Here's my vote for restricting who can have childrenFollow

You're right, they're not even close, but putting down a 6 week old puppy, who knows no better is over reacting. Agreed?

I'm uncertain actually. I've known lots of dogs, though I've never owned one of my own. The dogs I've known, even as puppies, would be more likely to agressively defend an infant, even from the parents, rather than bite it. They also seem to become very concerned about children crying and attempt to console them. Labs *especially* fit this mentality...right along with shepherds.

I think the entire story is unfortunate, but if the child was so neglected, and the puppy was so abused/neglected that it would actually bite an infant TO DEATH, maybe it needed to be put down anyway.

Nexa

You're right, they're not even close, but putting down a 6 week old puppy, who knows no better is over reacting.

No, it's not overreacting, because it's a FUCKING DOG. Killing every dog in the town would have been overreacting, killing the dog that likely killed a child is an attempt to mitigate the pain of the kids family. I'm sure you dream of a day when the dog can be tried and plead out to manslaughter, but we're just not there yet.

Edited, Jul 29th 2008 10:29am by Smasharoo

At six weeks old the puppy was just chewing.

Also, I have a sneaking suspicion that "euthanized" means "kicked to death" in this case.

Either way, both babies are better off not being raised by these people.

Exactly, and that's why I think it was overreacting, because we both know that it won't help.

Help how? I imagine the family would feel somewhat better knowing the childslaying dog had been killed. You're barking up the wrong tree with me on this one. I'm completely in favor of laws stating any person can kill any dog they see on sight. Living in a society where pets are valued more than starving children sickens me on a daily basis.

Barking up the wrong tree, hahaha, you slay me.

Nexa

Yet you won't get the cat fixed because you think it will hurt her feelings.

*sigh*

Nexa

So killing the dog is personal for you.

No, it's meaningless to me, just as you eating a turkey sandwich doesn't spark a debate on the pointlessness of raising animals for food.

While I don't condone the parents' lack of attention, if the dog got a hold of the babies neck (as puppies do with other puppies when they are playing), even a 6 week old puppy, there wouldn't have been a heck of a lot of crying to hear. Young parents, baby is in the swing possibly taking a nap in the other room, they have the music on so they can't hear the muffled baby cries. I could see it happening.

There's just not enough information here to make a judgment on the situation.

Personally I'm of the mind that dogs shouldn't be anywhere near young children, of course I'm biased being severely allergic to most pets. That being said, putting the 6 week old puppy down seems a little unwarranted, the puppy likely was just playing like it would with another puppy.

There's a lot to this story that we're not seeing.

[b]

There's a lot to this story that we're not seeing./b]

Yup, it's a big puppy killing conspiracy, clearly. It's so mysterious and complex. For **** sake it's LITERALLY a "dog bites man" story. It's only news because people LOOOOOOOOVE babies dying so much and no newspaper can resist those kinds of dollars.

Wait, is this Hannah or did you get a kitten?

And the way they have their butts in the air CONSTANTLY. Little whores.

Well,even if there were no noise at all and the parents and grandmother were all stone cold sober, you don't leave a dog alone with a baby.