Discussions

I had a family member (child) attacked by a dog unprovoked. Dog had previously attacked someone and nothing was done then. Could have been avoided completely had it been dealt with first time. Dog is still alive and with its owner after being quarantined. Luckily the scar can be hidden and was not life threatening. That dog should have been put down and do should these.  
 
I would not think twice about putting one of my animals down if it ever injured someone

The people who are defending those two dogs is not helping the situation at all. This was not the first time they have ran away. This was not the first time they have been on bala. This was not the first time they have shown aggression. This was an unprovoked attack. Poor lady was only walking her dog and they killed her dog for no reason. I feel bad for both parties but the owner of those two dogs are irresponsible. RIP FOXXY

To all who think any animal should be put down is an idiot. When a person kills another person and knows that is the wrong thing to do u put that person in jail for rehabilitation. But we are quick to kill any animal for

To all who think any animal should be put down is an idiot. When a person kills another person and knows that is the wrong thing to do u put that person in jail for rehabilitation. But we are quick to kill any animal for something that was taught to them or instincts. These two dogs escaped their yard through negligence of the owners and a dog is dead and an elderly lady is scarred for life and many witnesses horrified to what they seen. This is a owners fault and I believe that they should be charged with numerous charges and not be able to own a large animal for quite sometime or ever. Apparently this is not the first time these dogs got out so the punishment for the owners be strict. Now these dogs need to be taken away from the owners and observed for behavioural problems. Perhaps the dogs felt threatened or maybe abused and perhaps they acted out the only way they were taught to.... aggressively. Maybe these dogs can be rehabilitated and be good dogs. We are so quick to kill animals and humans are not to blame??? This makes no sense at all. Owners need to be make accountable for the pets actions. No breed should be banned just the owners, no breed should be demonized for stupid owners. I have met a lot of loving pit bulls in my life and lots of loving dogs yes a few aggressive ones but owners are to blame. Now humans I met some loving ones and a lot of aggressive ones. So we should put down aggressive humans just as easy as dogs??? Yes that makes no sense so it should make no sense to do it to a dog.  
Pet owners should be responsible for their pets actions. U can't handle a dog of any size then don't get one.

I think it's time to stop this thread as no amount of blaming or uncalled comments are going to bring this poor little dog back and make his owner feel any better...RIP little Foxx...

my thoughts go out to the elderly lady who lost her companion. Several years ago I sat on a Town Council that brought in a bylaw banning specific breeds of dogs who because of their make up and muscular body could be dangerous (Pit bull, rotti, Doberman, german shepherd) The bylaw was brought in to protect the public at large and protect these breeds of dogs from ending up in the hands of irresponsible owners. The exception to the bylaw was for dogs used for a specific purpose (police dogs etc.) If Brandon had a ban on pit bulls the animal would have been seized and if its rabies shot was up do date - it would have been euthanized forthwith - if rabies shots were not up to date it would have been quarantined for 3 weeks at the owners expense then euthanized. The owner then would be charged with having a dangerous animal within the city limit and allowing same to run at large. With a bylaw there would be no going to Court to obtain an order to have the animal declared dangerous and seized. When you have to go to Court to get an order of seizure the owners often contest same which results in long delays and an eventual trial. With the dog out of the picture its a simple Court Action as to whether the dog was within the city limits and whether it was running at large. The above is a simple explaination of a Breed Specific bylaw. It should be noted that breed specific bylaws have been challenged in Court on many occasions without being overturned.

ram1952 said "my thoughts go out to the elderly lady who lost her companion. Several years ago I sat on a Town Council that brought in a bylaw banning specific breeds of dogs who because of their make up and muscular body could be dangerous (Pit bull, rotti, Doberman, german shepherd) The bylaw was brought in to protect the public at large and protect these breeds of dogs from ending up in the hands of irresponsible owners. The exception to the bylaw was for dogs used for a specific purpose (police dogs etc.) If Brandon had a ban on pit bulls the animal would have been seized and if its rabies shot was up do date - it would have been euthanized forthwith - if rabies shots were not up to date it would have been quarantined for 3 weeks at the owners expense then euthanized. The owner then would be charged with having a dangerous animal within the city limit and allowing same to run at large. With a bylaw there would be no going to Court to obtain an order to have the animal declared dangerous and seized. When you have to go to Court to get an order of seizure the owners often contest same which results in long delays and an eventual trial. With the dog out of the picture its a simple Court Action as to whether the dog was within the city limits and whether it was running at large. The above is a simple explaination of a Breed Specific bylaw. It should be noted that breed specific bylaws have been challenged in Court on many occasions without being overturned. "

Are the most stupid laws I've ever heard of and are only based on fears with no merit. It's like saying lets ban baby's with brown eye because a few people with brown eye killed there neighbor.