on a lead (this could apply to children who misbehave).

mark1987 wrote:

KitKatPuss wrote: Let's stick to the story; This poor woman was badly injured, I hope she gets better soon. It is never a good idea to get in the middle of two dogs fighting as there is a very high risk of being bitten. Will the owner of the attacking labrador be bought to justice for not having control over their dog? As a responsibile dog owner I think all dogs should be kept on a lead (this could apply to children who misbehave).

Excellent you took it away from the story with your human argument but you cant answer what i said so you quickly revert back to the original post classic!

retry69 wrote:
Yeah we wish the woman well but lets not have nightmares about our dogs turning into wolves overnight.

mark1987 wrote:

retry69 wrote:

retry69 wrote:

Franks Tank wrote: I understand that humans share around 50% of their DNA with a cabbage. It's clear this percentage varies from person to person though.

Frank tell me thats really true, that only confirms what i said in my original post these threads are full of facts i only hope that one of the contributors on here had nothing to do with the big **** cat scare that went on

That should read puss*cat

grow up!

your wrong get over it.
do half an hours research and find out

poolepaul wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

retry69 wrote:

retry69 wrote:

Franks Tank wrote: I understand that humans share around 50% of their DNA with a cabbage. It's clear this percentage varies from person to person though.

Frank tell me thats really true, that only confirms what i said in my original post these threads are full of facts i only hope that one of the contributors on here had nothing to do with the big **** cat scare that went on

That should read puss*cat

grow up! your wrong get over it. do half an hours research and find out

*You're

poolepaul wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

retry69 wrote:

retry69 wrote:

Franks Tank wrote: I understand that humans share around 50% of their DNA with a cabbage. It's clear this percentage varies from person to person though.

Frank tell me thats really true, that only confirms what i said in my original post these threads are full of facts i only hope that one of the contributors on here had nothing to do with the big **** cat scare that went on

That should read puss*cat

grow up!

your wrong get over it.
do half an hours research and find out

*You're

KitKatPuss wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

KitKatPuss wrote: Let's stick to the story; This poor woman was badly injured, I hope she gets better soon. It is never a good idea to get in the middle of two dogs fighting as there is a very high risk of being bitten. Will the owner of the attacking labrador be bought to justice for not having control over their dog? As a responsibile dog owner I think all dogs should be kept on a lead (this could apply to children who misbehave).

Excellent you took it away from the story with your human argument but you cant answer what i said so you quickly revert back to the original post classic!

I didn't read your post regarding humans evolving hence why I haven't yet responded. I agree that humans have evolved to a degree but we have also been domesticated as is the case with the americans domesticating the native indian population many years ago. I also quote an excerpt from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 2007: "The hypothesis that anatomically modern homo sapiens could have undergone changes akin to those observed in domesticated animals has been contemplated in the biological sciences for at least 150 years. The idea had already plagued philosophers such as Rousseau, who considered the civilisation of man as going against human nature, and eventually "sparked over" to the medical sciences in the late 19th and early 20th century. At that time, human "self-domestication" appealed to psychiatry, because it served as a causal explanation for the alleged degeneration of the "erbgut" (genetic material) of entire populations and the presumed increase of mental disorders." Maybe we should just agree to disagree. You have some very valid points and are obviously well educated, however this is not really a forum to discuss these theories anymore.

throatwarbler wrote:
"Well said, I am fed up of having to hear about how awful dog owners are whilst its fine for kids to do as they please".

I fail to see the logic here. Are you suggesting that we let dogs/dog owners run amok until all the evils of youth are sorted out? That's a bit like saying "don't bother investigating burglary until all murders are stopped".

I'm offended by anti-social behaviour full stop.

KitKatPuss wrote:
Let's stick to the story;

This poor woman was badly injured, I hope she gets better soon.

It is never a good idea to get in the middle of two dogs fighting as there is a very high risk of being bitten.

Will the owner of the attacking labrador be bought to justice for not having control over their dog?

As a responsibile dog owner I think all dogs should be kept on a lead (this could apply to children who misbehave).

mark1987 wrote:

KitKatPuss wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

KitKatPuss wrote: Let's stick to the story; This poor woman was badly injured, I hope she gets better soon. It is never a good idea to get in the middle of two dogs fighting as there is a very high risk of being bitten. Will the owner of the attacking labrador be bought to justice for not having control over their dog? As a responsibile dog owner I think all dogs should be kept on a lead (this could apply to children who misbehave).

Excellent you took it away from the story with your human argument but you cant answer what i said so you quickly revert back to the original post classic!

I didn't read your post regarding humans evolving hence why I haven't yet responded. I agree that humans have evolved to a degree but we have also been domesticated as is the case with the americans domesticating the native indian population many years ago. I also quote an excerpt from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 2007: "The hypothesis that anatomically modern homo sapiens could have undergone changes akin to those observed in domesticated animals has been contemplated in the biological sciences for at least 150 years. The idea had already plagued philosophers such as Rousseau, who considered the civilisation of man as going against human nature, and eventually "sparked over" to the medical sciences in the late 19th and early 20th century. At that time, human "self-domestication" appealed to psychiatry, because it served as a causal explanation for the alleged degeneration of the "erbgut" (genetic material) of entire populations and the presumed increase of mental disorders." Maybe we should just agree to disagree. You have some very valid points and are obviously well educated, however this is not really a forum to discuss these theories anymore.

Domestication is not commonly related to humans in any way! Domestication is an evolutionary process made by humans to meet thier needs! Some may use the word domestication to relate to say government who make us act in such a way benefits them but this is twisting the true definition of the word! Thank you for your educated comments it is refreshing to see another echo reader with good knowledge.

KitKatPuss wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

KitKatPuss wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

KitKatPuss wrote: Let's stick to the story; This poor woman was badly injured, I hope she gets better soon. It is never a good idea to get in the middle of two dogs fighting as there is a very high risk of being bitten. Will the owner of the attacking labrador be bought to justice for not having control over their dog? As a responsibile dog owner I think all dogs should be kept on a lead (this could apply to children who misbehave).

Excellent you took it away from the story with your human argument but you cant answer what i said so you quickly revert back to the original post classic!

I didn't read your post regarding humans evolving hence why I haven't yet responded. I agree that humans have evolved to a degree but we have also been domesticated as is the case with the americans domesticating the native indian population many years ago. I also quote an excerpt from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 2007: "The hypothesis that anatomically modern homo sapiens could have undergone changes akin to those observed in domesticated animals has been contemplated in the biological sciences for at least 150 years. The idea had already plagued philosophers such as Rousseau, who considered the civilisation of man as going against human nature, and eventually "sparked over" to the medical sciences in the late 19th and early 20th century. At that time, human "self-domestication" appealed to psychiatry, because it served as a causal explanation for the alleged degeneration of the "erbgut" (genetic material) of entire populations and the presumed increase of mental disorders." Maybe we should just agree to disagree. You have some very valid points and are obviously well educated, however this is not really a forum to discuss these theories anymore.

Domestication is not commonly related to humans in any way! Domestication is an evolutionary process made by humans to meet thier needs! Some may use the word domestication to relate to say government who make us act in such a way benefits them but this is twisting the true definition of the word! Thank you for your educated comments it is refreshing to see another echo reader with good knowledge.

Everyone is educated whether it be academically or via life experience. I think everyone on this forum has made some good points and it is very interesting to read what other people think.

funkychicken_83 wrote:

KitKatPuss wrote: Let's stick to the story; This poor woman was badly injured, I hope she gets better soon. It is never a good idea to get in the middle of two dogs fighting as there is a very high risk of being bitten. Will the owner of the attacking labrador be bought to justice for not having control over their dog? As a responsibile dog owner I think all dogs should be kept on a lead (this could apply to children who misbehave).

Whilst I agree with most of what you have said, I have to disagree that dogs should be kept on leads. Dogs need to have off lead exercise or behavioural problems will occur, lead walking simply is not enough mental stimulation for them. Most dog owners put a lot of time into training their dogs, and by far the majority do not pose a risk when off lead.

beachcomber1 wrote:
try as i might i can't find a single story about an out of control cat killing or mauling an adult or child.

jobsworthwatch wrote:

KitKatPuss wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

KitKatPuss wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

KitKatPuss wrote: Let's stick to the story; This poor woman was badly injured, I hope she gets better soon. It is never a good idea to get in the middle of two dogs fighting as there is a very high risk of being bitten. Will the owner of the attacking labrador be bought to justice for not having control over their dog? As a responsibile dog owner I think all dogs should be kept on a lead (this could apply to children who misbehave).

Excellent you took it away from the story with your human argument but you cant answer what i said so you quickly revert back to the original post classic!

I didn't read your post regarding humans evolving hence why I haven't yet responded. I agree that humans have evolved to a degree but we have also been domesticated as is the case with the americans domesticating the native indian population many years ago. I also quote an excerpt from Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 2007: "The hypothesis that anatomically modern homo sapiens could have undergone changes akin to those observed in domesticated animals has been contemplated in the biological sciences for at least 150 years. The idea had already plagued philosophers such as Rousseau, who considered the civilisation of man as going against human nature, and eventually "sparked over" to the medical sciences in the late 19th and early 20th century. At that time, human "self-domestication" appealed to psychiatry, because it served as a causal explanation for the alleged degeneration of the "erbgut" (genetic material) of entire populations and the presumed increase of mental disorders." Maybe we should just agree to disagree. You have some very valid points and are obviously well educated, however this is not really a forum to discuss these theories anymore.

Domestication is not commonly related to humans in any way! Domestication is an evolutionary process made by humans to meet thier needs! Some may use the word domestication to relate to say government who make us act in such a way benefits them but this is twisting the true definition of the word! Thank you for your educated comments it is refreshing to see another echo reader with good knowledge.

Everyone is educated whether it be academically or via life experience. I think everyone on this forum has made some good points and it is very interesting to read what other people think.

Everyone except retry, he never makes any points, good or bad and obviously doesn't think.

KitKatPuss wrote:

funkychicken_83 wrote:

KitKatPuss wrote: Let's stick to the story; This poor woman was badly injured, I hope she gets better soon. It is never a good idea to get in the middle of two dogs fighting as there is a very high risk of being bitten. Will the owner of the attacking labrador be bought to justice for not having control over their dog? As a responsibile dog owner I think all dogs should be kept on a lead (this could apply to children who misbehave).

Whilst I agree with most of what you have said, I have to disagree that dogs should be kept on leads. Dogs need to have off lead exercise or behavioural problems will occur, lead walking simply is not enough mental stimulation for them. Most dog owners put a lot of time into training their dogs, and by far the majority do not pose a risk when off lead.

I agree that dogs need to be let off the lead to help exercise the body and mind. Luckily I have a large garden where my dog has free roam in addition to him having access to a large fenced field which is secure and monitored.

Unfortunately the reason I think all dogs should be kept on a lead is due to the amount of dogs that just wander over to say hello to my dog. This always inevitably ends up with my dog barking and lunging as he things that the dog that has just approached is invading his territory or going to attack him mum. As my dog is from a rescue centre he has behavioural problems.

retry69 wrote:
Now we have got away from the fairy tales of wolves and quotes out of books we can return to the old chestnut of dog control which has been out of the headlines for at least a week.It seems that the attacking dog was either without its owner or the owner made themselves scarce.The unforunate lady was in the wrong place at the wrong time it could happen to any of us walking dogs but it is not as a common occurence as some would want us to believe, neither is being mown down by a cycle,but these incidents get hyped up by headlines such as "mauled" and the likes and we get hysteria breaking out all over.

KitKatPuss wrote:

beachcomber1 wrote:
try as i might i can't find a single story about an out of control cat killing or mauling an adult or child.

http://www.thesun.co

.uk/sol/homepage/new

s/4507250/Cat-attack

s-baby-girl-in-cot-l

eaving-her-needing-1

7-stitches.html

Recent news story.

funkychicken_83 wrote:

KitKatPuss wrote:

funkychicken_83 wrote:

KitKatPuss wrote: Let's stick to the story; This poor woman was badly injured, I hope she gets better soon. It is never a good idea to get in the middle of two dogs fighting as there is a very high risk of being bitten. Will the owner of the attacking labrador be bought to justice for not having control over their dog? As a responsibile dog owner I think all dogs should be kept on a lead (this could apply to children who misbehave).

Whilst I agree with most of what you have said, I have to disagree that dogs should be kept on leads. Dogs need to have off lead exercise or behavioural problems will occur, lead walking simply is not enough mental stimulation for them. Most dog owners put a lot of time into training their dogs, and by far the majority do not pose a risk when off lead.

I agree that dogs need to be let off the lead to help exercise the body and mind. Luckily I have a large garden where my dog has free roam in addition to him having access to a large fenced field which is secure and monitored. Unfortunately the reason I think all dogs should be kept on a lead is due to the amount of dogs that just wander over to say hello to my dog. This always inevitably ends up with my dog barking and lunging as he things that the dog that has just approached is invading his territory or going to attack him mum. As my dog is from a rescue centre he has behavioural problems.

So basically all dogs need to stay on a lead as they might approach your dog. If your dog has issues, which is understandable with some rescue dogs, then I would suggest seeing a behaviourist about this, or if they are not able to sort the problem, either not taking your dog to areas where dogs are exercised off lead, or muzzling him. This is exactly the sort of thing that is giving all dog owners a bad name. Dogs naturally want to socialise with each other, and whilst I feel that the owners should try and prevent their dog for just going up to another dog, especially if it is on a lead, this is not always possible, for example with puppies undergoing training that are still learning to be recalled from distractions. If a dog can not be trusted to behave in a friendly manner towards other dogs then they simply should not be taken where they pose a risk to other dogs.

mark1987 wrote:

retry69 wrote: Now we have got away from the fairy tales of wolves and quotes out of books we can return to the old chestnut of dog control which has been out of the headlines for at least a week.It seems that the attacking dog was either without its owner or the owner made themselves scarce.The unforunate lady was in the wrong place at the wrong time it could happen to any of us walking dogs but it is not as a common occurence as some would want us to believe, neither is being mown down by a cycle,but these incidents get hyped up by headlines such as "mauled" and the likes and we get hysteria breaking out all over.

quotes out of books? i quoted one article to show you that you were wrong! since most people get thier knowledge from books then quoting them is best practise rather than claiming it as your own words! i have a vast knowledge on what i have been saying and what i have posted is my own knowledge as for fairy tales, you obviously live in a phantasy world so you would know more about that than me!

KitKatPuss wrote:

funkychicken_83 wrote:

KitKatPuss wrote:

funkychicken_83 wrote:

KitKatPuss wrote: Let's stick to the story; This poor woman was badly injured, I hope she gets better soon. It is never a good idea to get in the middle of two dogs fighting as there is a very high risk of being bitten. Will the owner of the attacking labrador be bought to justice for not having control over their dog? As a responsibile dog owner I think all dogs should be kept on a lead (this could apply to children who misbehave).

Whilst I agree with most of what you have said, I have to disagree that dogs should be kept on leads. Dogs need to have off lead exercise or behavioural problems will occur, lead walking simply is not enough mental stimulation for them. Most dog owners put a lot of time into training their dogs, and by far the majority do not pose a risk when off lead.

I agree that dogs need to be let off the lead to help exercise the body and mind. Luckily I have a large garden where my dog has free roam in addition to him having access to a large fenced field which is secure and monitored. Unfortunately the reason I think all dogs should be kept on a lead is due to the amount of dogs that just wander over to say hello to my dog. This always inevitably ends up with my dog barking and lunging as he things that the dog that has just approached is invading his territory or going to attack him mum. As my dog is from a rescue centre he has behavioural problems.

So basically all dogs need to stay on a lead as they might approach your dog. If your dog has issues, which is understandable with some rescue dogs, then I would suggest seeing a behaviourist about this, or if they are not able to sort the problem, either not taking your dog to areas where dogs are exercised off lead, or muzzling him. This is exactly the sort of thing that is giving all dog owners a bad name. Dogs naturally want to socialise with each other, and whilst I feel that the owners should try and prevent their dog for just going up to another dog, especially if it is on a lead, this is not always possible, for example with puppies undergoing training that are still learning to be recalled from distractions. If a dog can not be trusted to behave in a friendly manner towards other dogs then they simply should not be taken where they pose a risk to other dogs.

Thanks for your comments. My dog is undergoing behaviour training already and is really benefiting from it. His issues unfortunately stem from being abused, dumped on a street and then being picked up by the dog warden.

Why am I giving dog owners a bad name? My dog is microchipped, fully insured, is never off the lead in public places, is very obedient considering his background and is very friendly towards people.

Why should my dog not go walking in the woods? Why should he suffer due to his previous treatment from human beings?

I don't expect dogs to come bounding up to me and my dog, the same as I would not expect people to deal with my dog bounding up to them. The same can be said of children running riot and said parents not enforcing discipline.

Muzzling is not the solution to everything.

mark1987 wrote:
I apologise for spelling mistakes and gramatical errors.

Don't mean to offend the English language police!

saynomore wrote:
It should be compulsory to have dogs trained with a certificate to prove it,it would also help if owners were trained as well it might stop morons owning one.

KitKatPuss wrote:

funkychicken_83 wrote:

KitKatPuss wrote:

funkychicken_83 wrote:

KitKatPuss wrote: Let's stick to the story; This poor woman was badly injured, I hope she gets better soon. It is never a good idea to get in the middle of two dogs fighting as there is a very high risk of being bitten. Will the owner of the attacking labrador be bought to justice for not having control over their dog? As a responsibile dog owner I think all dogs should be kept on a lead (this could apply to children who misbehave).

Whilst I agree with most of what you have said, I have to disagree that dogs should be kept on leads. Dogs need to have off lead exercise or behavioural problems will occur, lead walking simply is not enough mental stimulation for them. Most dog owners put a lot of time into training their dogs, and by far the majority do not pose a risk when off lead.

I agree that dogs need to be let off the lead to help exercise the body and mind. Luckily I have a large garden where my dog has free roam in addition to him having access to a large fenced field which is secure and monitored. Unfortunately the reason I think all dogs should be kept on a lead is due to the amount of dogs that just wander over to say hello to my dog. This always inevitably ends up with my dog barking and lunging as he things that the dog that has just approached is invading his territory or going to attack him mum. As my dog is from a rescue centre he has behavioural problems.

So basically all dogs need to stay on a lead as they might approach your dog. If your dog has issues, which is understandable with some rescue dogs, then I would suggest seeing a behaviourist about this, or if they are not able to sort the problem, either not taking your dog to areas where dogs are exercised off lead, or muzzling him. This is exactly the sort of thing that is giving all dog owners a bad name. Dogs naturally want to socialise with each other, and whilst I feel that the owners should try and prevent their dog for just going up to another dog, especially if it is on a lead, this is not always possible, for example with puppies undergoing training that are still learning to be recalled from distractions. If a dog can not be trusted to behave in a friendly manner towards other dogs then they simply should not be taken where they pose a risk to other dogs.

Thanks for your comments. My dog is undergoing behaviour training already and is really benefiting from it. His issues unfortunately stem from being abused, dumped on a street and then being picked up by the dog warden.

Why am I giving dog owners a bad name? My dog is microchipped, fully insured, is never off the lead in public places, is very obedient considering his background and is very friendly towards people.

Why should my dog not go walking in the woods? Why should he suffer due to his previous treatment from human beings?

I don't expect dogs to come bounding up to me and my dog, the same as I would not expect people to deal with my dog bounding up to them. The same can be said of children running riot and said parents not enforcing discipline.

Muzzling is not the solution to everything.

Adrian XX wrote:
The idea that a well-trained dog will NEVER attack humans cannot be proven. I would prefer to assume all dogs are a risk - a very small risk in some cases but the risk is always present.

username for this site wrote:
My neighbour has got a vicious Chalky dog
and for all the dimmo's that use this site a Chalky is a cross between a Chihuahua and a Yorky
Its cage is an Asda shopping basket with a brick on the top.

mark1987 wrote:

username for this site wrote:
My neighbour has got a vicious Chalky dog
and for all the dimmo's that use this site a Chalky is a cross between a Chihuahua and a Yorky
Its cage is an Asda shopping basket with a brick on the top.

So why haven't you phones the RSPCA to report cruelty to a dog! Either report them or post the address so someone else can

username for this site wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

username for this site wrote:
My neighbour has got a vicious Chalky dog
and for all the dimmo's that use this site a Chalky is a cross between a Chihuahua and a Yorky
Its cage is an Asda shopping basket with a brick on the top.

So why haven't you phones the RSPCA to report cruelty to a dog! Either report them or post the address so someone else can

Chalky gets plenty exercise he's got a big run its a tea chest in the kitchen with two hamster wheels fitted
they give him rusks for his dinner he only weighs 6 ounces,
his drinking bowl is a thimble.

renea wrote:
Poor woman, I get really annoyed with the dog owners who think they can let their dogs do what they want, refuse to pick up their mess and let them roam loose to cause all types of mayhem. I own 3 rescue dogs and they are all microchipped, tagged and only allowed of the lead in dog walking areas and they are very well behaved. My sympathy goes out to this woman but please don't think all dog owners are irresponsible. (Although I am now waiting for all the trolls to come out of the woodwork and add their ridiculous comments !!)

username for this site wrote:
There is only one cure for a dog that bites forget the muzzle and training schools

100% cure

take him to the vets and get all his teeth pulled out

BIGTONE wrote:
Where are the anti-Staffie brigade when you need them?

Say-it-how-it-is wrote:

username for this site wrote: There is only one cure for a dog that bites forget the muzzle and training schools 100% cure take him to the vets and get all his teeth pulled out

Well yeah. But people say that is cruel. But yes that is the answer.

mark1987 wrote:

Say-it-how-it-is wrote:

username for this site wrote: There is only one cure for a dog that bites forget the muzzle and training schools 100% cure take him to the vets and get all his teeth pulled out

Well yeah. But people say that is cruel. But yes that is the answer.

Couple of people here who think they are funny.

it is people like you who need thir teeth pulling out!

Grow up!

Say-it-how-it-is wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

Say-it-how-it-is wrote:

username for this site wrote: There is only one cure for a dog that bites forget the muzzle and training schools 100% cure take him to the vets and get all his teeth pulled out

Well yeah. But people say that is cruel. But yes that is the answer.

Couple of people here who think they are funny. it is people like you who need thir teeth pulling out! Grow up!

I'm not being funny mate. And yes I am grown up thank you.

nigglygrilly wrote:
A gun is NOT dangerous - it's the person behind the trigger that is dangerous!
Well said Renea.
A dog is as good as it's training. This labx is obviously not trained well, for a number of reasons; where was its owner? and it's not socialised with other dogs, for two!
The labx attacked the other dog NOT the lady - she got caught in the cross fire and wish her a speedy recovery and don't blame her for her actions.
My two dogs (also rescued, microchipped, collared and tagged) generally get on well but every now and then they have a disagreement (just like us humans do (some fight and others don't humans's that is) and my hubby has had teeth marks on his arms dealing with it but my dogs certainly are not vicious!
My older dog was not terribly friendly with other dogs so we kept him under control but he changed when we got our second dog and became more socialised with doggy behaviour!
PS: If a gun is dangerous then cakes make people fat without any human intervention!!!!!!

mark1987 wrote:

Say-it-how-it-is wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

Say-it-how-it-is wrote:

username for this site wrote: There is only one cure for a dog that bites forget the muzzle and training schools 100% cure take him to the vets and get all his teeth pulled out

Well yeah. But people say that is cruel. But yes that is the answer.

Couple of people here who think they are funny. it is people like you who need thir teeth pulling out! Grow up!

I'm not being funny mate. And yes I am grown up thank you.

Try acting grown up then.

Typical troll!

mark1987 wrote:

throatwarbler wrote: with all these wolves around i think it's high time i got myself a tiger. Tigers predate wolves in the wild. must be one going free in Essex or somewhere.

sorry but no the first wolf is dated back 10 million years ago. Tigers were only truely known as tigers 2 million years ago. Before anyone disagrees the sabre tooth tiger is named this because of its look it is not linked to the tiger family as we know it.

Imaximus wrote:
I blame the Imax, and cyclists and dog walkers and or the surf reef. I have covered all the bases there i think.

retry69 wrote:

Imaximus wrote:
I blame the Imax, and cyclists and dog walkers and or the surf reef. I have covered all the bases there i think.

We are all grateful for that thank you

retry69 wrote:
Just having returned from walking my 99% wolf 1% collie i realise we all should be congratulated on reaching 100 comments.My education has been somewhat slated by some commenteers or should that be commenters, but i have seen the other side of the coin that too much education is not always a good thing,certainly too much time on the games consol can lock you in a "phantasy" world sorry fantasy,ans say-it-how-it-is keep saying how it is

Say-it-how-it-is wrote:

retry69 wrote:
Just having returned from walking my 99% wolf 1% collie i realise we all should be congratulated on reaching 100 comments.My education has been somewhat slated by some commenteers or should that be commenters, but i have seen the other side of the coin that too much education is not always a good thing,certainly too much time on the games consol can lock you in a "phantasy" world sorry fantasy,ans say-it-how-it-is keep saying how it is

So why are you pointing me out for some reason. Trying to be funny are we.

throatwarbler wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

throatwarbler wrote: with all these wolves around i think it's high time i got myself a tiger. Tigers predate wolves in the wild. must be one going free in Essex or somewhere.

sorry but no the first wolf is dated back 10 million years ago. Tigers were only truely known as tigers 2 million years ago. Before anyone disagrees the sabre tooth tiger is named this because of its look it is not linked to the tiger family as we know it.

"predate" not "pre-date". come on man!

mark1987 wrote:

throatwarbler wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

throatwarbler wrote: with all these wolves around i think it's high time i got myself a tiger. Tigers predate wolves in the wild. must be one going free in Essex or somewhere.

sorry but no the first wolf is dated back 10 million years ago. Tigers were only truely known as tigers 2 million years ago. Before anyone disagrees the sabre tooth tiger is named this because of its look it is not linked to the tiger family as we know it.

"predate" not "pre-date". come on man!

Both have the same meaning!

jonheat1 wrote:
if all dogs were muzzled when out, then no fights and no bites,it should be law that when out, dogs should be wearing these.

throatwarbler wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

throatwarbler wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

throatwarbler wrote: with all these wolves around i think it's high time i got myself a tiger. Tigers predate wolves in the wild. must be one going free in Essex or somewhere.

sorry but no the first wolf is dated back 10 million years ago. Tigers were only truely known as tigers 2 million years ago. Before anyone disagrees the sabre tooth tiger is named this because of its look it is not linked to the tiger family as we know it.

"predate" not "pre-date". come on man!

Both have the same meaning!

No no no! (picture Basil Fawlty) not in that context! i mean predate as in "predation" as in "the action of a predator on its prey". It's an ecological term. Tigers eat wolves, hence i will protected..... but anyway, i think i may have digressed....

mark1987 wrote:

throatwarbler wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

throatwarbler wrote:

mark1987 wrote:

throatwarbler wrote: with all these wolves around i think it's high time i got myself a tiger. Tigers predate wolves in the wild. must be one going free in Essex or somewhere.

sorry but no the first wolf is dated back 10 million years ago. Tigers were only truely known as tigers 2 million years ago. Before anyone disagrees the sabre tooth tiger is named this because of its look it is not linked to the tiger family as we know it.

"predate" not "pre-date". come on man!

Both have the same meaning!

No no no! (picture Basil Fawlty) not in that context! i mean predate as in "predation" as in "the action of a predator on its prey". It's an ecological term. Tigers eat wolves, hence i will protected..... but anyway, i think i may have digressed....

In all my years readings and studys have i ever heard or seen predate used in that field.
Predation and predator are used to explain relationships between the predator and the prey.

In ecology predate is used for the meaning of time and if it was used for two different explanations of something it would get pretty tricky

throatwarbler wrote:
here is the crucial bit: "while proponents of predate can be satisfied that their term developed specifically to address predator–prey interactions"

Dog friendly 1 wrote:
The lady who was injured should not have tried to intervene with two fighting dogs - thats a recipe for disaster, no matter how well you think you know the breed. If the owner knew the dog was likely to be aggressive then it should have been muzzled whilst out AND receiving training to better socialise it.

However - lets also muzzle anti-social kids too please - roll on the end of the summer holidays for them and they return to school and perhaps neuter the parents (so you see humans and dogs have more in common than we thought) - now lets see the pro kids (no matter how badly behaved they are) brigade come out! Not all children, I hasten to add- some are lovely - sadly some are not.

BmthNewshound wrote:

saynomore wrote:
It should be compulsory to have dogs trained with a certificate to prove it,it would also help if owners were trained as well it might stop morons owning one.

Perhaps the same should apply to parents, it might stop morons breeding and producing another generation of feral kids with anti-social tendancies.
.
Fortunately attacks like this are rare, and a lot less frequent than attacks on innocent members of the public by drunken or drugged up thugs.
.
The majority of dog owners are responsible and most dogs are well behaved. But they'll always be a minority who give the majority a bad name and no amount of draconian legislation will change this, just like parents with ASBO kids.
.

rmf1212 wrote:

BmthNewshound wrote:

saynomore wrote:
It should be compulsory to have dogs trained with a certificate to prove it,it would also help if owners were trained as well it might stop morons owning one.

Perhaps the same should apply to parents, it might stop morons breeding and producing another generation of feral kids with anti-social tendancies.
.
Fortunately attacks like this are rare, and a lot less frequent than attacks on innocent members of the public by drunken or drugged up thugs.
.
The majority of dog owners are responsible and most dogs are well behaved. But they'll always be a minority who give the majority a bad name and no amount of draconian legislation will change this, just like parents with ASBO kids.
.

I think you need keep your narrow-minded your views on teenagers to yourself. I am 14, i don't have an ASBO, and I don't know anyone that does. You have just used your post to have a rant about how much you hate kids. This story in about a woman who got mauled by a dog, probably belonging to some 50 yr old man, it's nothing to do with teenagers?

portia6 wrote:
There are more single people about
hence they get lonely so a dog is
a best friend. Unfortunately rescue
dogs are notoriously badly behaved
and need loads of training, a muzzle
is essential in public places.