Skins Zombie Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 YOUR KID'S JUNK. IT HAZ A FLAVOR. NOM NOM NOM These retard parents should mutilated in ways most foul. Perhaps with a cheesegrater and a belt sander... lol... Then when the poor kid and victim of his loser parents inattention and blatant dumber than a bag of broken hammers stupidity grows up he should be given the legal right to brutally torture these morons if he so wishes. Besides its not everyday that someone else is responsible for you getting your junk bitten off. The dog should be given a new home where hopefully donkeys that have no idea what a dog is do not reside. ZOMBIE HTTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoney26 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 I was always under the impression that this was a myth.However, if this is true then the right thing was done. Ive never heard of such a myth. Once the animal tastes human blood does it crave it or something?? Can you elaborate?> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamB Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 This is the third time in a year I have heard about this type of thing happening, the first two involving dachsunds. In each of these cases, it involved a small dog (usually considered "safe" by parents), an young boy (infant or toddler), unsuprivised, who where wearing diapers. The ages of the dog have varied. I am wondering if it is not a case of "puppy's chew", which they do, but something about the diaper (urine + the texture of the diaper) being the focus of the dog, with the child not being the target of the chewing (at least initially). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChocolateCitySkin Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 obvious its the breed. poodles kill people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsNation Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Honestly....the lady is a dope. Infant baby, 5 year old kid AND a dog running around....while she SLEPT????? I mean come on. Use some common sense. Its bad enough she is letting a 5 yr old kid run around unsupervised much less an infant and a dog in the mix. I have 2 dogs...im sure if i let them have run of the house while i slept or was out they would cause a problem.....people need to learn what a crate is and use them - they arent torture or anything...people need to get in gear. Now the lady/people will blame the dog for this...the woman is the one who is irresponsible in this particular case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sith lord Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Ive never heard of such a myth. Once the animal tastes human blood does it crave it or something?? Can you elaborate?> I believe the feeling is that once an animal attacks a human, it will do it again. Just a matter of time. And the only way to prevent it is to put the animal down. Also, an animal that can't be trusted is a dangerous animal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamB Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 I believe the feeling is that once an animal attacks a human, it will do it again. Just a matter of time. And the only way to prevent it is to put the animal down. Also, an animal that can't be trusted is a dangerous animal. I belive personally that the myth is based somewhat on fact but has been distorted. If an animal (dog, coyote, whatever) learns that humans are prey, they are more likely to attack again. It is not that they tasted blood, but see themselves as higher on the food chain. A great example of this is the lion pride in Africa (I cannot remember the name of the preserve) that used to avoid humans till they got hungry and killed one - now the entire area is extremely dangerous for humans to walk around in. It is not uncommon for dogs to lick at their owner's wounds (scratches, cuts, etc), thus tasting human blood, but they do not attack anyone because of it. Any dog that attacks without justification (protecting it's owner for example of justification) should be put down because there is a risk that it will attack again, but I would argue that in this case, it was not an "attack" but a tragic preventable accident based on the information available. The dog should be removed from the home and placed in a new home with more responsible owners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sticksboi05 Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Puppy was probably being a puppy. Who knows. Impossilble to know the driving force behind the action. Should err on the side of caution and put the dog down. But why? Why not just put it in a home with responsible people that do not have infants? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rdsknbill Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 imo, this isn't the dog's fault. If you have an infant in the house, you keep the damn dog away from it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chachie Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 ANYTHING that happens to a child or pet is the parent/owner's responsibility. End of story. You leave a baby exposed to a puppy and you're an idiot. Also- The baby's 5 year old brother had to wake the mother up and alert her to the problem. 'Nuff said as well. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BALLz Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Also- The baby's 5 year old brother had to wake the mother up and alert her to the problem. 'Nuff said as well. :doh: Not only that, but the infant was in bed with the mom and the mom had no clue till the 5 year old came in. I'm curious to know if she was more than just tired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chachie Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 Not only that, but the infant was in bed with the mom and the mom had no clue till the 5 year old came in. I'm curious to know if she was more than just tired. Eggzactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slacky McSlackAss Posted June 17, 2008 Share Posted June 17, 2008 No way can you blame this on the puppy. If the mother had any common sense at all she wouldnt have left the baby and puppy together while asleep. Further goes to show that people should have to pass an IQ test to concieve a child. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.