Quote:
Originally Posted by pylon
I say this as a lifelong dog owner and someone who loves dogs (not in the residents of Vancouver sense). The dog has committed the one unforgivable act, and should be put down. If it was my dog that did it, this decision and tax payer expense would have been spared, as animal control would be taking a carcass out of my home. Plain and simple, rover would have met the end of a shotgun barrel.
Think of how ridiculous this is. Had a human killed this child, by use of direct, traumatic, physical harm, intentional or not, the perpetrator would be locked up, awaiting trial right now. People would be outraged. The person life would be irreversibly ruined in the media innocent or guilty. We are feeling sorry for a dog, that killed a child? Are you insane? I don't care if the dog didn't 'mean it', she did it. And I would argue that yes, this dog is a danger. What is stopping it from making the same mistake, and confusing a child for a puppy again? If that is truly what happened.
The dog should be put down. Period. Case closed. End of story.
|
That's ridiculous. The dog was acting on instinct in a non-agressive manner. We're not talking about a person with the rational thought to distinguish right from wrong or accountability, we're talking about a dog who had recently given birth and acted accordingly to its instinctual reaction.
I put much more blame on the parents and allowing the circumstances for this event to take place.
In this discussion, the dog is not at fault. It was a terrible accident, but this dog should not be killed.