# Young girl attacked by two GSD



## lhczth (Apr 5, 2000)

Never good. Luckily there was a neighbor around. 

Young girl attacked by Warren neighbor's German shepherds - Fox 2 News Headlines


----------



## HarleyTheGSD (Feb 13, 2012)

Very sad.  I wonder if this poor girl will have a fear of dogs after the incident. Hopefully someone will help her with that.


----------



## Msmaria (Mar 2, 2013)

Very sad. I don't know why a four year old wasnt being watched by her mother. Thank god the neighbor was there. I'm surprised they let the dogs stay on their property. Just recently a friends dog in her own yard bit a boy that was bothering the dog through the fence. Small bite no stiches and they had him put his dog down.


----------



## Springbrz (Aug 13, 2013)

I feel bad for the little girl and her mom. But I have a lot of questions. Why wasn't the mother watching a 4 year old better? Did the dogs get out of their yard? If not, what was the four year old doing in the neighbors fenced yard unattended? 

Ultimately, we all know that the dogs will be blamed. Very sad.


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

Yes the dogs that attacked a 4 year old child will be blamed..is that an issue?


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

It may be a problem. The yard looked securely fenced. How did a four year old kid get beyond the fences into the dog's yard? 

If your kid or a child your dogs know is suddenly attacked. If you are there walking the dog down the street, and it suddenly attacks a small child -- these things have to be considered serious black marks on a dog. But if someone comes onto your securely fenced property and is attacked by your dogs, I don't know. 

What we are asking dogs to do is to be discriminating. To see a four year old as no threat, no intruder. And a lot of our dogs would never her a small child like that. Maybe we know this because they are raised around children, or because they have demonstrated good judgement around children. 

Some people do not have children and they keep their dogs away from children, because they have no friends with children willing to help socialize their dogs to. Some people may make a conscious decision to just not have their dogs around kids. And if they make their yard secure and keep their dogs secure it shouldn't be a problem. 

How did the kid get to the dogs, or the dogs get to the kid? If the gates are such that a four year old can open them, then the dog owners are at fault. If they are not, then, how did it happen? Could someone have picked the child up and put it over the fence? That sounds like a horrific thing, but some people do do horrific things to children.

Amazing that the kid didn't have more injuries really. If the dogs were all out attacking the child, I would expect the child to be in the hospital requiring plastic surgery or something. GSDs have the same or more bite strength than pits. It looks like a LOT of scratches. But we are only seeing some of the wounds there. The kid seemed to have nothing on the face, throat, etc. It looks like the kind of damage my girls could do with their nails more than their teeth. 

How did the kid and the dogs connect? Until I understand that, I just don't want to say hang the dogs.


----------



## HarleyTheGSD (Feb 13, 2012)

selzer said:


> It may be a problem. The yard looked securely fenced. How did a four year old kid get beyond the fences into the dog's yard?
> 
> If your kid or a child your dogs know is suddenly attacked. If you are there walking the dog down the street, and it suddenly attacks a small child -- these things have to be considered serious black marks on a dog. But if someone comes onto your securely fenced property and is attacked by your dogs, I don't know.
> 
> ...


:thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## Springbrz (Aug 13, 2013)

selzer said:


> It may be a problem. The yard looked securely fenced. How did a four year old kid get beyond the fences into the dog's yard?
> 
> If your kid or a child your dogs know is suddenly attacked. If you are there walking the dog down the street, and it suddenly attacks a small child -- these things have to be considered serious black marks on a dog. But if someone comes onto your securely fenced property and is attacked by your dogs, I don't know.
> 
> ...


 ^ This

Exactly what I was thinking. It's a shame that no matter what the circumstances the dog/s are held to a standard that makes it pay the price for it's natural instinct. Even when everything is done to protect dog and human. The dog almost always pays the ultimate price. 

We have grown children. We don't get many house guests and none have small children. My only way to socialize my GSD with children is to allow her to greet and be petted by children when we are out and about. But, that no way is the same as having children playing around or with her. So, would I want my GSD near children unsupervised...NO WAY. That's just one reason we have a 6 ft privacy fence that is locked with a padlock on the inside. If by some means a child or adult, for that matter, entered my property (behind my locked fence) uninvited and my dog attacked that person what do you think the outcome would be? In my community I can say for certain the city and courts would force me to PTS my dog. It has happened many times where I live. I don't think it's right in such circumstances to make only the dog accountable. That's just me. 

And yes, I have been bitten by more than one dog in my life. Fortunately, never a full on attack.

Even when a dog is provoked into a bite or attack, the dog is always the one that is punished in some fashion. Labeled a biter; placed into some type of "management" program for the remainder of it's life; rehomed or most often and worse is euthanized.


----------



## Chip18 (Jan 11, 2014)

HarleyTheGSD said:


> :thumbup::thumbup:


Same here!


----------



## Alice13 (Feb 21, 2014)

I would say the root cause of this whole thing is the mother's negligence. Since the dogs belong to someone she has somebody to blame. What if it had been strays? Who is she gonna blame? This girl had wandered off her house and entered a neighbour's yard on her own. There are so many other things that could have happened to her. And where the dogs are concerned, I agree with Selzer. It doesn't look like the dogs were going all out to attack her. I think my 6 month old pup could do more damage than that if given the chance. 

Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

I think that responses would be completely different if this was a different breed and I can say that comfortably because I am not one that will typically blame the dog, no matter what the breed. This mom is really no more negligent then the mom whose little boy was attacked and the cat saved it. Both kids were the same age and about the same distance away without supervision, but yet no one called the mom negligent in that situation? In this case from what I can see in the video, the area the dogs are in is secure, so I don't think the kid got in and in the interview something about a couple houses down is where the attack happened, but the little girls room is right next to the garage where the dogs are. This makes me believe that the next door neighbors own the dog and the attack happened further down the block. Mom should have been watching the child better and the owner of the dogs in any scenario need to be more careful, because either the dogs got out or there is no lock to keep kids from going in(which by the set up I saw, it did look secure). I have had a kid open my door on my property, but luckily my dogs were contained in another area so they didn't even see the kid enter the house. In any case whether it was an accident or not, responses should be the same no matter what the breed. The attack could have been worse, but the neighbor acted quickly. Those dogs were still not in a good state of mind if they also attacked the mom once she got there, they were not done and still highly agitated. Someone was able to control them. Hopefully everything turns out okay for everyone involved. I also think mom is being very nice just asking for the dogs to be removed, she never said she wanted them destroyed, but again if it was a different breed people would be saying that there are so many dogs out there without a bite history that need homes that the needle is the only answer here....


----------



## LaRen616 (Mar 4, 2010)

llombardo said:


> This mom is really no more negligent then the mom whose little boy was attacked and the cat saved it. Both kids were the same age and about the same distance away without supervision, but yet no one called the mom negligent in that situation?


2 totally different stories. I do not think the mother of the child that was attacked by the dog and saved by the cat was negligent at all. The child was playing on his driveway in his yard and the mom was outside with him when a dog went out of it's way to attack the child that wasn't even aware the dog was there.

In this story the child is a couple of houses down, away from her mother and entered a neighbor's yard that had dogs.

I am not a mother, nor do I ever plan to be one, but I would not allow my 4 year old child to be outside without me. This world is terrible, children are kidnapped, molested, murdered and attacked every day. I would not allow my small child to wander around outside, period. The mother in this story is negligent. JMO


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

LaRen616 said:


> 2 totally different stories. I do not think the mother of the child that was attacked by the dog and saved by the cat was negligent at all. The child was playing on his driveway in his yard and the mom was outside with him when a dog went out of it's way to attack the child that wasn't even aware the dog was there.
> 
> In this story the child is a couple of houses down, away from her mother and entered a neighbor's yard that had dogs.
> 
> I am not a mother, nor do I ever plan to be one, but I would not allow my 4 year old child to be outside without me. This world is terrible, children are kidnapped, molested, murdered and attacked every day. I would not allow my small child to wander around outside, period. The mother in this story is negligent. JMO



*The story never stated that this child entered the yard with the dogs *. That is pure speculation. When we were growing up the neighbors looked out for each other and we were able to play outside and ride our bikes up and down the block . In the situation it's a good thing that neighbors still do that.


----------



## martemchik (Nov 23, 2010)

llombardo...I clicked this thread to see exactly what I saw...people shifting the blame away from the GSD.

100% sure that if it was anything but a GSD...god help us if it was a pit...we'd have a group ready with pitchforks to hang the dog.


----------



## LaRen616 (Mar 4, 2010)

I apologize, the yard where the GSDs live looks like a fortress so I thought the child entered the yard, but no one has confirmed that she did or didn't.

I don't care what breed of dog it is. I would only demand that the dog be put to sleep if the dog escaped it's yard and went out of it's way to attack a child or if it was an unprovoked attack. If this child entered the yard where the dogs were contained then no, I do not believe it is the dog's fault and I do not think the dogs should be put to sleep.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

LaRen616 said:


> I apologize, the yard where the GSDs live looks like a fortress so I thought the child entered the yard, but no one has confirmed that she did or didn't.
> 
> I don't care what breed of dog it is. I would only demand that the dog be put to sleep if the dog escaped it's yard and went out of it's way to attack a child or if it was an unprovoked attack. If this child entered the yard where the dogs were contained then no, I do not believe it is the dog's fault and I do not think the dogs should be put to sleep.


And because it looks like a fortress I find it hard to believe the child got in. But then the question becomes how did the dogs get out? We all know that these dogs can be great escape artists or it could simply be that they accidentally got out of the house? Either way, based on the story, I tend to think it happened out of the yard.


----------



## ken k (Apr 3, 2006)

Warren MI. is in Oakland county, very very strict animal control, if the dogs escaped the yard and attacked the little girl, they would not be there right now, Oakland would have taken them no questions asked, there is more to the story, i feel bad for the little girl , 4 years old is too young to be wandering around outside un attended in this day and age


----------



## Lilie (Feb 3, 2010)

I find fault with both parties. If the mother was correctly supervising her child, the child would not have wandered off to be mauled by the dogs. 

Dogs in your yard are considered an attractive nuisance - at least they are here in the State of Texas. If the dogs got out of the yard or the 4 year old was able to get in, it just doesn't make any difference. 

Due to the lack of injuries - I tend to think the dogs were poorly behaved dogs that were jumping on the child and it wasn't an aggressive attack. But it doesn't make any difference. Injuries are injuries. Poor behavior is poor behavior. The burden will lay with the dog owners.


----------



## Bridget (Apr 5, 2004)

I think the same thing...what was the girl doing in the neighbor's yard in the first place? Also, how can they say she has scars? They won't know until the stitches are removed and she heals whether she will have "scars."


----------



## ken k (Apr 3, 2006)

Lilie said:


> Due to the lack of injuries - I tend to think the dogs were poorly behaved dogs that were jumping on the child and it wasn't an aggressive attack. But it doesn't make any difference. Injuries are injuries. Poor behavior is poor behavior. The burden will lay with the dog owners.


agreed


----------



## Wolfgeist (Dec 4, 2010)

I hate hearing about stories like this... horrible for the poor little girl and bad press for the breed. I agree, though... not fair for the girl to have to see and listen to the dogs after such a traumatizing event.


----------



## OklahomaGSDonTheRez (May 29, 2014)

Sad to hear. I feel that it is the parents of both children(the dogs and the child). It is your responsibility to keep your dogs under control. Saying that and having a 3 year old in my home, you should NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, N.E.V.E.R. leave a dang 4 year old unnattended, much less unattended OUTSIDE! Shes lucky she didn't get snatched up! I'm not saying that the dogs should have attacked her, and i'm not really taking up for the dogs. I'm saying that the parents are bad because they would let their 4 year old out of their sight. I would never let my children go near a dog or dogs without me being near to protect. End of father rant. lol


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

An attack is an attack no matter what the injuries. I took a better look at those to. It doesn't say when the attack happened but it wasn't just a day or two ago, some scabs are forming and there will be scars. The point is in most dog cases negligence will fall somewhere on a human, not the dog or a child. If these were pit bulls, everyone would have blamed the breed, forget about who is really negligent. Even though pit bulls are bred to be on the dog aggressive side, they aren't generally human aggressive, but they get blamed for everything. As we can see a GSD can be just as dangerous and instead of blaming individual dog breeds and condemning them to death, the people involved should be the ones that are condemned.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

So if your dog jumps up on someone who is walking up your driveway, and his claw breaks the skin on her torso, then the dog deserves a death sentence?

This is going to sound very cynical, but boy that neighbor was Johnny on the spot. Went into the fortress and removed the child without getting scratched or bitten himself, and before the kid was seriously maimed or mutilated, and before the mother who heard her daughter's screams was able to get there. Wow. I know, but if the child was placed in the yard, would the dog owners still be liable? How did a little girl like that get into the dogs.

I tend to agree that Animal Control would have removed the dogs if they were roaming. And why weren't they if the girl opened the gate and went into them. A four year old child is going to close the gate behind her? So maybe they were intent on scratching her up, and didn't bother to take a hike out the open gate. Or maybe Mr. neighbor was right there and shut the gate before the dogs could harm him or the child any more. 

Why are all the scratches to the torso. Could this child have been lifted in, and then lifted out of the fence area? She should have defensive wounds are her arms, I would think. Unless her arms were up out of the way when the scratching happened. 

Could she have climbed over the fencing and panicked and started screaming and then had been lifted to safety by the neighbor causing the dogs to jump up? 

Yes we are going to be doing some questioning on this. The GSD owners seemed like responsible people by the way their yard looked anyway. We responsible GSD owners do not want to see children mauled but we don't want dogs blamed for an attack, when the circumstances are really odd. If I was lifting an unknown child over a fence, I would expect some scratches from the fence, and maybe from the dogs as well. And I do not want to see a dog euthanized when it didn't attack.

If the dogs wanted to attack the girl, they would have. She would have deep puncture wounds, disfigurement to the face, throat, hands, arms, and probably legs as the dogs tor into her with teeth. She may have some scratches from claws as they were grasping and holding her. It would be very bad. And if this was an attack by pit bulls, and this was the extent of the injuries, and the pit bulls were on their property, and the never roaming, I suspect I would have the same opinion.

Kids do get loose. 4 year olds cannot be crated in their homes, and sometimes they manage to slip out. Sometimes parents do not wake up as quick. Sometimes kids are playing nicely in the living room and parents are fixing lunch. And that quickly, someone is two doors down. If a child can get to your dogs, you have a problem. 

The mother wants the dogs removed? What exactly does that mean? The people have to move out of the neighborhood? Maybe they can't just up and move. What then? Who is going to take two dogs that attacked a four year old kid? If it was an attack. The mother wants the two dogs put down.

But again, we are all thinking with are emotions somewhat in the heat of it all. Maybe when everyone cools down and sees that the child will fully recover, and can figure out exactly how this happened, there may be other ways to manage the situation so it never happens again. 

As for being four years old and outside on your own. I lived in Cleveland when I was four and given a map so I could leave school to walk to the baby sitter's home, whom I never met. I think that when we are adults, we forget sometimes what it was like to be four. Four is worlds away from two. Four is old enough to go to Kindergarten and to have some responsibilities. It also is old enough to slip out of your parents' sight. And it may be old enough to open a gate and play with some dogs. 

I don't think a four year old could manage my latches. Probably not. And tougher to open my gates. But, four can be pretty enterprising.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

Where does everyone keep getting that this happened in the yard? They said specifically that it happened a couple doors down, the dogs live next door, which means that the dogs were out of the yard. Regardless, look at the picture of the girls back, those are much more then a dog jumping on her. Those are very thick and you can see it's going to scar. The girl is lucky she wasn't hurt more seriously. The neighbor was bitten or scratched but mom was. If she opened the gate, shame in the owners for not having it locked and shame on mom for not watching her. If the dogs got out again shame on mom and the owners of the dogs. The area where the dogs are make me think that these are guard dogs or portrayed as such. High fences, beware of dog signs, etc. I find it hard to believe that the owners would leave out a simple thing like forgetting a lock for the gate. I don't even think someone can climb in. But can the dogs go under? We just don't know. We had 2 GSD's terrorize the neighborhood one time and it wasn't fun, it was pretty scary and kids were on their way to school running in all directions, just crazy.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Because it said that the animals were on their property and that is why animal control did not take the dogs. 

I think there is more to the story. 

If we cannot leave our dogs securely fenced, then we may as well go out and kill them all. And some people would be very happy with that. 

Trust me that my dogs are more secure in kennels then they are in my house. Dogs can rush through doors and break through windows to get at things. 

Did the neighbor have control of the dogs when this happened?

Is it two doors down, or can you actually see it from the girls' windows?


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

selzer said:


> Because it said that the animals were on their property and that is why animal control did not take the dogs.
> 
> I think there is more to the story.
> 
> ...


 
No it did not say that it happened on the property. What it says is that the dogs are allowed to stay on the property for the 10 days...
*"Since the dogs are licensed and up-to-date on their shots they are allowed to stay on the property under quarantine in the garage for 10 days. The dogs' owner was instructed to observe and report their behavior"
*​


----------



## sparra (Jun 27, 2011)

If they were Pitts and they decided to rough her up a bit she would be dead.

If they were roaming and did this wouldn't they have been seized??


----------



## Blitzkrieg1 (Jul 31, 2012)

If you read the story its pretty easy to deduce that the 4 year old did not scale the fence and sneak in to be with the dogs.

Since they were also both involved in the attack and both got in bites from the look of her torso one can also deduce that they were not being controlled while outside their fenceline.
So yes the dogs should be PTS.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

sparra said:


> If they were Pitts and they decided to rough her up a bit she would be dead.
> 
> If they were roaming and did this wouldn't they have been seized??


I think that depends, they did not seize the dog that bit Gator(they might have by now, but didn't up to a week after the attack) If the neighbor wasn't there in this case those dogs would have killed this girl. I have no doubt about that.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

If the dogs were not on their property and attacked the four year old girl, then yes, they should be PTS. And, their owner should be fined, and responsible for all the medical costs. I do not think that the wounds look so much like bites as scratches though. I've had GSD bites, and there is an awful lot of damage, even with a single bite. I just have no sympathy for owners who leave their dogs roam. It is surprising that they have such a nice secure area for the dogs and the dogs were out, if they were.


----------



## gsdsar (May 21, 2002)

I am a bit torn by this one, TBH. 

The recent case of a chained dog disfiguring a child. I called for the dog to be euthanized. Because the attack was so horrific and disproportionate to the "threat". All the while I place responsibility on the parents of the child. 

So I feel a bit hypocritical not feeling the same way about this attack. But I am on the fence. The attack was not as severe. But was that due to quickness of response by a neighbor? Did the child go into a fenced yard? If the dogs got loose, that's a different story. It shows an inability to properly contain the dogs. The dogs had never shown this type if aggression before. I know my dogs could get carried away playing and being jerks without it being aggression. But I don't know if that's what happened here. We don't have all the facts. 

But at the end if the day. Even if the child came into my yard, if MY dogs did this. I would PTS, or at least remove the dogs. I just could not live with myself. I could not stay in the area with my dogs, knowing that a young child would have to live a few doors down from dogs that mauled her. I could not be THAT person. Probably why I am so hyper vigilant and why my dogs are never unsupervised in my yard. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

selzer said:


> If the dogs were not on their property and attacked the four year old girl, then yes, they should be PTS. And, their owner should be fined, and responsible for all the medical costs. I do not think that the wounds look so much like bites as scratches though. I've had GSD bites, and there is an awful lot of damage, even with a single bite. I just have no sympathy for owners who leave their dogs roam. It is surprising that they have such a nice secure area for the dogs and the dogs were out, if they were.


This is my point.... I don't believe these dogs were roaming(if happened to close to the house)I don't think these dogs should be put to sleep if they got out. Accidents happen and there should be forgiveness toward the animal because of that. We all know that no matter the breed that sometimes things happen. I think that in dog bite situations there are lots of things to consider..circumstances, bite history, care that is given to the dog by owner, etc . I just think that lots of people are more forgiving to a GSD versus a pit bull and that shouldn't be the case. GSD's can escape just like a pit bull or any other dog, they aren't special. There is always going to be negligence, but it's not on the dog, go for the owner. Dogs that bite won't necessarily ever do it again , I know because my oldest female bit someone pretty bad one time and never has even attempted it again. I didn't think for a minute to put her to sleep, but I got rid of the person she bit Any dog can bite at any time, so whether they have or haven't can make a person crazy wondering when and if it will happen. I'm just not on the PTS if they bite bandwagon, there is going to be a reason they bit 90% of the time.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

gsdsar said:


> I am a bit torn by this one, TBH.
> 
> The recent case of a chained dog disfiguring a child. I called for the dog to be euthanized. Because the attack was so horrific and disproportionate to the "threat". All the while I place responsibility on the parents of the child.
> 
> ...


I have to say its nice to see honesty again it's all about circumstances, ownership, and history. I disagree with the dog on the chain being put to sleep, that was ignorance on the parents part. They could have prevented that by buying a crate . They are the kind if people that would think its funny and post a video of the dog growling over a bone. It's a shame the child got hurt, but I personally can't base putting a dog to sleep based on injuries. People like them should not own a dog. It's a proven fact that dogs on chains can be more aggressive and then add a bone in there to add to that, no those people had no clue what they were doing and put their own child at risk. I'm sure that they seen the behavior prior to the incident and did nothing. As for you feeling bad if a child entered your yard and something bad happen..you are a good owner, you do everything in your power to protect your dogs and people around them, these are the circumstances I refer to. You shouldn't have to make the choice of removing your dog, you wouldn't be negligent and shouldn't feel that way. If there is no negligence on your part, then let the people with the child move if they don't feel comfortable, they should have been watching their kid.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

The dog on the chain shows clear negligence on the part of the dog owners. I do not have a problem with putting a dog on a chain. But if you have a formidable dog, it is an attractive nuisance, children need to be blocked from access for their safety. And a chain simply does not do that. Also, a dog on a chain, can be guarding. The act of chaining a dog to something, for some reason puts the message to some days to guard.

If that dog was a GSD, then I would say put it down. Because the owners are not suited to the breed or to dog ownership, and the level of damage done, what is the point in wasting resources on such a dog, since the dog's owners who supposedly love the dog are unfit. It would be sad. Because it would have been totally preventable. 

These dogs definitely have an area that seems secure. Animal control seemed to feel the area was secure enough to leave the dogs there to quarantine them, and they do check that. (My dog killed a raccoon and I called the health department, concerned about rabies, and they came out and told me to quarantine the dog, and where he was was fine to quarantine him.)

Here's the thing, how did the neighbor contain the dogs so fast and save the child. By the time a woman heard the screams of her child and ran two doors down, the child was pulled to safety. Some how the dogs bit her too? How? I have seen dogs in an all out attack. One guy would have a heck of a time pulling two dogs off and kenneling them. If the dogs were intent on killing the child, how did he prevent it? 

I am trying to think how I would. I would probably grab one dog and drag it to the fence and shove it in and then go back for the other dog. And drag it off the child. How did the dogs get to the mother, but are not concerned with the neighbor at all. If he went into the pen, and lifted the child out of the pen, over the fence, or if he reached over and pulled the child to safety, but then, how did the dogs get to the mother? 

I am trying to picture how this happened. If the dogs were only trying scratch and play with the child, rough play, being yelled at by the neighbor could drive them off of her, and then when the mother was screaming and hollering onto the scene the dogs might have amped up on that. But even then, how did she get away if the dogs were all out attacking. How did she get away without serious injuries? 

The thing is, when one dog does something awful, lots of times the other dogs will join in, and it seems like things can escalate faster with more than one dog present. 

I guess we will just have to see how the court rules on this, or if more information is released. Not sure why it would be. German Shepherds attack child is not necessarily that out of the ordinary from all I hear.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

It doesn't solve anything putting a dog to sleep when the owner is negligent, because they are getting another dog immediately after they failed the first one. A problem dog in one home isn't necessarily a problem dog in the right home, I have two of those that proves it. Most(not all) dogs that bite are showing signs of being capable of that and its ignored. If the dog has no training of boundaries then that dog has nothing. These dogs don't ask to be put in these homes, it's the luck of the crappy draw. We can't save them all, but I believe they deserve that chance. There are only two reasons a dog will bite, genetics and lack of training(human error), sadly we can't do anything about the genetics.


----------



## Chris Wild (Dec 14, 2001)

I have very mixed feelings on this. On the one hand, I believe any GSD who would deliberately harm a young child without significant provocation has a screw loose. On the other hand there are so many unknowns in what has been reported in this story that it is impossible to tell exactly what happened, exactly what the dogs did and their reason for doing it.

Why was a 4yo running about unsupervised? Was there any sort of provocation?
If the dogs were in some sort of "attack mode", why wasn't the neighbor who rescued the child before the mom got there also injured? Where did it happen? While it doesn't say where, it does imply that this may have been in the dogs' own yard as it says mom "heard the screams from 2 doors down" and then the camera pans exactly 2 doors down to show where the dogs live.

I'm beginning to think that it would be wise for every person with children and every dog owner to put up security cameras on their property. Then the exact circumstances surrounding things like this would be known. Like the video with the cat. That dog was clearly showing direct, intentional, predatory behavior against a child. The only reasonable response to that sort of behavior IMO is a "lead injection". But in this situation there is too much unknown for us to make any sort of judgment based on the very lacking news story. Hopefully the judge making the decision gets all of the facts from both sides.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

llombardo said:


> It doesn't solve anything putting a dog to sleep when the owner is negligent, because they are getting another dog immediately after they failed the first one. A problem dog in one home isn't necessarily a problem dog in the right home, I have two of those that proves it. Most(not all) dogs that bite are showing signs of being capable of that and its ignored. If the dog has no training of boundaries then that dog has nothing. These dogs don't ask to be put in these homes, it's the luck of the crappy draw. We can't save them all, but I believe they deserve that chance. There are only two reasons a dog will bite, genetics and lack of training(human error), sadly we can't do anything about the genetics.


There are hundreds of thousands of GSDs out there in less than perfect homes, with no training, with few if any boundaries that are not attacking little children. If you have a suitable home for such dogs that has not already demonstrated its inability to manage the dogs, then that would be up to whomever needs to make the decision. But wasting any resources (to foster or find the dog a home) on dogs with serious bite histories just doesn't make any sense when dogs are being put down daily who have no such history. 

The one thing it does do is it ensures that no one has to explain to another mother or father why that specific dog did serious damage or killed their child, after having had such a strike already against it. There is really nothing in place to ensure that whoever takes on such a dog is capable of managing it. 

I am not saying that that is what has to happen to these dogs. I agree with Chris that there are just too many unexplained questions in this case. 

And, I think there is a lot we can do with genetics. Even dogs who have weak nerves, problems with storms, quick movements, etc. Even these dogs in the right hands can become more confident, and less likely to bite, and they can be managed properly. Domestic animals all have a human responsible for them. So when an animal behaves badly, you can always say that a human is responsible. But that does not give the animal a pass so that it can do it again. 

Think about the Rottweiler in Africa. It was "rehabilitated" by some Cesar-wannabe, and called a Service Dog, and brought into a crowded eating portion of a large mall. A small child walking by was severely attacked by the dog. Giving dogs second and third chances is not protecting children. If it is clear that a dog is attacking with an intent to kill, or if a dog seriously attacks a small child causing death or serious disfigurement, society has to ensure that that dog doesn't get a chance to do it again. AND if the owners can be found criminally negligent, they need to face consequences too. 

I am not talking about every single bite. I am talking about attacks. I am talking about when dogs cross the line of communicating their fear or displeasure, and go into some type of prey mode or attack mode, where the act more like a wild animal than a domestic pet.


----------



## Kayos and Havoc (Oct 17, 2002)

gsdsar said:


> I am a bit torn by this one, TBH.
> 
> 
> But at the end if the day. Even if the child came into my yard, if MY dogs did this. I would PTS, or at least remove the dogs. I just could not live with myself. I could not stay in the area with my dogs, knowing that a young child would have to live a few doors down from dogs that mauled her. I could not be THAT person. Probably why I am so hyper vigilant and why my dogs are never unsupervised in my yard.
> ...


I can understand this but I would not be so quick to PTS. Years ago I had a young 6 year old boy wander into my yard with my two (now deceased) GSD's. I saw the kid come through the gate leaving it open and make a bee line for Wolfie. He climbed on Wolfie as I cam out the door. All Wolfie did was lay down to try to wiggle out from under the boy. GOOD DOG!!!! But at the end of the day, if Wolfie had nipped or bitten the kid as far as I was concerned the kid had it coming. Neither dog left the yard and I was there immediately. And this is the reason I now padlock my gate and have security cameras.

While I agree the dog might have had a loose screw, depending on the circumstances I may or may not PTS.

Very sad all around. I find it interesting that the reporter was prompting the child about barking and not being able to sleep and being scared due to the barking. If that and been an issue they should have complained. 

All said, the dogs will most likely lose their lives. If they were loose and the attack unprovoked they should be PTS.


----------



## Jaursland (Oct 24, 2012)

B


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## InControlK9 (Sep 23, 2013)

link not working


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Maybe 'cause the thread is two years old.


----------



## charger (Jan 29, 2008)

Alice13 said:


> I would say the root cause of this whole thing is the mother's negligence. Since the dogs belong to someone she has somebody to blame. What if it had been strays? Who is she gonna blame? This girl had wandered off her house and entered a neighbour's yard on her own. There are so many other things that could have happened to her. And where the dogs are concerned, I agree with Selzer. It doesn't look like the dogs were going all out to attack her. I think my 6 month old pup could do more damage than that if given the chance.
> 
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App


Plus the child could have been easily abducted by some weirdo.


----------



## Concetta Parsons (Jul 20, 2016)

well said


----------

