Rottweiler Mauls Calif. Toddler to Death

[sabra]

<<SNIP>>
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-5189737,00.html

Rottweiler Mauls Calif. Toddler to Death

GLENDALE, Calif. (AP) - A Rottweiler ripped a 16-month-old girl out of her mother's arms, dragged her for several feet and mauled her to death in an apparent unprovoked attack, police said.

Cassandra Garcia died at a hospital Tuesday evening following the attack by her grandparents' 150-pound male dog, named Enano, police Sgt. Tom Lorenz said.

The toddler was being held as her mother, Blanca Garcia, bent down and gave the dog a bowl of water. The dog attacked the girl, snatched her and dragged her several feet down a driveway.

``It was extremely severe,'' Lorenz said.

Garcia's mother was able to grab her child back and sought refuge in a vehicle where she made a ``hysterical 911 call,'' Lorenz said. The 28-year-old mother had bites to her arm and upper body but ``suffered no major injuries,'' he added.

<</SNIP>>

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. OMG

How incredibly tragic.

[Coventina]

2. Flame war about banning Rotties in 3....2....1.....

:hide:

[Seabiscuit]

111. That was my first thought exactly. Let the countown begin...

But I've seen enough in the past not to want to read any further.

[progressivebydesign]

154. I like Rotties if they are...

1) neutered
2) trained and raised lovingly.

They can be the sweetest of sweet dogs. Just because a dog is big, doesn't make it aggressive, but this dog apparently had food aggression issues, as the baby was put directly near the water dish when the Mom bent down.

I am against irresponsible owners and aggressive dogs, regardless of the breed.

[Warren DeMontague]

159. Don't ban the dog, charge the owner with murder.

Period. If people would be held TOTALLY responsible for their dogs' actions, I bet some would think about owning these hyper-aggressive "Fuck You" Dogs.

[Siena]

3. I used to have a rottweiler...

Smart dog but at the end of the day not safe! when are people going to learn? When ANYONE would come over, our dog was locked up because you just don't know what he would do.

[Pithlet]

18. If every single owner of these dogs behaved the way you did

It wouldn't be nearly the problem it is. Thank you for understanding. THere will be flames about how safe and good these dogs are. But they are too dangerous around children.

[Siena]

Thanks!

It's sad but true. Because and I'll say it again - FANTASTIC breed of dog.

[jayfish]

108. I Have Had Two Of Them And When...

it came to them being around other people, I didn't trust either of them as far as I could throw'em. A characteristic of the breed is aloofness around people.

Jay

[RebelOne]

4. It makes me sick to read reports like this.

Stories like this have given the Rottie a bum rap because the press jumps all over it. If it had been a cocker spaniel, you would not have read about it. I have a Rottweiler and she is the sweetest dog you would ever want to know.

[Siena]

6. But do you live in an area surrounded by people?

I love the Rott too - great dog. But you really can't say with 100% certainty that you can trust them.

[RebelOne]

11. I can say with 100% certainty that my dog can be trusted.

I know her all too well. And yes, I live in a mobile home park with lots of people.

[Siena]

13. Trusted with YOU

Not necessarily trusted with a stranger. It's an animal, after all. So I ask, do you live in an urban area?

[Cocoa]

55. I'm afraid of your Rottweiler

especially since its owner doesn't have a responsible attitude toward her.

[RebelOne]

83. Please explain how I am not a responsible owner. n/t

[Imagevision]

130. my dog can be trusted." >Grandparents thought the same thing!

[LisaL]

160. Exactly. That's what they all say-the owners whose child was

murdered "My dog is so sweet and gentle".
I have yet hear one of them saying the dog was a vicious killer and they knew it.

[smbolisnch]

12. You can't trust anything with 100% certainty. Can you?

:shrug:
Not your dog, your car, your boss, anything.

[Pithlet]

26. They're all sweet

until the rip someone's throat out. It is the rottweiler owner who thinks their dog is safe and would never attack anyone that is the danger. The dogs are just doing what they know how to do and living by their instincts. It's a shame that their owners didn't do the right thing and it is people like the child in the OP's story that suffer.

[One_of_8]

67. That symbolises part of the problem:

I don't know for sure, but I bet that the grandparents of this little baby probably thought their Rottie was a good dog, and safe to be in the same room with their grandchild. The mom did nothing wrong. She's holding the baby, for crying out loud. And the dog just "out of the blue" goes for the baby and kills it.

Unless this "attack without provocation" mentality can be bred out of them, there is no way that any one can say their own Rottie "would never do such a thing." And knowing that this breed does have it in them to attack without provocation, is is really responsible of anyone to own this breed unless you live well away from anyone who could be harmed or killed should your dog suddenly veer from the "normal" and attack an innocent bystander?

[Coventina]

97. It wasn't "unprovoked" on the dog's part. The water dish is the tip off.

And this goes back to most dog owners' ignorance about dogs.

Dogs are pack animals. They have a hierarchy that is absolutely crucial to their social functioning.

That was HIS water (and probably food) dish that the mother and child were near. In his eyes, his position was threatened by two people he probably saw as only tertiary members of his pack.

He went for the weaker of the two, of course.

It is children who most often get attacked by dogs because the dogs see them as being closest to them in the pecking order. Obviously, the message had not been adequately conveyed to this dog that the little girl was dominate over him.

This is why it is encouraged that in families with dogs, the smallest child capable should be the one responsible for feeding the dog. This establishes to the dog the message that the child is in control and is "above" the dog in the pecking order. And never leave a child too small for that task alone with the animal. Period.
That is just responsible parenting and dog ownership.

If the mother and child were only occaisonal visitors to the house in this case, the dog did not understand, and obviously had not received adequate training that visitors should be accepted.

[smbolisnch]

106. Well said. nt

[phylny]

165. You're absolutely right.

Being territorial about a food dish, a water dish, or anything, is one of the FIRST things you want to address while training a dog.

When our dog (a Cavalier King Charles Spaniel who has never growled at anyone, let alone snapped at or bitten anyone) was a puppy, we routinely had all our girls, down to our then-3-year-old, remove her food and water, toys, you name it. She wouldn't dare fuss about it, even to this day at the age of 10.

[MadHound]

110. First of all, understand that unless the dog is rabid or otherwise damaged

No dog will "attack without provocation" We may not understand what the provocation is, but dogs don't just up and go after somebody without a reason. Most of the time it is because they somehow feel threatened.

Secondly, you're falsely generalizing when you say that an entire breed has it in them to attack without provocation.

Third, the vast majority of dogs who belong to the so-called "dangerous breed" are actually quite docile, well-behaved loving dogs who wouldn't hurt anybody.

Finally, perhaps you should realize that in these types of incidents we rarely hear the full story.

[MXMLLN]

145. Funny ... I've never heard of a Cocker Spaniel grabbing a child ...

... from its mother's arms.

[LisaL]

158. If it had been a cocker spaniel, the mother would have kicked his

ass, and the child would have been alive.

[iamjoy]

5. Why Do People Have These Dog Breeds? (eom)

[RebelOne]

7. Because they are great family dogs, intelligent and loyal.

Well, at least my Rottie is.

[shanti]

89. so are labs

but you don't read stories like this about them. what made you choose a rotweiler over a say, a lab?

[Siena]

93. Labs are great dogs too.

Rotts are smarter. And some people like to feel protected, I suppose.

[shanti]

136. exactly

"protected". well, i'd feel just as "protected" by a lab, and a heck of a lot safer around other people with one than a rott too.

[smbolisnch]

8. Why not?

This is an isolated incident. Tragic, yes,but it could have just as well been a standard poodle.

[Dora]

39. All the poodles I've met

whether miniature or standard, have had aggressive tendencies.

[formernaderite]

151. The axiom "All Dogs can bite" is naturally true...

I keep a sweet pitbull and an airedale together...the neighbor beside me has a rottie...all three play very nicely. Across the road, a neighbor whom no one likes has a nasty jack russel bitch. Guess which dog on our road has bitten small children?

The nasty one. The key is not to generalize about dogs. Right now pits and rotties are the "bad dog of the day". 15- 20 yrs ago it was dobermans, before that german shepards. There will always be irresponsible dog owners who rear irresponsible dogs.

[fujiyama]

178. I seriously hope you are not leaving your dog

without a leash outside especially around kids.

I'm not saying your not a good owner. I'm sure you are, but no amount of training can change animal behavior and instinct.

[Siena]

10. They really are fantastic dogs.

They just need to be raised in the right environment. NOWHERE near strangers.

[shanti]

94. then they're not

"fantastic" dogs.

[Siena]

98. If raised responsibly,

they really are. Everyone has their opinion.

[Kraklen]

14. Because not everybody's a knee jerk rottweiler hater.

[iamjoy]

24. I Don't Hate Them

I just don't trust them.


But I think there is something about certain breeds of dogs (like Rottweilers) that no matter how long you have them, and how well you treat them, they are more likely than other breeds to turn on you.

I don't think they should be banned, that would be a knee jerk reaction. More people are killed in fire arm incidents, but that doesn't mean we should ban fine arms (and not just because of the Second Amendments arguments).

[Siena]

27. It's less likely the Rott will turn on the owner...

than a total stranger. As long as the owner asserts authority from the beginning. Very important.

[smbolisnch]

31. And how does one assert authority to ensure the dog doesn't bite?

:shrug:

[Siena]

37. No fear.

Fight with the dog when it's young and win. Dogs respect a certain "pecking order". with Rotts, they need to know from the start who is boss and they are VERY loyal and respectful of that. It would be strange for a Rott to turn on its owner.

[smbolisnch]

41. Fight with it? Like how? Like biting it?

:shrug:

[Kraklen]

46. I think she means beating it.

That's some great advice on controlling dog behaviour.

:eyes:

[smbolisnch]

49. I think so too. I was waiting for him to admit that.

Real good advice, huh? People never cease to amaze me. :eyes:

[Siena]

56. You guys crack me up!

On another note, it's funny that once you assume I'm talking about violence that you also assume I'm a man. Interesting.

[Siena]

53. NO!!!!!!

Dogs like to play! Even kids play wrestle. and btw, i'm a woman.

[Kraklen]

60. doesn't make much sense.

yes, puppies love to wrestle, I don't know how that's going to "teach it a lesson."

Sounds like you're backtracking.

[Siena]

63. Backtracking?

I don't follow you. When my brothers "play wrestled" when they were little, there was still an element of competition and one would want to win. It doesn't mean they're hurting each other. Do you agree with it from that perspective?

[Siena]

48. no biting!

:rofl: wrestle with it. pin him down.

[smbolisnch]

50. Yeah, good idea.

[RebelOne]

62. My Rottie is an obedient, loyal and respectful dog.

She has never been hit or yelled at.

[Tallison]

175. But respect for an owner doesn't extend to a owner's young child

in said 'pecking order.' As an extension of your argument, perhaps the dog was trying to teach the toddler a lesson?

[Kraklen]

Bullshit.

Rottweilers are less likely to turn on owners than most breeds. They're famous for loyalty.

[CanOfWhoopAss]

113. Loyalty to the owner only.

In addition to loyalty, they are extremely territorial and jealous. Especially if there is competiton for the owner's attention. I've known spouses who have been attacked because the dog was closer to one spouse than the other. The dogs also attack other pets including other rotties in competition for the owner's attention. They are extremely complex dogs that require a specific type of owner to be safe.

[Dora]

9. So sad.

We are so close to our animals that we forget they are animals; the mistake that comes out of this is that we trust them as much as we would trust any human family member.

So sad, on all counts.

Added on edit: I am not blaming the mother, neither am I blaming the breed. It's a tragedy.

[Pithlet]

15. I was thinking

If I click on the link somewhere, there will be a quote about how friendly and sweet the dog was. Sure enough, there was.

These dogs should not be around little kids. Period.

[RebelOne]

16. My Rottie can be trusted around little kids.

And she has been exposed to plenty of them.

[Siena]

20. well Rebel One, I would say that you have the exception not the norm.

You do have to admit that most rotts should be kept away from children and strangers.

[smbolisnch]

23. What BS.

Seriously.

[Siena]

29. What's BS?

[smbolisnch]

35. That "most rotts should be kept away from children and strangers."

That is BS.

[Siena]

40. Well we are all entitled to our opinions.

[smbolisnch]

44. Ridiculous as they may be, apparently.

[countingbluecars]

57. Not BS in my opinion.

A wonderful woman who boards my dog will no longer accept male rotweilers at her kennel. She said she can no longer expose her employees to their aggressive behavior. This is a woman I trust. She is a true animal lover and has written several books on dogs.

[Pithlet]

30. No, it can't.

It is the owners who think like you do that are precisely the problem. I don't think most of the owners of the dogs who have killed thought it would ever happen to them.

I don't mean to attack you. I'm certain that your dog makes a great pet for you. I just think that you'd be better off understanding that you need to keep your dog away from children.

[AngryAmish]

92. I hope you have good homeowners insurance

Plus a personal umbrella policy. You can get $1 million in umbrella coverage for about $800-1000 per year.

No jury will ever give you or your dog sympathy. Even if you think the kid provoked your dog you will still pay. A lot. Hundreds of thousands of dollars.

[RebelOne]

126. I have a mobile home, so only carry mobile home insurance.

But why are you even suggesting that my dog would attack a child. She is never left alone with any little children. In fact, she avoids them.

[AngryAmish]

129. Because it could cause harm

Big powerful dog. If it does attack it can do an amazing amount of harm or kill.

You stated above that you dog is good around kids. If that dog is anywhere around kids, supervised or not, it is irresponsible.

How much insurance do you have?

[fujiyama]

177. No offense

but if you let your dog go near kids you are pretty irresponsible.

I'm not for banning them, but any owner that exposes their children to these dogs are putting their children at risk. Rottweilers are aggressive dogs and no amount of training can change nature. I find it arrogant to believe it can.

[Siena]

17. I completely agree that they shouldn't be around kids.

But they really are sweet dogs. VERY smart and loyal.

[smbolisnch]

19. Not true.

Not at all. Cats have fits and scratch and bite. Should they not be around kids?

[skypilot]

32. OK. This is where I'll come in.

I think it's one thing to be scratched and bitten (by a dog or cat) but it's quite another thing to be mauled. Dogs like Rottweillers and Pit bulls are know to have powerful jaws that will lock onto their victim and they will maul, not simply scratch or bite. I would never take the chance with one of these dogs around children. They may be sweet and loyal and trustworthy...until they're not.

[Coventina]

45. That "locking jaw" business is completely false.

Powerful jaws? Yes.

But locking jaws? Myth.

I was just going to eat my popcorn and watch this one, but I have to point out when there is downright WRONG information bandied about.

[skypilot]

54. Ok. Fine.

I was under the impression that this was the case. But the powerful jaws are quite bad enough. And I stand by my point that a cat and most other dogs aren't going to maul you.

[CanOfWhoopAss]

120. Locking Jaws are not a myth just not naturally occurring.

The dogs have to be trained by some idiot to lock their jaws.

[skypilot]

147. Thanks for that info.

Somehow I didn't believe that I was completely wrong about this.

[Coventina]

149. Dogs can be trained to bite and hold on

but there is no "locking jaw" mechanism.

Any dog could be trained to do it, regardless of breed.

Any breed of dog can be dangerous, given bad training, neglect or abuse.

[CanOfWhoopAss]

156. Who mentioned a "locking jaw" mechanism?

I just said the dog had to be trained to lock his jaws. Not literally "lock" but bite and hold as you stated. I guess it was a poor choice of words on my part if you were confused.

Any dog can be trained to "lock" but only a few have jaws powerful enough for it to be effective. Fewer still to the extent of an American Staffordshire (pitbull) or Rottweiler where it is difficult to break the animal's grip and courage to continue to hold.

While all dogs follow a social hierarchy, rotties are a breed that is naturally aggressive, territorial and jealous. Pitbulls have to be trained to be aggressive so their temperament is more "stable".

Not only did the rottie see the child as being lower in the pecking order but it was probably quite jealous of the attention the child likely received from her grandmother. The child May even have been an intrusion on the dogs established lifestyle assuming the dog was with the grandmother longer than the 16 month old child which of course brings us back to the social hierarchy of your other post. The daughter probably was not as much of an intrusion if at all as she probably new and fed the dog since it was a puppy.

>>Any breed of dog can be dangerous, given bad training, neglect or abuse.<<

As with motorcycles, firearms and almost anything in between, bad training, neglect, abuse, ignorance, and inexperience creates a dangerous situation. If you don't have the time or you are a first time dog/pet owner, don't choose a rottie, Presa Canario (canary dog), Chow, or other dog with a complex temperament and the power to render subsequent consequences. Definately do not dogsit for someone outside of a "controlled and safe environment".

[Coventina]

157. Sorry, didn't mean to accuse you. I was addressing

the myth that gets bandied about that some (usually pit bulls) breeds have this "special jaw" that allows them to lock onto someone and maintain it. It has even been embellished to say that even if you kill the dog, their jaws remain locked onto their victim.

It popped up here on DU not very long ago, and its believers were extremely adamant.

If I came across as accusatory or mean I apologize.

[CanOfWhoopAss]

176. We're all on the same team

Actually this is the first I've heard of a "special jaw". That's kind of silly. I hope you were able to enlighten them to a better understanding.

[Pithlet]

34. Big difference.

House cats can not maul a child to death in seconds.

[One_of_8]

91. Unless it's rabid

the most crabby, cranky cat will leave you alone, if you leave it alone. Some bad-tempered cats will claw or scratch at you, if you attempt to pet it or pick it up. Then they'll attempt to get the heck away from you.

That's completely different than the Rott in this story. What's the explanation for the dog's behavior? What would make the dog view the baby as a) some sort of threat? or b) something to be mauled? If those questions can't be answered, then how could you take steps to prevent it in the future? It's the fact that these dogs seem to have some genetic predisposition to attack without provocation, that makes them seem unsuited for being in the general population.

[MXMLLN]

146. Fortunately though ... pet cats don't grab babies from their mother's arms

[Beaverhausen]

22. That's a pretty broad generalization don't you think?

Only a very small percent of Rotties "attack" humans.

There has to be some reason this dog did what he did. He knew the victim and the victim's mother.

I really hope they can figure out what exactly provoked the attack.

Very sad.

[Dora]

33. Mom was giving the dog its water dish

I imagine that the water dish was located right next to the food.

If mother was holding the toddler as she bent over to set down the water dish, then the dog could have seen the toddler as a threat to the dog's food/water... hence an attack.

My dad and stepmom owned a cocker spaniel, and I was told to STAY AWAY from the dog's food dish, especially when he was eating.

[Beaverhausen]

36. I thought the same thing about the water dish

God...this happened in my town.

:cry:

[Kraklen]

42. Cocker spaniels can and will kill infants.

You never hear about how they should be kept away from children.

[smbolisnch]

47. That's right. A bite is a bite.

[Pithlet]

135. Actually, you do.

I've read and heard more than once that Cocker Spaniels are a dangerous breed to have with children. In fact, a two year old little boy of a woman I worked with had his ear ripped off by one, and it had to be re-attached.

[iamjoy]

51. A Reason? The Dog's Nature

This is an extreme example, I know but after Roy Horn was attacked by the tiger at his show, people started trying to figure out why. And one animal handler said, "Because it is a tiger."

Some animals are wild by nature and should not be owned by humans. Tigers are one. Some are by their nature (and thousands of years of breeding) more aggressive than others and need to be handled with extreme caution. Pit bulls and rottweilers are just such breeds.

Some breeds of dogs can be a faithful, gentle family pet for years, handled by a loving family who understands the nature of the breed. But the animal could still turn, unprovoked. Such incidents are rare, but they do happen. And because these breeds are stronger, the attack is more likely to result in severe injury or death.

It isn't fair to compare to cocker spaniels. These dogs are not child friendly and have a low tolerance for kids pulling their tails and ears, so they may bite, but the bite is a defensive measure, and then the kid or dog retreats. They bite, they don't maul. The kid gets a few stitches (at worse) and learns how to respect the dog.

[Scout]

139. Our cocker spaniel must have been the exception to the rule then

I was an infant/toddler, and the dog would let me pull on hair, tail, climb on her. Snoopy and I grew up together! We never had ANY problems at all with her ... with our family, our friends and neighbors.

Perhaps some people don't teach their children how to treat a pet in the home properly. Then of course when the kid does something nasty to the dog, and it bites, of course the dog is the one who suffers the punishment.

I've watched how some children are allowed to treat the family pet, and I think if they get bitten, they fucking deserved it. I'd rather have the dog in my house than that kid.

[iamjoy]

148. Well, I Brought Up The Cocker Spaniel

because some one else had noted that you never hear about it when cocker spaniels bite children.

I have read that cocker spaniels are very sensitive. Over breeding (because they are so pretty and generally sweet, demand was high) was poor breeding and many veterinarians and groomers to claim the dogs were nasty. But the thing is, even if you have a "nasty" cocker spaniel, it is much easier to handle than a rottie or pit bull, just because of its physiology. And, really, breds like pit bulls which were originally bred deliberately as attack to kill dogs, I just don't see them making good family pets.

[Pithlet]

52. Not at all.

These kinds of attacks aren't just people the dog knows.

I don't care what provoked the attack. It should have been prevented in the first place. A dog owner should know that dogs can be "provoked" by many things, and children are especially prone to this.

I would extend that the owner of ANY breed of dog should be careful about letting their dogs around children. But, when the careless owner has a breed like a Rotweiller, the consequences can be deadly. Yes, I know that other breeds can kill as well, which is exactly why I don't limit it ONLY to rotweillers.

[smbolisnch]

58. So do you support legislation that rounds up ALL dogs of a certain

breed and puts them to sleep? Just takes them from their owners, even if they have been with them for 14 years with no incidents, and murders them? Do you support such a thing?

[Pithlet]

64. No

I don't. I support dog owners, including rotweillers, understanding the dangers, and not being in denial thinking their dog wouldn't hurt a fly. It is the stupid owners who don't understand the dangers that I would like to see rounded up.

You know, I just love how you immediately jumped to conclusions like that. I'm not firmly in the "Rotweillers are innocent harmless little lambs" camp, therefore I must be the enemy who wants them all killed. Please.

[smbolisnch]

66. Then please understand that it is precisely your attitude that

encourages this legislation. And it happens, all too often. Your are spreading fear, unnecesarily about large breeds. And dog can bite and kill.

[Pithlet]

74. My attitude that owners should be careful with their dogs?

Give me a break. I'm not spreading fear. I'm spreading responsibility. The responsibility that EVERY dog owner should have.

If this legislation happens, it doesn't happen because of people like me. It happens because of the stupid owners who are careless with their dogs and people die. When people die, steps have to be taken. It is obvious to me from the responses in this thread alone that too many people would rather be in denial. So, people will continue to die. And stuff like that tends to spur reaction. It isn't me bringing about this legistlation. It is the stupid dog owners.

[smbolisnch]

76. You said:

These dogs should not be around little kids. Period.
That is your statement.

[Pithlet]

81. They shouldn't.

I still stand by that. If I owned a rotweiller, or any breed capable of killing a child, I would not take the chance that something like this would happen.

[Siena]

84. I think the point is,

that you can't be certain what a rott will do so why take the chance?

[smbolisnch]

88. You can't be certain what any animal will do. eom

[Siena]

90. But not every animal will rip your head off.

[smbolisnch]

99. And not every person will approach a large dog's food dish

who is capable of such a thing, with a baby in their arms.

[Siena]

100. what is your point?

that this woman is an idiot? be nice - she just lost her baby, stupid or not.

[smbolisnch]

103. No, I never said anything like that.

[Siena]

104. so then what is your point?

[smbolisnch]

109. Please see post #97.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4258530&mesg_id=4258984
Said so well, there is no point in me reiterating it.

[Siena]

114. well I don't disagree with post 97 at all!

that was my complete point from the beginning that you can see in my very first post in this thread. But what is listed in post 97 is that the occasional visitor might still have problems. the dog was the grandmother's dog - she was a visitor. she's not the owner! the woman who lost her child is not the owner. so hence, why i thought you were picking on her for not knowing better.

[Coventina]

116. Thanks for the kind words! I'm writing my master's thesis on dogs

So I've spent a lot of this summer learning as much as I can about them.

They are fascinating creatures.

[Siena]

118. Well you've done your research!

What are you getting a masters in?

[Coventina]

123. Well, this is going to sound really strange but

it's actually an M.A. in Art History.

I'm doing it about paintings with dogs in them. The thing is, in order to analyze the paintings, you have to understand dogs and the relationship people have had with dogs over the last 14,000 years.

[Siena]

124. Oh that's interesting!

Do you analyze this one?



hee hee. couldn't resist.

I would be interested in reading that when you get it published. Good idea!

[Coventina]

125. LOL! No, I'm afraid that one isn't on my list.

Although, I really do find paintings like that very interesting. I think they really have a lot to say about how we see dogs and how we relate to them.

But I'm focusing on 17th century paintings of dogs.

[Siena]

127. I totally agree.

And I'm totally serious that I would be interested in reading your thoughts.

[smbolisnch]

119. Well I am impressed. You seem to have a good idea as to what

may have happened in this tragic situation. I think you hit the nail on the head. Unfortuately, we just don't have all of the facts.

Good luck on your thesis! It sounds to me like you will do just fine :)

[Coventina]

65. Or what about mixes? Does 1/2 Rottie get the needle?

1/4?

A dog of unknown ancestery that looks vaugely like a Rottie?

Breed banning is a can of worms that is just not the right path to start going down.

Punish the bad owners.

[smbolisnch]

68. That's right.

[Pithlet]

70. Except I said nothing about banning the dogs.

Not one word. Zip. And I'M the one kneejerking...

All I've ever been talking about is the owners. Owners who are too stupid to realize that their dogs could kill, and therefore should take precautions. The owners who think their dog could never do that. They're too stupid to have a dog.

[smbolisnch]

73. You didn't have to. You are instilling fear of large breed dogs.

That ENCOURAGES this legislation.

[Pithlet]

77. Bullshit. Bullshit. Bullshit.

Telling people that they need to be careful of their dogs and aware of the dangers is not instilling fear of large breed dogs. Telling people who think their dogs are harmless that they're wrong, and need to be more careful just might save a life, if that person is willing to listen.

Go ahead. Continue to try to shut up people who want to get through to irresponsible dog owners. And then more people will die. Which will spur draconian legislation.

The accident that happened in the OP's story happened because too many people think their dog is harmless, and aren't careful. And these deaths will do FAR MORE harm to the reputaion of large breeds than little ol' me ever will.

[smbolisnch]

79. I am not trying to shut anyone up.

I am all for responsible pet ownership, which is why we should be discussing that, not that These dogs should not be around little kids. Period.

[Pithlet]

85. Okay.

Rottie owners should let their dogs frolick and play freely around children. We should just consider the ones that die collateral damage. Is that better?

I'm sorry for the hyperbole, but this is just frustrating. Rotweillers are not harmless. They are capable of killing. Ignoring that is so damn irresponsible. It's crazy.

[Coventina]

75. Sorry, I wasn't responding to you. I was adding to the other

poster's concerns about the issues of banning breeds.

Since he/she brought up the issue. It's one I've given quite some thought to recently.

Sorry if you felt personally attacked by me. I didn't intend it to come across that way. I was just adding my thoughts on the problem of banning specific dog breeds.

[Pithlet]

78. He/she was accusing me of proposing that legistlation

in that post.

[smbolisnch]

80. I most certainly did not!!!!!!

I said that your attitude encourages the legislation. Don't flat out lie. :eyes:

[Pithlet]

82. You're right. It was another poster. I'm sorry.

The thread is long.

I still contend that the attitude that people need to be responsible has nothing to do with the legislation.

[smbolisnch]

86. Thank you.

You about gave me a coronary. :crazy:

[gman16]

21. It's the people,

Not the breed. Rotties and Pit bulls, or any other dog is a product of what we want them to be. It's like blaming the gun when a person kills someone.

[smbolisnch]

25. EXACTLY. Well said.

And welcome to DU. :toast:

[RebelOne]

28. You are right. And it all have to do with how the dog is raised.

My Rottie has never been yelled at or hit. I never had to use any force to train her. She is just happy to please me. She is now almost 8 years old and I have had her for 6 years, so I know her well.

[Pithlet]

43. I totally agree.

And the denial being expressed in this thread is the danger. The people who think that rotweillers and other similar breeds are no different than any other housepet. Scary.

[Pithlet]

96. It is the owners

The responsibility is 100% on them. I do think it is worth noting, however, that some breeds are more dangerous than others. It's not saying that no one can ever have one of these breeds safely. But understanding that is key to being a safe owner. It is the rottie owners who think their dog is no different and no more dangerous than any other breed that is the problem.

I have no problem with the owners that do acknowledge this. They're not likely to be in the next story headlining how their dog just mauled another toddler.

[smbolisnch]

101. Responsible pet owner is key.

A responsible pet owner engages their dog in obedience training, cres for their physical and emotional needs and considers the breed specific needs.

Dogs that are brough home as puppies because they were cute and then tied up to a tree 12 hours a day are probably more likely to bite.

[Siena]

107. well that is true.

Makes a big difference with all dogs to be taught things as early as possible. can't teach an old dog new tricks! (sorry - had to throw that in :) )

[Pithlet]

112. True

However, even the ones owned by responsible pet owners have that capability. A responsible pet owner should know that even if they do everything right, dogs are dogs. Sometimes they'll react and bite. And children are more likely to be victims because they are smaller, more venerable and more likely to accidental provoke even the most docile dog, with the yelling, running, pulling ears and tails, etc. Any dog may bite as a result.

Dogs don't bite to be malicious. They do it because they're dogs, and that is what dogs do, even if they're raised up right. The dog that mauled the poor toddler in this story probably didn't mean to kill a baby. He was just acting on his instincts. Every dog regardless of breed should be cared for and handled knowing that they might bite.

edit spelling.

[RebelOne]

128. I totally agree. I am a responsible dog owner even though

someone else on this thread doesn't think so. My Rottie has been to obedience school. She is kept indoors and is only allowed out on a leash. I take her to a field behind my house every night and let her run. She is treated like a baby. And to me she is my furry child.

[smbolisnch]

131. I don't doubt for 1 seond that you are an awesome pet owner.

Seriously. Don't pay any attention to that poster. :hug:

[Pithlet]

134. If I am the poster in question

My only objection was the attitude that the dog was completely safe. I applaud all the precautions he/she is taking. But the idea that any dog is incapable of biting is horribly naive. I stand by that.

[phylny]

167. I read y our post with interest, and I think you've hit the nail on the

head with your statement that "some breeds are more dangerous than others."

This is taken from the breed standared of the AKC:

http://www.akc.org/breeds/rottweiler/index.cfm

Temperament
The Rottweiler is basically a calm, confident and courageous dog with a self-assured aloofness that does not lend itself to immediate and indiscriminate friendships. A Rottweiler is self-confident and responds quietly and with a wait-and-see attitude to influences in his environment. He has an inherent desire to protect home and family, and is an intelligent dog of extreme hardness and adaptability with a strong willingness to work, making him especially suited as a companion, guardian and general all-purpose dog.

The behavior of the Rottweiler in the show ring should be controlled, willing and adaptable, trained to submit to examination of mouth, testicles, etc. An aloof or reserved dog should not be penalized, as this reflects the accepted character of the breed. An aggressive or belligerent attitude towards other dogs should not be faulted.

A judge shall excuse from the ring any shy Rottweiler. A dog shall be judged fundamentally shy if, refusing to stand for examination, it shrinks away from the judge. A dog that in the opinion of the judge menaces or threatens him/her, or exhibits any sign that it may not be safely approached or examined by the judge in the normal manner, shall be excused from the ring. A dog that in the opinion of the judge attacks any person in the ring shall be disqualified.

[progressivebydesign]

155. Not entirely true. It is nurture but there IS nature.

Herding dogs herd, it's their nature, you do not have to train that instinct into them. Labs carry things in their mouth and usually love to swim, it's nature. Terriers dig. There are some things that the breeds have been developed for, either for good or bad, that goes beyond training.

Yes, you can take a dog of a breed that has been developed over the years to be aggressive, and you can raise him with care, and have a good dog, because that dog understands what you expect of them. But.. you cannot ignore instinct.

[tblue37]

166. And loaded guns should not be kept around children, either.

Children do stuff, often dumb clumsy or careless stuff.

Loaded guns should be locked away from kids because kids can't be trusted not to do something stupid with them.

Dogs like Rottweilers should be kept away from kids, too, because if the kid provokes the dog to attack, the sheer size and strength of the dog would make the consequences more serious than if the dog were smaller and less powerful.

Also, as the OP story indicated, it is harder for even an adult to defend against such a big, powerful dog. If the child were being attacked by a smaller, weaker dog, the mother could easily have, as an earlier post said, kicked the dog's ass. But it was undoubtedly harder for her to get her baby from the Rottweiler, and in the process, the mother also suffered bites all over her upper body.

Kids move suddenly or weirdly, they startle, they pull a dog's hair. Even if a dog would not attack unless provoked, it is pretty much certain that at some time a kid will do something provocative, even if only by accident. And it can happen in a second, before you can do anything to prevent it.

I had a darling, sweet-tempered Afghan Hound when my kids were young in the 1980s. Jason loved the kids, and they loved him, but when she was about 3, my daughter was running near the dog when she stumbled and fell--on him. He was asleep when she landed on him, and he startled awake and bit her.

He was only an Afghan Hound. He was fairly big, but not as big as a Rottie, and he only bit once and did not do any serious harm. But even one bite from a Rottweiler could have done much more harm, and if the dog bit more than once, then the child would probably have been maimed or even killed.

The point is not that breeds like Rottweilers should be banned. Obviously they shouldn't. But owners should be aware that even the sweetest dog can snap or seriously bite if provoked--and kids will provoke, even if only by moving suddenly and startling the dog. I

Last year my 25-year-old son was sitting and watching TV at a friend's house, with the friend's sweet Doberman Pinscher lying on the floor at his feet. The dog was a sugar pie (her name was actually “Sugar”—she was that sweet) and really liked Michael. But he stood up suddenly to go in to the bathroom and startled her awake, and she bit him on the leg. The dog felt terrible afterward and was all wiggly-kissy with him to make up for it, and Michael blamed himself anyway, but if it's hard for even an adult to remember not to startle a dog, how likely is it that a small child would remember?

My nextdoor neighbor has a black Lab mix named Xander. He is adorable, and he absolutely adores me. (I play with him all the time and take him rawhide bones to play fetch with.) But if I am carrying my backpack or a bag of groceries when he sees me, he doesn’t always recognize me immediately, and he barks and lunges at me when I approach him. I use my voice to calm him and help him recognize me. But when young children visit me, I never let them approach Xander unless I “introduce” them (even if he knows the child and has played with him or her before). And while a kid is playing fetch with him, I stand right there to make sure the kid doesn’t do something that might cause the dog to startle and bite. Or, if something really weird happened and the dog actually turned on the kid (something I consider possible with almost any large animal), I would be right there to get between them.

My point is that any large dog is capable of seriously harming or killing a child. Heck, sweet Xander is capable of harming or killing me. I have no reason to believe he would, but I know how to act around dogs. Kids are less aware, and far more vulnerable. And if somehow a dog I know went nuts and attacked me, as an adult I would probably be able to figure out a way to escape. A child would just scream and run (acting for all the world like prey and triggering the dog’s hunting instincts).

By the way, I remember a case some years ago where a pair of Great Danes chased down a young boy and killed him. The point is that they were very big dogs, and big dogs can do a lot more harm than smaller dogs. And Rottweilers are very big, very powerful, and therefore potentially very dangerous to children.

Cars and trucks should not be banned either, but you also don't want kids to be playing near the street or in the street. And you supervise children near streets, not because you think cars will attack them unprovoked, but because you know the kids are so capable of doing something that would cause them to get in the way of an oncoming car.

(This is in reply to the post above that said, "It's like blaming the gun when a person kills someone.")

[ScamUSA.Com]

38. probably mistook the baby for a toy

horrible tragedy :(

[RebelOne]

72. That is very possible.

My Rottie loves the soft squeaky toys. The more the toy squeaks, the more she bits it and tosses it around.

[ScamUSA.Com]

115. my dobie does the same thing

She's smiling!

[Siena]

121. SO CUTE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[smbolisnch]

132. Isn't she a beauty!

How cute!

[Cocoa]

59. a Rottweiler near my home forces me to go a block out of my way

they sit outside their house with their Rottweiler roaming around without a leash.

I can't walk down that block. :mad:

[smbolisnch]

61. Without a leash. That is irresponsible. Not the dog's fault.

[Cocoa]

69. I know

of course it would absurd to be mad at the dog. my :mad: was for the assholes that own the dog.

[Cats Against Frist]

174. I was just reading about a case where a rottweiler jumped a fence

and killed a little girl, in her backyard. I especially hate when you're on a walk, and the fuckers think a really thick hedge is what they should have up, to pen their murder dog.

These dogs are a nuisance -- and, yes, as a former daily 5k runner, I have run into far too many of them loose, and behind fences that they can get out of.

[Coventina]

71. Are there leash laws in your community? If so, report them

A loose dog is a danger to itself and every animal (including humans) around it.

[Sapphire Blue]

87. Hoping to phrase this w/o condemning anyone...

The mother, w/child in arms bent over to give the dog a bowl of water. The bowl of water might have been next to the dog's food. Dog's can be protective of their food... this dog might have felt that his food was being threatened. If the dog had been a chihuahua, the child might have gotten nipped, rather than mauled.

Since this dog was thought to be a "goofy, gentle giant", the mother may not have realized the danger in approaching the dog w/her child.

Dog Safety for Kids
From Krista Mifflin

The Basics in Dog Safety

The First Step In Bite Prevention

<snip>

Never Approach a Dog When He is Eating

Parents, this should be common sense, every child should know this, whether you have pets in the home or not.

Dog Owners, if your dog is food protective, please take the time to train him out of it.

http://dogs.about.com/cs/childrenanddogs/a/child_safety.htm

Edited to add:

Resource Guarding
Behaviour

From Krista Mifflin

Don't go near the dog when he's eating!:
Do you remember hearing that? Your mother/aunt/father had a good point. A lot of dogs have a problem with "Possession Aggression". In other words, "what's mine is mine, and you aren't allowed to even look at it." Sharing is a foreign concept to most dogs, especially dogs who are the sole family pet. A dog with possession aggression will guard his resources, whether his resources are his food, toys, or the most valuable of all, You.

The easiest way to deal with this is to start from puppyhood. Get your dog used to having you come and take his things away. Give them back, but take them for a while. Let him see that even someone else has something he wants, if he waits patiently he'll most likely get it back.

Teaching a "give" command will also help. When your puppy has a toy in his mouth, gently take it from him, saying "give" at the same time. When you have it, reward him and praise lavishly. By rewarding him as well, he'll learn that to give something to you, means to get something even better at times.

Too late! He's an adult Resource Guarder now! :
Oops, you've left it too long, or you've adopted a dog who's got guarding tendencies. Either way, it will now take time, patience and persistence for your dog to learn that there's no need, and that it's unnacceptable to try and protect his food.

Continued @ http://dogs.about.com/cs/behaviorissues/p/resource_guard.htm

[smbolisnch]

95. The food issue may very well be the case.

Unfortunately, the child is dead, and so is the dog.

[Pithlet]

105. Yes. Absolutely.

The people who want to lump these breeds in with all others, and refuse to acknowledge that there is a difference are the scary ones.

I have no problem with the responsible rotweiller owner who knows that their dog is more dangerous and more capable of killing than many other breeds, and takes precautions based on that knowledge. I think owning a rottie can be safe if that is kept in mind. If they all did, we wouldn't be hearing these stories nearly as often.

[Love Bug]

133. Interesting about food protection

I was watching that animal cop program on Animal Planet one night and they rescued this dog (mixed breed -- not a pit or rottweiler) that had been neglected and injured. I don't recall if there was an owner or not. After the dog healed from it's injuries, they put it through some tests to see if it was ready for adoption. One of the tests was to see how it would react to someone approaching it's food. While the dog was eating they extended a fake arm towards the bowl and this otherwise sweet dog attacked and bit the hell out of that arm. They tried this several times with the same results. The shelter staff were really saddened by this because they would have to put the dog down because it was not safe to be around people, especially children even though it was otherwise a sweet, friendly dog. They said this was behavior that could not be corrected -- this was instinct.

I'm an animal lover (2 cats) but sometimes you just have to put the safety of people above owning a potentially dangerous animal.

[LisaL]

163. They do it all the time. I watch this same show a lot.

I seriously think they are over reacting many times when they put these dogs down. I used to have little dog that was food aggressive like that. Little dog wouldn't do much damage if he/she bites. It's the big dogs that you would have to worry about. Also, a lot of these dogs have been starved, etc. I am pretty sure they could have improved if given a chance. But I guess they feel better safe than sorry, so they put these dogs down.
Yet, on the other show on animal planet, a big pit bull type dog kept viciously attacking a police officer, and they had trainer working with this dog on his aggression. That didn't make sense to me at all.
I guess it depends on which shelter a dog gets into.

[tblue37]

171. Talk about your food protection behavior!

Check out this hilarious video of a dog that keeps attacking his own leg because he thinks it is after his bone.
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/videos/donttouchmybone.html

[tishaLA]

102. LA Times reports this dog had killed previously

another neighborhood dog, a Maltese. The Maltese's owners, for reasons I cannot begin to fathom, didn't press charges.

If they had, or if this dog's owners had acted responsibly, this tragedy might have been averted.

[ScamUSA.Com]

117. now thats just inexcusable

dogs can only get 1 mistake... otherwise its a habit

I hate to say it, and it would break my heart, but as a responsible owner you cant tolerate that...

at the very least you would have to imprison the dog

[Siena]

122. That's awful.

[Pithlet]

137. For clarification, and in my defense

I am very passionate about animal rights, and responsible pet ownership. Any example of irresponsible pet ownership gets me very riled up. Part of that irresponsibility is failure to recognize or own up to the very real dangers that owning a pet can entail. Because failing that means letting your guard down. That's why the stories like the OP posted happen.

I do not wish to demonize any breed of any pet. I don't support banning any of them. My issues aren't with the pet themselves, but with the owners. Every time I hear anyone saying about their dog "My dog isn't dangerous around kids. He wouldn't hurt a fly", it enrages me, because that is exactly why people who own them let their guard down, and then people are hurt or killed. Almost every time a pet hurts a person, it's because the owner of that pet was irresponsible at that moment, regardless of how good they usually are. It's the owner's fault.

People who've attacked me in this thread would do better going after the irresponsible pet owners, because THEY are the ones that are going to ruin it for everyone else when steps are taken to prevent more deaths that those owners caused. If more deaths occur, and legislation was put into place, it wasn't because of people like me. It was because of the owners who maimed and killed others through their indifference and irresponsibility.

[ulysses]

138. entirely agreed with this.

Thank you.

[Siena]

140. Totally agree.

Good for you to stand your ground. Not sure I understand why you were being attacked in the first place.

[Pithlet]

141. I think it's because

people sometimes become irrational when it comes to their pets, much like parents do when it comes to their kids. They personalize the criticism. And I do understand it to some extent. I'm crazy about my kids and my pets. I just wish more people were responsible about both, and they deserve to get blasted when they're not, because we all suffer the consequences.

[Siena]

142. I think you're exactly right.

And I too have always been a pet owner (and I'm soon to be a mom for the first time!) and it's really just about being responsible - not a criticism.

[Pithlet]

143. Congratulations

soon-to-be-mom!

[Siena]

144. Thanks!

:)

[tblue37]

172. How will you handle the Rottweiler

when the baby is born? Any dog can be very dangerously jealous when a new baby invades its territory and takes away its owner's attention.

[Siena]

180. I don't have the Rott anymore.

He died. :-( But, I would have to say that I would be forced to give the dog away if I did still have him. I would never forgive myself if something happened to the baby.

[entanglement]

150. Tragic. Why don't people realize that no amount of

anthropomorphizing is going to change the fact that a dog's an animal, after all. A bigger, strong dog is just that much more of a threat. This ain't rocket science, people. Anyhow, I guess that's one dog owner who'll never say "Ooooh my dog is an angel. He would never bite / hurt anyone"

[really annoyed]

153. I agree with you.

How many more children need to die before we do something about it?

I had a toy poodle, and she would bite anybody she got the chance to.

I feel bad, because my friend has this big dog I love to death. The dog barked at my niece, and it was the first time the dog had ever barked at a stranger.

[PittPoliSci]

168. greyhounds are large strong dogs

they aren't much of a threat.

[progressivebydesign]

152. Horrible. The dog was obviously food aggressive.

The mother bent down to give the dog water and put the poor baby near the dog and the dog's dish. A severely food aggressive dog will attack anything that gets near its food dish. How horrible for this family. I have no idea if the dog had any previous aggression issues, but I do know that dogs can become extremely aggressive near their food dish. An honest mistake on the Mom's part, as she apparently didn't realize that children should never be near a dog and his dish, even if it's water.

[LisaL]

161. On the shows about animal rescues, when they test a dog and find it to be

food aggressive, they don't adopt it but put it down.

[Warren DeMontague]

162. People should be held legally responsible for what their dogs do.

There's way too much of this bullshit going on, and I don't think it's a coincidence. Just like aggression crazed drivers careening all over the freeway in oversized SUVs and pickup trucks, this fetishization of violent, aggressive dogs is part of what I consider the "fuck you" mentality lots of people seem to have these days.

If someone's dog attacks and kills a baby or litte kid, charge the owner with murder. Period.

[Nashyra]

169. I am the owner of 3 Rotties

Right now I have a female, male and their "son" who is moving out with my college son. The male is the son of our first Rottie, the female is an import as an 8week old puppy.

We recently had the pleasure of raising 11 Rottie puppies, we had friends, family and children over the day after they were born and they were exposed to humans everyday of their young lives. The male is a sweet gental giant, the female is a sweetie but tries to grab you with her mouth when you pet the puppy but never agressively, the puppy is a "slug" spoiled by his momma. They are like our children, our daughter has one of our males brother, they are both 6 now and our daughters dog has grown up with her kids. My husband spoils the crap out of them and sometimes I feel that he is stubborn about how dangerous they could be.

All that being said I would NEVER leave a child in a room with with any of our dogs, ever, ever, ever, ever,!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I would not leave any animal in a room with kids. Period. Our daughter is coming to visit in a couple of days and I want to kennel our female because she stirs up the other two and I know in a second they can have a pack mentality, plus she is protective of the puppy. I love my dogs, I am still grieving over the fact that our first Rottie was poisoned a year ago. We have trained them to not be food agressive, we get down on the ground and pretend to be eating their food from the time they are puppies, if they growl they are muzzled and told no and we repeat until they do not do it and then they recieve their treat, I know they are not food agressive but would I let my grandaughter feed my dogs, absolutely not. My dogs are not dog agressive, they want to play but they are intimdating and I do not want others to be frightened, unless you are a regular guest in my home, the dogs are put outside until my guest has been in the house for awhile and let them in one at a time. I LOVE my dogs and that is why I take care to make sure that I do not let them in a compromising position. They are animals and for the most part I trust my dogs more than I trust people. You absolutely have to be responsible and show common sense and then some if you want the luxury of owning one of these beautiful animals, Good Dog Carl is a perfect example of how these animals are but I would never, ever want to be responsible for my dogs injuring anyone, for the persons sake, my dogs sake and my sake. Enjoy this wonderful beautiful breed but be more than careful, these animals are counting on you to take care of them and keeping them in a safe environment.

[phylny]

164. A few weeks ago, I was almost attacked by a pit bull while

leaving my car to visit a kid for Early Intervention. The lactating female broke free from her "rope" (hardee har har) and rushed at me. I put my huge bag of toys in front of me in the hopes that if she lunged at me, she'd latch on to the bag instead of me. In addition, I turned my head so as to avoid eye contact. The owner came out soon after and called the dog off.

I thought, later on when my heart rate slowed, that if I had been a kid, I would have run like hell, and probably been a statistic, just like this poor kid was.

[Cats Against Frist]

170. Shunning

I'm kind of a libertarian, so it goes against my beliefs to actually BAN a dog. However, if one chews up your kid, the owners should a. go to jail, b. pay restitution and c. the dog should be put to sleep.

Now, for me -- when I see someone with a murder dog -- usually ones from this list:

Pit bulls
Rottweilers
German Shepherds
Huskies
Alaskan Malamutes
Doberman Pinschers
Chow Chows
Great Danes
St. Bernards
Akitas

I usually suggest they get a muzzle on it, if it's around people. Any dog owners who have one, who invite me over, with my son, have to lock the fucker in the basement or in a cage -- and I've also told my neighbors (who have a pit bull) that if I ever see it loose -- I don't care if it's in my yard, or not, I'll put a bullet in its head.

The neighbors love me. And I don't even own a gun -- but if I see the thing loose, I might buy one, and shoot it the next time I see it loose.

I also scowl at strangers who have these dogs. It's my right. I don't suggest the government ban them, but I think that everyone who hates the dogs, and/or wishes there was a ban, would treat the dog owners like hell.

[Nashyra]

173. Like I said in my post

I trust my dogs and like my dogs more than most people, they are not supposed to be as intelligent as us but they appear to me more intelligent than some people, plus they have the gift of unconditional love. We are responsible for them as we have domesticated them, These breeds are not for everyone and even if you consider yourself a responsible dog owner you should always err on the side of caution.

[Corgigal]

179. It sounds like you are a wonderful dog owner

I have welsh corgi dogs. My female is a wonderful pet who I can trust. My male is not only territorial but fear aggressive. Which means he will bite if he's scared. The most common reason a dog bites is because of fear. He is only 10 months old and I already have a trainer coming to the house to the tune of 330 dollars for 5 lessons. I owe it to the dog and the humans of this world to correct this pup. I must say he's getting it. When my kids have friends over I keep him on a leash with me the whole time and he follows me room to room so I can insure their safety, not to mention I'm showing him dominance. He has never bitten a child, but again, a fearful dog will bite. No telling what he's scared of all the time.

I don't know if a Welsh Corgi has ever killed anyone but being a dog they can hurt someone, possibly badly. It's my responsibility to teach this dog and to make sure he's never off the leash outside.
That being said even with this Corgi, I would never allow a baby to crawl around on the floor with him being free. He hasn't earned the right no matter what the Corgi breeding books mentions on how they are wonderful family dogs. He will be but not just yet. You have to know what you're working with because all dogs come from the wolf.