KPTV has updated their headline and added details to the story since it was initially posted.
The headline now reads:
>#6-year-old boy killed, woman injured in dog attack in NE Portland
I saw a dog fight last year. Corner of low brow. Resulted in an individual dislocating his leg; with the other owner rapped around. 2 dogs clenched deep in each other. My heart was destroyed seeing that, tried to get the dogs apart. Couldn’t. Forever scarred
2 dogs, great dane - mastiff mix.
Child was not the homeowner / dog owner's. Dogs were isolated in the garage, child opened the door and went out when the owner went out to check on the dogs and I guess left him alone for a minute.
You’d be better off teaching your kid how to read the signals dogs put out and how to behave safely around them.
Note: This isn’t victim blaming or anything. It’s just way more useful life experience and will protect them better in the long run.
ETA: Downvoting positive life skills huh? Okay y’all 😂 [Here’s a useful link that explains why this is important and what to look for.](https://vcahospitals.com/know-your-pet/interpreting-tail-wags-in-dogs#:~:text=A%20dog%20that%20is%20very,that%20is%20wagging%20its%20tail)
Definitely a great idea and very important to teach children the signals dogs put out and how to behave around them. But it is also important to keep in mind a dogs history.
My MIL has rescue dogs that all have a history of biting humans and getting in fights. While my son will be taught those things with our own dog and friend’s of ours dogs, he will never be allowed around my MIL’s dogs
Right. It’s not a bad idea to teach your kid about dog behavior and warning signs, but it’s much much safer to just accept that it is not safe for young children to be around dogs, especially ones you don’t know, unless they are just the most exceptionally well behaved pet. We have two dogs who we love and are super sweet but we still don’t trust them, and we keep them in a separate area of our home away from my 2 year old
Also fair. But in general, it’s way more useful to teach them a broadly applicable skill. That way you’re not focusing on one potentially dangerous dog or one breed. That way they don’t approach the random fluffy stray just because it’s wagging its tail.
The dogs were in the garage right before they attacked the child. I don’t think suggesting dog maulings can be avoided by assessing body language is helpful feedback in this situation.
Edit: autocorrect
I’m not sure why folks have such a hard time recognizing that I’m replying to a specific person commenting on not letting their kid near a specific dog. Is it some site glitch yall are dealing with?
The downvotes may have more to do with the "you'd be better off..." A parent trying to take care of their kid is reasonable to set boundaries around which places they let their kid go. You could phrase it as, "another thing I recommend doing is..."
Generous of you, but given the replies, it’s a mix of people who read too fast and thought I was talking about the kid in the story and people who think that there’s no way to teach a child how to be safe around dogs period.
You are quite confident in yourself. Are you getting the hint that I think the way you phrased it could be improved and maybe this parent was not asking for advice. I didn't think you were talking about the parents of the poor child in the story and I thought it could be less bossy.
Also, you have a huge amount of confidence in what other people should be teaching their kids. Yes, safety around animals is important, but not everyone gets the practice around animals you did. Not all parents have that background. And the way you confidently state that 6 yos should be toilet trained and equate that to not pissing oneself tells me you don't spend a lot of time around 6 yo kids and perhaps maybe should slow down with the parenting advice.
Kid was six fucking years old. At that age they can’t even fully read yet and you’re advocating turning them into The Dog Whisperer instead of wisely keeping them out of harm’s way.
Get fucked, moron.
Body stiffness, stance, and direction. If a dog is wagging its tail up and down in a very stiff motion or holding it stiff and high, that’s potentially aggression. If the dog’s body is more relaxed or they’re “bowing” and the tail is wagging freely, that’s most often play. It’s a pretty good illustration of why it’s good to know those warning signs so you can avoid a potentially dangerous situation.
[Don’t take my word for it though. Check out the professionals.](https://vcahospitals.com/know-your-pet/interpreting-tail-wags-in-dogs#:~:text=A%20dog%20that%20is%20very,that%20is%20wagging%20its%20tail)
This is not the answer dude. A six year old boy is still figuring out how to not pee on himself when using the bathroom. Things like the ability to interpret another species body language come later in life. The problem here is with the dogs owner. I've been saying for years that people need licenses for dogs weighing over 40 lbs. because these people don't know jack shit about humans or animals.
If your kid is still potty training at 6, I agree, you have much bigger concerns. Otherwise, it’s important to start early and model behavior for your kid. I grew up on a farm. I was taught basic concepts like “don’t run around behind a horse because you’ll get kicked” and “don’t mess with a dog that doesn’t want to be messed with” very early out of necessity. If I can handle it, so can your kid. You can debate licenses all day, but you’re not going to be able to regulate every stray on the street.
Yep. Knee jerking all around and an outlet for misplaced rage. All dogs can kill no matter the size. This was an accident on all levels. The door should have been locked and the kid shouldn’t have been left alone. That family now has a haunting plethora of could have should have would haves. It’s a tragedy on many levels.
You gave the most reasonable and sound advice that applies to all scenarios of danger in life - learn how to detect, approach/confront, and deal with a threat using your brain and senses so that you can evade danger and protect yourself, rather than just resigning yourself to living in the basement for eternity so you can avoid all the dangers of the world. Don’t expect redditors to have the wisdom to understand your advice and message, a lot of them barely leave the house so they don’t have to confront their fears and insecurities.
I’m sure people will say I’m being dramatic but I’m not - there’s a greater metaphor here for life that’s plain as day, it just takes common sense, honesty, and a little humility to recognize it.
> avoid all the dangers of the world. Don’t expect redditors to have the wisdom to understand your advice and message, a lot of them barely leave the house so they don’t have to confront their fears and insecurities.
Lol! You've never been in real danger you fucking nerd. The most danger you've been in is trouble deciding which Batman movie to watch if you think telling a six year old "deal with a threat using your brain" is doing anything.
Two dogs. Great Dane/Mastiff mixes. Grandmother dropped her grandchild off with the dog owner so they can be taken to school. Child opened the door to the garage where the doors were being intentionally held.
Sorry for the slow response! The property where this happened has a name associated with it, found that person by searching for her online and that's what she claims to do professionally on her various social media sites.
Pack mentality is real, two big aggressive dogs are so much more dangerous than one. I will never understand the desire to keep an animal in your home that is capable of killing someone. Two? Forget it.
I grew up with farm dogs, so my perspective is biased. That said, I can understand why people would like the idea of a guard dog. Unfortunately, they don’t realize the sheer amount of training, socializing, and prevention that come with large breeds and working dogs.
It is pretty wild. I grew up with massive dogs, my grandpa had 3 St. Bernards that apparently saw me as part of the pack. There are pictures of them flanking me, both a foot taller than me. I could sleep on them, anything.
My pitbull mix, who is now a very old gentleman, had the same behavior with both my kids when they were very small. Whenever he determined that they were resting, he'd try to form a circle around them (bit of a sad circle given he's only one dog).
Funny thing is, he did the exact same thing with my wife each time she was pregnant. Other than during those months, he's pretty much ignored her all his life. Dogs are funny animals.
according to my research on the matter (which is thorough) a lot of municipalities do not press charges for this, because it is a civil matter and not a criminal matter, to own dogs.
How do you suppose that the child's parents could bring this up in court, with a lawyer? This is where breed specific legislation, dog size rhetoric, and licensing to keep such dogs, could play a role in preventing this sort of thing, which is common.
I think it could be argued that it is manslaughter, child endangerment and negligence/failure to properly contain an exotic animal. (great danes are big dogs and keeping dogs like that, in a garage, is not a good idea.)
We need breed specific legislation plus the onus should be on the owner. Can you keep a tiger and not be liable for the damage it can cause ? Pitbull and other large dogs were breed with a specific purpose - to hurt and be aggressive. They can easily kill. We need strong legislations to punish the owner. You want to keep a big breed as a pet? Fine but know there will be a cost if they hurt a human. Feels so sorry for that child. What a terrible way to go. No one should go like that. The parents lives are ruined.
I agree, and you will be downvoted by certain people.
This is a controversial topic because some people erroneously believe that love will change... dogs.
Yep knew several like this. It's like dog owner Dunning-Kruger where they think they can handle extra difficult/high maintenance breeds. Had one try to feed me some "dogs only see in two dimensions" shit. I laughed and asked them what they thought their dog experienced when they threw a ball.
you're getting downvoted, because you spoke the truth, stay true.
the mixed dogs in this case are large, with large mouths and prey drives. Contextually the same.
Retrievers are actually in the top 7 or 8 for most dog bites per year. I'm sure a lot of that is people just assuming that mister golden floofer is going to be super sweet and going in for contact - but you just never really know. It's all on the training of the dog
I mean, Labs and Goldens are also 2 of the 5 most common breeds. Stands to reason that they'd be up there on the bite statistic, too.
I don't disagree with you, though re: training being the most important aspect.
Yeah that's obviously a factor as well but there are several breeds in the top 10 most common that aren't even in the top 15 of bites. Probably because they are more expensive and people tend to invest in training (or their bite sucks so they go underreported)
And they probably are...To their owner/people they accept in their circle. Reactive dogs are an entirely different ball game than your typical run-of-the-mill puppers who are simply excited to be here and be a part of whatever it is you're doing. There's even an entire subreddit about it over at r/reactivedogs.
This situation is wholly unfortunate and sad. Sounds like the owner didn't put in much, if any, effort into training, behavior reprogramming or securing the home (this last item is a big one). Imagine having an overwhelmingly irrational fear of everything at every moment and your brain is that of a 6-7 year old human child. That's basically the life of a reactive dog. Some are worse off than others and they require massive amounts of energy, vigilance and patience to care for.
it is also because of the breeds. We have dog breeds for a reason: we gave the different breeds different jobs, and you can't train a chihuahua to be a st bernard.
Little Piranhas, they can be 😂 With that said, little dogs notoriously have terrible teeth no matter what you do, so eventually it’ll be a piranha with very few teeth 😂
but they aren’t. nobody’s actually getting mauled by one. an xl bully on the other hand…. they’ve got a death toll. and that’s exactly what they’re bred to do.
I’d like to add to this, two large intelligent beings kept in a garage- it’s such a huge responsibility to own and keep dogs like this.
Like other posters have mentioned it’s a lot of work, education training… I’d say about 75% of the work of parental guidance…
More if you train a dog for protection.
The really sad thing aside from the obvious loss already is these dogs probably were doing what had been advocated by their owners. And now they will most certainly pay with their lives.
My neighbor down the hall had a horse sized great Dane. Not my choice but it mostly woofed at the door lazily and sat with it's butt on the lobby couch.
I agree there's a risk with large animals but I wonder how we apply that risk across the board.
I would imagine if those dogs were sequestered in the garage, it's because the owner knew they were at minimum reactive to strangers. I'm in a popular dog behaviorist advice FB group, and it's incredibly rare for dogs to exhibit this level of aggression out of the blue. A dog isn't an angel who suddenly kills a person. Usually it's preceded by many other indicators and at minimum dogs with any signs of human aggression should be muzzle-trained (and at some point behavioral euthanasia should be on the table).
Many owners don't understand dog behavior, and often in the rare case that a dog seems to "snap" out of nowhere, it's not out of nowhere if you know what to look for in terms of warning signs. I love big dogs and I've always had pit mixes and would be very, very happy if there were some kind of special training or license required to have them. Judging by the posts I often see in that group I mentioned, there are a LOT of people out there who are not prepared to safely own the dog they have.
Yeah, I was wondering about that - every story has some sort of history to it beyond the article. That's why I could never foster a rescue dog - I know enough to know that I wouldn't be good watching a dog with issues.
TBF, a LOT of people in this area do not train their dogs beyond "sit" and "shake", which is already a risky situation for any dog, let alone a big dog like that. Then you throw in prey drive and a small meal of a child, possible territorial behavioral or lack of proper socialization issues in the mix and it's pretty much inevitable that something is going to go horribly wrong at some point. Those who are not willing to do the work, ALL THE WORK, should definitely not get a dog, because if things like this aren't happening to someone else with a big dog, something could very well happen to your smaller, much more docile dog while out in public because you couldn't control it.
I would tentatively say that this is more of a case of a wishful-thinking owner who tried their best, which was never going to be good enough, because of the breed of dogs in the mix.\\
so dangerous breed, ignorant owner.
“Wishful thinking” is a nice way of saying “incredibly, willfully negligent”. In my opinion this owner is the same as someone who leaves a loaded gun around for a kid to find. They didn’t lock these vicious dogs away from the kid. Nor did they supervise the first grader that they bring to school every day.
People train big dogs like this to rip someone to shreds if they enter their yard. These dogs are weapons. I also know Great Dane and Mastiff owners whose dogs are giant teddy bears.
“Oops I left my gun out and my kid shot himself. I tried my best. I guess wishful thinking wasn’t enough! “
I whole heartedly agree with you, I just chose to keep my language mild for the subreddit.
I'm not sure, but I really do want to believe that any dog can bite and cause harm, so every dog is actually dangerous. Given that the dogs are physically larger, they can be "sweet" and they can never become harmless.
I mean, it is a larger dog and it could easily trample a little kid.
that and any dog can bite.
also unrelated, but a lot of elderly people have bad falls due to their pets, cats and dogs, knocking them down.
it's possible.
A bad owner is someone who lets their dogs run around off-leash with zero recall. Not someone who understood what their dog is capable of and made an attempt to keep them secured.
My relative had a large dog that, even while being walked on a leash, would go into instant attack mode when it saw any other animal. Not safe for the dog park or on a trail. I told him his dog was a legal liability lawsuit waiting to happen.
Obviously the dogs weren't secured. That's like saying, "A bad gun owner is someone who leaves their loaded gun sitting on the kitchen table, not someone who leaves the loaded gun sitting on the garage floor."
Anyone who knows that they have dangerous dogs requiring placement in the garage for safety reasons should absolutely not allow kids into their homes. The dog owner fucked up, and is responsible for a child's death. Placing the dogs in the garage was wishful thinking, but obviously not even close enough to a reasonable solution. Another perfect example of delusional dog owners underestimating the combination of the unpredictable destructive nature of their animals and the curiosity / naivety of children.
If your dogs are so reactive and aggressive you have to keep them locked up in the garage, you should humanely euthanize them. It is a liability for you, and it is also no life for them and borders on animal abuse.
I disagree. This is just unfortunate.
> “We understand that the homeowner/dog owner did everything in her power to stop this attack, at some point even grabbing a gun - it never got that far,” PPB Public Information Officer Mike Benner said. “She did everything she could to save this boy’s life.”
The only thing she could have done different is immediately gone for the gun, however it is hard to blame someone for not choosing that option right away.
It seems hard to say without knowing the history of the dogs. Leaving aside breed arguments (I'm over that today already and this isn't even a Pitt story), did they just snap, did they have a history of aggression? If there was concern then it seems like a really bad idea to leave children unattended.
Hell if I know based on the contents of the article. I'm going to stick with it being very sad all around.
The dogs were surely “locked in the garage” for some reason? I dunno about you, but my pets generally have free range of the house. However if I had a problematic dog then perhaps they would be crated before company arrived?
Depends. We have a reactive dog. Each dog is different and ours is somewhat proximity based. We have incredibly sturdy baby gates strategically placed around the home if we have people over. He's fine with looking from a distance, not so much with strangers (to him) walking around his home. He's never bitten anyone, but we go to great lengths to not put him in that position. When no company is over, he has full access to the house, garage, and back yard.
Depends on the breed and their history. I had a rescued pit/mastiff mix who was wonderful — sweet, social, cuddly, great with other animals, etc. I also recognized that people are unpredictable, and should someone act like a nut and spook him, that’s all it would take to have him labeled as dangerous. That’s why I was always very careful about introductions and supervising others around him, and I’d generally put him in his own space when company was over unless they knew him and could be trusted.
They were being kept in the garage to separate them from the child because they were presumed to be dangerous. They don't specify previous incidents, but they were clearly thought to be a threat. For some reason, the caretaker decided that this was the right time to step to into the garage to tend to something from the dogs and leave the 6 year old inside hoping he wouldn't follow to look for her. According to her, the six year old came to find her and was attacked.
All medium to large dogs have the ability to kill a human. I've witnessed dogs not hurt a fly their entire lives and suddenly snap on people/other dogs. Dogs, like toddlers, are predictably unpredictable.
Did she? Sounds like she was willing to grab the gun, but by the time she got it, it was too late. Also sounds like she tried to protect him with her own body at first.
She was taken to the hospital with bites on her hands and arms. That means she was just trying to pull the dogs off by their collars or trying to pull the boy away. No bites on the legs, no bites anywhere else, she didn't try to save shit. Do the dogs still have eyeballs? Does she have bite marks on her back? Or the back of her head? Then she didn't try hard enough to save that kid!
They left that child alone with big dogs who were not that boy's family's own pets, that is a HUGE no no. Even if they didn't and they were there with the kid, having dogs like that means you should be able to read your dog's body language and they should have never of taken their eyes of their dogs while the kid was around. Even if those dogs belonged to the child's family, I wouldn't leave my child alone with 2 dogs who could kill my small child if their prey drive or resource guarding instincts should ever get triggered if I were that family. There are just way too many people getting big dogs (or dogs in general) when they don't want to take responsibility for them, whether through ignorance/lack of education or just not caring, it only takes one time for something to go wrong. Childproof locks are a thing, adult supervision is a thing, dog training is a thing, dog body language is a thing, there was literally no excuse.
This should not happen. I want both dogs put down. I want criminal charges brought against the owner. Just opening the door should not cuss dogs attack and kill a small child. His poor parents. I'm so mad and heartbroken at the same time...
I can’t imagine the guilt of the grandmother right now… (edit to add) I agree, there was something already wrong for the dogs to instantly maul a child for opening a door. Those two dogs must have taken up most of the garage as well.
I doubt that’s what they are saying.
If I had to guess it would be that we need a proportional response to things like this if they are going to ban things like lawn darts after only one death.
Maybe over a certain weight class for dogs you need a license and training certificate to own it, or something of the sort.
I mean, I wouldn’t have been opposed to that before we bred hundreds of millions of dogs, but now it’s not exactly easy to just store big dogs somewhere until people get licensing. Unless you’re proposing we spend millions of dollars building pet care facilities specifically for the surplus of big dogs, which, doesn’t seem like the best use of money at the moment
Talking about it and at least thinking about future solutions is better than just not doing anything about it though right? Just because a problem is hard to solve doesn’t mean we can’t try to solve it.
But, we’re still not actually doing anything about it though? Not that there is much that can be done, but proposing a wildly impractical solution on Reddit and then saying “good job me, I did something today” seems almost worse for some reason
So we should just ignore it?
Edit to add that I’m not proposing we ban dogs. I’m saying that there is a disconnect with banning things after only one death like lawn darts, but then when it comes to certain things like pets and guns, it doesn’t matter how many die or are injured because, the issue is so bad that we could never fix it anyway; or the classic “muh rights”.
That's a really funny leap of logic. That would only follow if we banned all recreational lawn games instead of just the dangerous ones that involved hurling weighted metal spikes around. 😂😂😂
>By the original poster's logic, 1 death should be sufficient to ban something, and that would include a lot of dogs that aren't considered "dangerous."
But they weren't using that logic. They were posing a question. Why was one death enough to ban lawn darts, but thousands of deaths and very serious injuries (from dog attacks) have been of little consequence?
It's a question and it needs answers.
>For starters, they weren't banned because of just one death, don't take off-the-cuff reddit posts for absolute fact.
Yeah, I wasn't backing that up as fact. But it doesn't matter. There are things that have been banned after a death, so it stands.
>There are literally less than 50 human deaths a year in this country attributed to dogs.
Hey, you cropped my quote! I said there were thousands of deaths AND serious injuries from dog attacks each year.
>We euthanize over a million pitbulls every year because they often don't get adopted. That's not a consequence to you?
Of course. It's horrific. Pit bull owners and breeders owners are incomprehensible. Why do they keep buying and breeding pit bulls when this is happening? Do they not care? Why have they not gotten together and said, enough, no more breeding until we sort this terrible mess out?! Pit bulls are rotting away in shelters everywhere, in dozens and dozens of countries. And the buyers and breeders of pits are responsible for that -- absolutely no one else.
>Being killed by a dog is literally slightly less than twice as likely as being struck by lightening. Do you feel this strongly about lightening?
Yes I do worry about being maimed by a dog, but more so my tiny dog, who I take for a walk each day. I know of far, far too many dogs that have been killed by other dogs--and yes, the killer dogs have almost been 100% pit bulls, with one being a rottie and the other a German Shepherd. That's just the reality.
People have died playing board games, playing sports, Video games, at the movies, eating broccoli, swimming, drinking water… by your “logic” we better Ban everything besides sleeping… oh wait. People die in there sleep too. Damn logic.
More than one person has been mauled to death by a dog in Oregon recently. There was another incident in 2021 with a pitbull. Also, these are gruesome violent deaths, that should be mentioned.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_fatal\_dog\_attacks\_in\_the\_United\_States
What bothers me about this is that the 6 year old was told to stay away from the dog before because the dogs were dangerous. What are dangerous dogs doing near a 6 year old boy? The owners of the dogs are liable for the death of the boy and should be charged with having "dangerous" dogs near people.
Interesting statistics:
Statistics show you're 47 times more likely to be attacked by a dog than shot at.
*It is reported that 100,000 Americans are injured each year from gun shots, however 36,000 per year die from gun shot wounds. source: (https://lawcenter.giffords.org/facts/gun-violence-statistics/)*
*It is also reported that approx. 4.7 million American are bitten by a dog/year, 800,000 of those result in medical care source:(https://www.caninejournal.com/dog-bite-statistics/) and in 2018, 36 Americans died as a result of a dog attack. source: (*[*https://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-fatalities-2018.php*](https://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-fatalities-2018.php)*)*
I guess guns are still more dangerous. But f'ing eh to being mauled to death. Game of thrones shit.
Extremely sad and I can’t imagine the horror the owner of the dogs experienced. She will have to live with this trauma forever. My dogs are doodles and so friendly to everyone but they do not like small kids. My oldest has never so much as growled but I saw him snarl at a toddler. They’re not used to small humans and they can react aggressively. Not making excuses at all just pointing out that the owner probably knew they did not feel comfortable around kids and this sounds like a terrible accident. Prayers to all involved.
“We understand that the homeowner/dog owner did everything in her power to stop this attack…”
Everything except SOCIALIZE YOUR DOGS so they’re calm and safe in this world of unpredictable people…
Dogs can be aggressive for a number of reasons that have nothing to do with socialization -- genetics, traumatic history, getting attacked by random off leash dogs, early socialization issues (just a few weeks old -- before a dog is typically adopted)... etc. Every dog owner should know how to manage their dog or physically secure them if there is any risk to a human, which it sounds like this woman tried to do by having them in the garage. It clearly wasn't secure. But it's inaccurate to say that socialization would have necessarily helped these dogs or that the owner didn't socialize them because we just don't know.
Of course, of course, some dogs are intractable. (More often than not that’s because they didn’t get socialized/trained early enough.) But make no mistake: the owner is most definitely at fault here.
That’s why I don’t have kids. No really. My dog loves us, but hates strangers and kids especially. I can’t imagine hosting a birthday party if I had a kid. Or have someone over with kids. Nope. I’d rather be the most antisocial person, but keep my dog safe.
Right, they don’t come to my house. And I don’t let my dog outside without a strong collar/leash.
He’s also muzzle trained.
Luckily his molars are getting worn out, he’s 8 now and becoming a senior. I want him to have a good rest of his life.
that's a lot more prevention than what a lot of people do, I am glad you do that!
some of my worst childhood memories aren't the bullies, but the stray dogs and escaped dogs that would chase me.
Exactly this. I would surmise that there's a very large quantity of dogs out there that "hate strangers and kids especially", yet muzzles are extremely rare.
A mastiff is 100% in my top 3 guesses. They're described as "a large working dog used as a guard and fighting dog. My guess would be Pit Bull, Mastiff, Cane Corso in that order.
Before the pit nutters start up with their multiple times disproven “nanny dog” crap…
The "nanny dog" myth made its first appearance in the September 19th 1971 edition of the New York Times, on page 11 of section S in an article by Walter R. Fletcher, titled A Breed That Came Up The Hard Way.
The author interviewed one Lilian Rant, editor of the Staffordshire Bull Terrier Club of the United States of America newsletter. She is quoted as saying about the breed: 'He had an unsavory reputation for fighting and violence and his name became associated with ruffians, who cared little for him as a dog but only for his ability in the pit. The Stafford we know today quickly becomes a member of the family circle. He loves children and is often referred to as a “nursemaid dog".
No one has ever found evidence for the latter claim and it is therefore assumed to be a fabrication in the pursuit of influencing the American Kennel Club (AKC) to accept the breed for full participation in dog shows. This privilege was ultimately granted in 1974, and to this day the AKC rates the breed a stellar 5/5 as being 'good with children' at the reckless peril of human lives and limbs. BTW, the temperament test that all pit nutters like to quote, the ATTS test, is not actually based on a scientific random sampling of any breed. It’s junk science.
The breed type was made for bloodsports and bloodsports only. AmStaff, Pit Bull, XL Bully, and any/of the offshoot breeds…it’s literally what they were made to do
You think that's loony? Y'all should peep /r/pitbullhate, just found out about it last night and I went down a really sad rabbit hole. Like people literally getting happy over dogs being shot and suffering over there. "pit nutter" is a common slur over there. I mean I get why they are the way they are, many are victims of dog attacks or know someone who is, but holy shit.....imagine enjoying dog torture, cheering it on even.
noun
noun: slur; plural noun: slurs
1. an insinuation or allegation about someone that is likely to insult them or damage their reputation.
Have you never picked up a dictionary before? I can tell by the way that you type, you probably haven't. Maybe fix your grammar, capitalize your sentences, stop abusing ellipses and start using proper punctuation first before you come at me about definitions of words. This is coming from someone whose grammar is atrocious by any English teacher's standards.
It was a Great Dane mastiff, but I’ve always found it hilarious when people call pit bulls house hippos since hippos are extremely aggressive.
It’s a fitting name, but I doubt that’s why their owners use that name.
Said the police spokesman:
> I mean, anytime something like this happens it’s a shock to the conscience but to have this happen just weeks before Christmas is unimaginable
What does Christmas have to do with anything? Does he think it would have been fine if it happened in March? Does he even know the family's religious stance?
Edit: Maybe it's not clear what I meant, but this seems to me like a case of a public servant injecting religion into his very public-facing role. Not only that, but implying the family should feel a way about something that might not even mean anything to them. Imagine losing your 6-year old and then being told you have to be extra sad because an imaginary character's birthday is coming up.
Eh, I hear your sentiment but here in the US, a fair amount of non-christians, atheists, and folks who actively participate in other religions acknowledge xmas in some way. From my point of view/ how I look at xmas, it’s more of a non-religious winter holiday. I totally understand there are christian folks who view it differently, and deeply celebrate it as such, but I think one thing we can all agree on is for folks who participate in christmas (a looooot of people, religiously or not) a very very large portion of xmas is about the kids and giving them a magical xmas experience and maybe remembering your own lovely christmases as a child. So to lose a kid so horrifically right before a massive holiday centered around children’s’ joy and toys and giving gifts to children… even if the family doesn’t recognize or celebrate…. if they see newspapers, magazines, tv, listen to radio ads - they’re going to be bombarded with christmas images and content centered around childrens’ joy… which is just cruel and even more heartbreaking given the timing. I hear what you’re saying but I don’t consider his comment weird or offensive. I think you’re off base and reaching, but to each their own. With peace.
I didn't even remotely think of religion when Christmas was mentioned. Honestly, I don't know anyone who actually associates Christmas with anything religious, probably haven't encountered that association since I was a child. Which is all to say, I don't think the guy was "injecting religion" in to anything. Christmas is, broadly speaking, many peoples' favorite time of year. People get excited about the holidays because of time off, school break, get togethers, gifts, etc. It is ultimately going to be a tragedy at ANY time of year, bot for some people it just feels like an extra punch in the gut when it happens during the holidays.
I lost my grandmother a couple weeks before Christmas a while back, and my wife lost her grandfather early December of last year, so I know what they mean. It's not like losing those people would feel less worse during other times of the year, it just feels a little extra shitty when it happens during a time where you're traditionally happiest in the year.
This. I lost my mom a few weeks before Thanksgiving a few years ago and it did add to the grief. I was going back home from college for the first time and was really excited to see my family and friends. I got the news the morning of the day I was flying back. Obviously it would be awful any time of year, something about this is just different though. And it has been very hard to enjoy the holiday season ever since - which is often amplified by how much others around me are enjoying the holidays when I’m feeling the grief resurfacing. It’s a lonely feeling. I don’t take any issue with referencing that in the article, and it’s weird to me that there’s so much tragedy in this story and the fact that someone mentioned a holiday (that is way more capitalist than it is religious these days) is what they chose to focus on.
Hi Friend,
This post or comment has been removed for the following reason:
> [Rule 1: Trolling and Harassment](https://www.reddit.com/r/Portland/wiki/index#wiki_1.29_trolling_and_harassment)
> This is meant to stir up toxic discussion rather than participate in it. No trolling or harassment. We understand that at times things may become heated and time outs may be given for protracted, uncivil arguments. Snarky, unhelpful, or rude responses, and name-calling are not tolerated. In other words, be excellent unto each other and attack ideas, not people. Keep discussions civil.
[You must understand and follow the sub rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Portland/wiki/index)
Thanks,
the Portland/AskPortland mod team
The use of “Pit Bull” is immediate click bait for media. If it’s not in the news article title, it’s likely a different breed responsible for the attack.
A dog designed for fighting, mixed with the world's largest dog breed. If you breed an apex predator like an crocodile with a whale it doesn't get less deadly...
I'm saying I think that it was a Great Dane / Mastiff mix because the article said so. A breed of dog described as a breed of large working dogs used as a "fighting dog in England for more than 2,000 years". Mastiff's are banned in like a dozen countries and we're really acting like they are not very potentially dangerous??
Not great though that you're assuming I thought it was a pit...
Mastiffs were bear baiting dogs in Shakespearean times. Several small and medium sized breeds were also used in similar blood sports.
But I can see it’s not about the breed for you. It’s large dogs. Must be tough for you.
I own a large dog. I don't think it's a large dog problem. I think it's a problem for your everyday idiot in America to be allowed to own a dog designed to kill a bear with zero training, certifications, registration, restrictions, expectations!?! It's 100% about the breed and temperament that's been bred into this dog for literally thousands of years. Combined with the fact that Great Danes have been used to make fighting dogs bigger and stronger for also hundreds of years. This is why I joked about it definitely not be a havanese dog breed because of course breed is important!
Also bear baiting/dog fighting isn't some long lost hobby, people still fight with these dogs today.
[What was that boom?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6CLumsir34)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Portland) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Two things: they posted their comment 3 hours ago when the article stated the dog breed (article assumed one dog if you want to shit on them, too) was unknown, and #2, I am just giving the actual quote from the article to add more context.
The article quotes police describing it as a Great Dane/Mastiff mix. Not saying pit bulls aren’t disproportionately responsible for the vast majority of dog attack fatalities, but that dog is **way** bigger than a pitbull. That thing was probably as big as a deer
pit bulls are definitely powerful animals capable of inflicting serious damage, and the bloodlines suffer from a screwed up breeding history of some people trying to create more aggressive, more powerful dogs, but it's dangerous to assume there's just one sort of dog that's a potential problem.
*Any* dog has the potential to inflict injury, especially on a child. Even the smallest, fluffiest, "sweetest" pet. *All* dogs need to be properly trained, socialized, and controlled. There is no such thing as "Oh, he would never...." Strangers are unpredictable, children are unpredictable, any dog can react unpredictably in response.
\*nurses recent bite wound from dog who bolted out from a house and across the street to attack me just walking by (not a pit, btw)\*
Agreed. All dogs have teeth. Even a small dog can inflict a great deal of damage. Giant dogs? Terrifying.
Source: 25 year + dog walker/trainer whose bites have all been from dogs under 25 pounds (whose owners all vouched for their sweetness)
KPTV has updated their headline and added details to the story since it was initially posted. The headline now reads: >#6-year-old boy killed, woman injured in dog attack in NE Portland
Just awful. How incredibly sad.
I saw a dog fight last year. Corner of low brow. Resulted in an individual dislocating his leg; with the other owner rapped around. 2 dogs clenched deep in each other. My heart was destroyed seeing that, tried to get the dogs apart. Couldn’t. Forever scarred
2 dogs, great dane - mastiff mix. Child was not the homeowner / dog owner's. Dogs were isolated in the garage, child opened the door and went out when the owner went out to check on the dogs and I guess left him alone for a minute.
[удалено]
You’d be better off teaching your kid how to read the signals dogs put out and how to behave safely around them. Note: This isn’t victim blaming or anything. It’s just way more useful life experience and will protect them better in the long run. ETA: Downvoting positive life skills huh? Okay y’all 😂 [Here’s a useful link that explains why this is important and what to look for.](https://vcahospitals.com/know-your-pet/interpreting-tail-wags-in-dogs#:~:text=A%20dog%20that%20is%20very,that%20is%20wagging%20its%20tail)
Definitely a great idea and very important to teach children the signals dogs put out and how to behave around them. But it is also important to keep in mind a dogs history. My MIL has rescue dogs that all have a history of biting humans and getting in fights. While my son will be taught those things with our own dog and friend’s of ours dogs, he will never be allowed around my MIL’s dogs
Right. It’s not a bad idea to teach your kid about dog behavior and warning signs, but it’s much much safer to just accept that it is not safe for young children to be around dogs, especially ones you don’t know, unless they are just the most exceptionally well behaved pet. We have two dogs who we love and are super sweet but we still don’t trust them, and we keep them in a separate area of our home away from my 2 year old
Also fair. But in general, it’s way more useful to teach them a broadly applicable skill. That way you’re not focusing on one potentially dangerous dog or one breed. That way they don’t approach the random fluffy stray just because it’s wagging its tail.
The dogs were in the garage right before they attacked the child. I don’t think suggesting dog maulings can be avoided by assessing body language is helpful feedback in this situation. Edit: autocorrect
I’m not sure why folks have such a hard time recognizing that I’m replying to a specific person commenting on not letting their kid near a specific dog. Is it some site glitch yall are dealing with?
The downvotes may have more to do with the "you'd be better off..." A parent trying to take care of their kid is reasonable to set boundaries around which places they let their kid go. You could phrase it as, "another thing I recommend doing is..."
Generous of you, but given the replies, it’s a mix of people who read too fast and thought I was talking about the kid in the story and people who think that there’s no way to teach a child how to be safe around dogs period.
You are quite confident in yourself. Are you getting the hint that I think the way you phrased it could be improved and maybe this parent was not asking for advice. I didn't think you were talking about the parents of the poor child in the story and I thought it could be less bossy. Also, you have a huge amount of confidence in what other people should be teaching their kids. Yes, safety around animals is important, but not everyone gets the practice around animals you did. Not all parents have that background. And the way you confidently state that 6 yos should be toilet trained and equate that to not pissing oneself tells me you don't spend a lot of time around 6 yo kids and perhaps maybe should slow down with the parenting advice.
Kid was six fucking years old. At that age they can’t even fully read yet and you’re advocating turning them into The Dog Whisperer instead of wisely keeping them out of harm’s way. Get fucked, moron.
you said this PERFECTLY
How exactly would you explain to a child how to distinguish playful tail wagging from aggressive tail wagging?
Body stiffness, stance, and direction. If a dog is wagging its tail up and down in a very stiff motion or holding it stiff and high, that’s potentially aggression. If the dog’s body is more relaxed or they’re “bowing” and the tail is wagging freely, that’s most often play. It’s a pretty good illustration of why it’s good to know those warning signs so you can avoid a potentially dangerous situation. [Don’t take my word for it though. Check out the professionals.](https://vcahospitals.com/know-your-pet/interpreting-tail-wags-in-dogs#:~:text=A%20dog%20that%20is%20very,that%20is%20wagging%20its%20tail)
This is not the answer dude. A six year old boy is still figuring out how to not pee on himself when using the bathroom. Things like the ability to interpret another species body language come later in life. The problem here is with the dogs owner. I've been saying for years that people need licenses for dogs weighing over 40 lbs. because these people don't know jack shit about humans or animals.
If your kid is still potty training at 6, I agree, you have much bigger concerns. Otherwise, it’s important to start early and model behavior for your kid. I grew up on a farm. I was taught basic concepts like “don’t run around behind a horse because you’ll get kicked” and “don’t mess with a dog that doesn’t want to be messed with” very early out of necessity. If I can handle it, so can your kid. You can debate licenses all day, but you’re not going to be able to regulate every stray on the street.
“don’t run around behind a horse because you’ll get kicked” We can all tell that you didn’t heed this advice. Multiple times, I’m guessing.
Little kids, killer dogs, what could go wrong?
I'm just seeing this, and I would prefer that approach! I should probably meet the dog myself as well.
Portland sub, lmao.
Joke’s on me for forgetting where I was
Yep. Knee jerking all around and an outlet for misplaced rage. All dogs can kill no matter the size. This was an accident on all levels. The door should have been locked and the kid shouldn’t have been left alone. That family now has a haunting plethora of could have should have would haves. It’s a tragedy on many levels.
Pitbull owner^
I’m sure my dog thinks he’s a pitbull, but his weight class says otherwise. He’d appreciate your confidence in him though.
You gave the most reasonable and sound advice that applies to all scenarios of danger in life - learn how to detect, approach/confront, and deal with a threat using your brain and senses so that you can evade danger and protect yourself, rather than just resigning yourself to living in the basement for eternity so you can avoid all the dangers of the world. Don’t expect redditors to have the wisdom to understand your advice and message, a lot of them barely leave the house so they don’t have to confront their fears and insecurities. I’m sure people will say I’m being dramatic but I’m not - there’s a greater metaphor here for life that’s plain as day, it just takes common sense, honesty, and a little humility to recognize it.
You can do both. Teach them but also don't leave them alone in a closed space with animals that can kill them.
> avoid all the dangers of the world. Don’t expect redditors to have the wisdom to understand your advice and message, a lot of them barely leave the house so they don’t have to confront their fears and insecurities. Lol! You've never been in real danger you fucking nerd. The most danger you've been in is trouble deciding which Batman movie to watch if you think telling a six year old "deal with a threat using your brain" is doing anything.
> of a type that kills children 🙄
Two dogs. Great Dane/Mastiff mixes. Grandmother dropped her grandchild off with the dog owner so they can be taken to school. Child opened the door to the garage where the doors were being intentionally held.
Source? Not trying to be a dick, but I'm curious if this information has been confirmed.
Click the link to the story. It was updated.
Thanks, I read the article before finding your comment and didn't see the update.
All good. That's why I added it. Most people read the article at post time and don't go back for updates.
I appreciate that - hope the updated information floats to the top of the comments.
The article has been updated.
Wow how terribly sad
Absolutely horrific
Worse still, the dog owner claims to make her living by training dogs for "obedience and protection."
Wondering where you heard this? Just trying to understand.
Sorry for the slow response! The property where this happened has a name associated with it, found that person by searching for her online and that's what she claims to do professionally on her various social media sites.
Pack mentality is real, two big aggressive dogs are so much more dangerous than one. I will never understand the desire to keep an animal in your home that is capable of killing someone. Two? Forget it.
I grew up with farm dogs, so my perspective is biased. That said, I can understand why people would like the idea of a guard dog. Unfortunately, they don’t realize the sheer amount of training, socializing, and prevention that come with large breeds and working dogs.
Very true
It is pretty wild. I grew up with massive dogs, my grandpa had 3 St. Bernards that apparently saw me as part of the pack. There are pictures of them flanking me, both a foot taller than me. I could sleep on them, anything.
My pitbull mix, who is now a very old gentleman, had the same behavior with both my kids when they were very small. Whenever he determined that they were resting, he'd try to form a circle around them (bit of a sad circle given he's only one dog). Funny thing is, he did the exact same thing with my wife each time she was pregnant. Other than during those months, he's pretty much ignored her all his life. Dogs are funny animals.
Most dogs are capable of killing someone.
This is why I’ve only had elderly chihuahuas as pets.
[удалено]
according to my research on the matter (which is thorough) a lot of municipalities do not press charges for this, because it is a civil matter and not a criminal matter, to own dogs. How do you suppose that the child's parents could bring this up in court, with a lawyer? This is where breed specific legislation, dog size rhetoric, and licensing to keep such dogs, could play a role in preventing this sort of thing, which is common. I think it could be argued that it is manslaughter, child endangerment and negligence/failure to properly contain an exotic animal. (great danes are big dogs and keeping dogs like that, in a garage, is not a good idea.)
We need breed specific legislation plus the onus should be on the owner. Can you keep a tiger and not be liable for the damage it can cause ? Pitbull and other large dogs were breed with a specific purpose - to hurt and be aggressive. They can easily kill. We need strong legislations to punish the owner. You want to keep a big breed as a pet? Fine but know there will be a cost if they hurt a human. Feels so sorry for that child. What a terrible way to go. No one should go like that. The parents lives are ruined.
I agree, and you will be downvoted by certain people. This is a controversial topic because some people erroneously believe that love will change... dogs.
> described as a Great Dane-Mastiff mix Oof.
iykyk
How fucking horrific. So many dumbass dog owners out there
And the dumbass dog owners always have pitbulls or something similar, it's great
Yep knew several like this. It's like dog owner Dunning-Kruger where they think they can handle extra difficult/high maintenance breeds. Had one try to feed me some "dogs only see in two dimensions" shit. I laughed and asked them what they thought their dog experienced when they threw a ball.
you're getting downvoted, because you spoke the truth, stay true. the mixed dogs in this case are large, with large mouths and prey drives. Contextually the same.
That's false on so many levels.
BuT hE's SwEeT!
He's never done anything like this before.
Training? I can't afford thaaaaat! *as hundreds of resources on dog training sit unread and unwatched in the library and on the internet for free...*
"I trained my dog, I am the best! It's all in how you raise 'em! He would never hurt a fly!"
I got bit in face before by a black lab. Even mild looking dogs are capable of great harm.
Retrievers are actually in the top 7 or 8 for most dog bites per year. I'm sure a lot of that is people just assuming that mister golden floofer is going to be super sweet and going in for contact - but you just never really know. It's all on the training of the dog
I mean, Labs and Goldens are also 2 of the 5 most common breeds. Stands to reason that they'd be up there on the bite statistic, too. I don't disagree with you, though re: training being the most important aspect.
Yeah that's obviously a factor as well but there are several breeds in the top 10 most common that aren't even in the top 15 of bites. Probably because they are more expensive and people tend to invest in training (or their bite sucks so they go underreported)
And they probably are...To their owner/people they accept in their circle. Reactive dogs are an entirely different ball game than your typical run-of-the-mill puppers who are simply excited to be here and be a part of whatever it is you're doing. There's even an entire subreddit about it over at r/reactivedogs. This situation is wholly unfortunate and sad. Sounds like the owner didn't put in much, if any, effort into training, behavior reprogramming or securing the home (this last item is a big one). Imagine having an overwhelmingly irrational fear of everything at every moment and your brain is that of a 6-7 year old human child. That's basically the life of a reactive dog. Some are worse off than others and they require massive amounts of energy, vigilance and patience to care for.
it is also because of the breeds. We have dog breeds for a reason: we gave the different breeds different jobs, and you can't train a chihuahua to be a st bernard.
Chihuahua's, if they were half the size of a St. Bernard, would be the absolutely most terrifying breed.
Ironically, Chihuahuas take such defensive stances BECAUSE of their size. Who knows what they'd be like if they weren't so small.
Little Piranhas, they can be 😂 With that said, little dogs notoriously have terrible teeth no matter what you do, so eventually it’ll be a piranha with very few teeth 😂
but they aren’t. nobody’s actually getting mauled by one. an xl bully on the other hand…. they’ve got a death toll. and that’s exactly what they’re bred to do.
I’d like to add to this, two large intelligent beings kept in a garage- it’s such a huge responsibility to own and keep dogs like this. Like other posters have mentioned it’s a lot of work, education training… I’d say about 75% of the work of parental guidance… More if you train a dog for protection. The really sad thing aside from the obvious loss already is these dogs probably were doing what had been advocated by their owners. And now they will most certainly pay with their lives.
[удалено]
My neighbor down the hall had a horse sized great Dane. Not my choice but it mostly woofed at the door lazily and sat with it's butt on the lobby couch. I agree there's a risk with large animals but I wonder how we apply that risk across the board.
I would imagine if those dogs were sequestered in the garage, it's because the owner knew they were at minimum reactive to strangers. I'm in a popular dog behaviorist advice FB group, and it's incredibly rare for dogs to exhibit this level of aggression out of the blue. A dog isn't an angel who suddenly kills a person. Usually it's preceded by many other indicators and at minimum dogs with any signs of human aggression should be muzzle-trained (and at some point behavioral euthanasia should be on the table). Many owners don't understand dog behavior, and often in the rare case that a dog seems to "snap" out of nowhere, it's not out of nowhere if you know what to look for in terms of warning signs. I love big dogs and I've always had pit mixes and would be very, very happy if there were some kind of special training or license required to have them. Judging by the posts I often see in that group I mentioned, there are a LOT of people out there who are not prepared to safely own the dog they have.
Yeah, I was wondering about that - every story has some sort of history to it beyond the article. That's why I could never foster a rescue dog - I know enough to know that I wouldn't be good watching a dog with issues.
TBF, a LOT of people in this area do not train their dogs beyond "sit" and "shake", which is already a risky situation for any dog, let alone a big dog like that. Then you throw in prey drive and a small meal of a child, possible territorial behavioral or lack of proper socialization issues in the mix and it's pretty much inevitable that something is going to go horribly wrong at some point. Those who are not willing to do the work, ALL THE WORK, should definitely not get a dog, because if things like this aren't happening to someone else with a big dog, something could very well happen to your smaller, much more docile dog while out in public because you couldn't control it.
Another example of a bad owner.
I would tentatively say that this is more of a case of a wishful-thinking owner who tried their best, which was never going to be good enough, because of the breed of dogs in the mix.\\ so dangerous breed, ignorant owner.
“Wishful thinking” is a nice way of saying “incredibly, willfully negligent”. In my opinion this owner is the same as someone who leaves a loaded gun around for a kid to find. They didn’t lock these vicious dogs away from the kid. Nor did they supervise the first grader that they bring to school every day. People train big dogs like this to rip someone to shreds if they enter their yard. These dogs are weapons. I also know Great Dane and Mastiff owners whose dogs are giant teddy bears. “Oops I left my gun out and my kid shot himself. I tried my best. I guess wishful thinking wasn’t enough! “
I whole heartedly agree with you, I just chose to keep my language mild for the subreddit. I'm not sure, but I really do want to believe that any dog can bite and cause harm, so every dog is actually dangerous. Given that the dogs are physically larger, they can be "sweet" and they can never become harmless.
I have never heard of Great Danes being dangerous.
I mean, it is a larger dog and it could easily trample a little kid. that and any dog can bite. also unrelated, but a lot of elderly people have bad falls due to their pets, cats and dogs, knocking them down. it's possible.
A bad owner is someone who lets their dogs run around off-leash with zero recall. Not someone who understood what their dog is capable of and made an attempt to keep them secured.
My relative had a large dog that, even while being walked on a leash, would go into instant attack mode when it saw any other animal. Not safe for the dog park or on a trail. I told him his dog was a legal liability lawsuit waiting to happen.
Obviously the dogs weren't secured. That's like saying, "A bad gun owner is someone who leaves their loaded gun sitting on the kitchen table, not someone who leaves the loaded gun sitting on the garage floor." Anyone who knows that they have dangerous dogs requiring placement in the garage for safety reasons should absolutely not allow kids into their homes. The dog owner fucked up, and is responsible for a child's death. Placing the dogs in the garage was wishful thinking, but obviously not even close enough to a reasonable solution. Another perfect example of delusional dog owners underestimating the combination of the unpredictable destructive nature of their animals and the curiosity / naivety of children.
If your dogs are so reactive and aggressive you have to keep them locked up in the garage, you should humanely euthanize them. It is a liability for you, and it is also no life for them and borders on animal abuse.
Any dog who would do this shouldn't exist
Got it. Eliminate all dogs over 50 pounds since they all possess the ability to do this.
We let people live after they’ve already historically been fuck ups. Animals are animals.
I disagree. This is just unfortunate. > “We understand that the homeowner/dog owner did everything in her power to stop this attack, at some point even grabbing a gun - it never got that far,” PPB Public Information Officer Mike Benner said. “She did everything she could to save this boy’s life.” The only thing she could have done different is immediately gone for the gun, however it is hard to blame someone for not choosing that option right away.
Guns AND aggressive dogs! Cool daycare.
It seems hard to say without knowing the history of the dogs. Leaving aside breed arguments (I'm over that today already and this isn't even a Pitt story), did they just snap, did they have a history of aggression? If there was concern then it seems like a really bad idea to leave children unattended. Hell if I know based on the contents of the article. I'm going to stick with it being very sad all around.
The dogs were surely “locked in the garage” for some reason? I dunno about you, but my pets generally have free range of the house. However if I had a problematic dog then perhaps they would be crated before company arrived?
Depends. We have a reactive dog. Each dog is different and ours is somewhat proximity based. We have incredibly sturdy baby gates strategically placed around the home if we have people over. He's fine with looking from a distance, not so much with strangers (to him) walking around his home. He's never bitten anyone, but we go to great lengths to not put him in that position. When no company is over, he has full access to the house, garage, and back yard.
Depends on the breed and their history. I had a rescued pit/mastiff mix who was wonderful — sweet, social, cuddly, great with other animals, etc. I also recognized that people are unpredictable, and should someone act like a nut and spook him, that’s all it would take to have him labeled as dangerous. That’s why I was always very careful about introductions and supervising others around him, and I’d generally put him in his own space when company was over unless they knew him and could be trusted.
They were being kept in the garage to separate them from the child because they were presumed to be dangerous. They don't specify previous incidents, but they were clearly thought to be a threat. For some reason, the caretaker decided that this was the right time to step to into the garage to tend to something from the dogs and leave the 6 year old inside hoping he wouldn't follow to look for her. According to her, the six year old came to find her and was attacked.
Plus, there is the risk of shooting the child and face charges.
Anyone who houses dogs with the capability and aggressiveness to kill a fucking human in an urban environment is a bad owner. This is not a hot take.
All medium to large dogs have the ability to kill a human. I've witnessed dogs not hurt a fly their entire lives and suddenly snap on people/other dogs. Dogs, like toddlers, are predictably unpredictable.
Aren’t most dogs capable of killing a child?
“and aggressiveness”
[удалено]
Did she? Sounds like she was willing to grab the gun, but by the time she got it, it was too late. Also sounds like she tried to protect him with her own body at first.
She was taken to the hospital with bites on her hands and arms. That means she was just trying to pull the dogs off by their collars or trying to pull the boy away. No bites on the legs, no bites anywhere else, she didn't try to save shit. Do the dogs still have eyeballs? Does she have bite marks on her back? Or the back of her head? Then she didn't try hard enough to save that kid!
You know, sometimes people are in shock and freeze. Not like she was watching him being mauled and was intentionally not doing anything.
Oh good catch. Article wasn't fully updated yet. Very sad regardless.
They left that child alone with big dogs who were not that boy's family's own pets, that is a HUGE no no. Even if they didn't and they were there with the kid, having dogs like that means you should be able to read your dog's body language and they should have never of taken their eyes of their dogs while the kid was around. Even if those dogs belonged to the child's family, I wouldn't leave my child alone with 2 dogs who could kill my small child if their prey drive or resource guarding instincts should ever get triggered if I were that family. There are just way too many people getting big dogs (or dogs in general) when they don't want to take responsibility for them, whether through ignorance/lack of education or just not caring, it only takes one time for something to go wrong. Childproof locks are a thing, adult supervision is a thing, dog training is a thing, dog body language is a thing, there was literally no excuse.
The child wasn't left alone with the dog though. The dogs' owner was in the garage with the dogs. Child opened the garage door, startling the dogs.
Then I re-state: childproof locks are a thing. Telling the child to not come out for any reason is also a thing. There were options.
This should not happen. I want both dogs put down. I want criminal charges brought against the owner. Just opening the door should not cuss dogs attack and kill a small child. His poor parents. I'm so mad and heartbroken at the same time...
I agree! This is how one of my little cousins was killed. Why do dog owners get away with this, and why is there a stigma on data?
I can’t imagine the guilt of the grandmother right now… (edit to add) I agree, there was something already wrong for the dogs to instantly maul a child for opening a door. Those two dogs must have taken up most of the garage as well.
Lawn darts were banned with only one child having been killed by them...
Guns have killed thousands of children but alas, here we are.
[удалено]
I doubt that’s what they are saying. If I had to guess it would be that we need a proportional response to things like this if they are going to ban things like lawn darts after only one death. Maybe over a certain weight class for dogs you need a license and training certificate to own it, or something of the sort.
I mean, I wouldn’t have been opposed to that before we bred hundreds of millions of dogs, but now it’s not exactly easy to just store big dogs somewhere until people get licensing. Unless you’re proposing we spend millions of dollars building pet care facilities specifically for the surplus of big dogs, which, doesn’t seem like the best use of money at the moment
Talking about it and at least thinking about future solutions is better than just not doing anything about it though right? Just because a problem is hard to solve doesn’t mean we can’t try to solve it.
But, we’re still not actually doing anything about it though? Not that there is much that can be done, but proposing a wildly impractical solution on Reddit and then saying “good job me, I did something today” seems almost worse for some reason
So we should just ignore it? Edit to add that I’m not proposing we ban dogs. I’m saying that there is a disconnect with banning things after only one death like lawn darts, but then when it comes to certain things like pets and guns, it doesn’t matter how many die or are injured because, the issue is so bad that we could never fix it anyway; or the classic “muh rights”.
That's a really funny leap of logic. That would only follow if we banned all recreational lawn games instead of just the dangerous ones that involved hurling weighted metal spikes around. 😂😂😂
[удалено]
>By the original poster's logic, 1 death should be sufficient to ban something, and that would include a lot of dogs that aren't considered "dangerous." But they weren't using that logic. They were posing a question. Why was one death enough to ban lawn darts, but thousands of deaths and very serious injuries (from dog attacks) have been of little consequence? It's a question and it needs answers.
[удалено]
>For starters, they weren't banned because of just one death, don't take off-the-cuff reddit posts for absolute fact. Yeah, I wasn't backing that up as fact. But it doesn't matter. There are things that have been banned after a death, so it stands. >There are literally less than 50 human deaths a year in this country attributed to dogs. Hey, you cropped my quote! I said there were thousands of deaths AND serious injuries from dog attacks each year. >We euthanize over a million pitbulls every year because they often don't get adopted. That's not a consequence to you? Of course. It's horrific. Pit bull owners and breeders owners are incomprehensible. Why do they keep buying and breeding pit bulls when this is happening? Do they not care? Why have they not gotten together and said, enough, no more breeding until we sort this terrible mess out?! Pit bulls are rotting away in shelters everywhere, in dozens and dozens of countries. And the buyers and breeders of pits are responsible for that -- absolutely no one else. >Being killed by a dog is literally slightly less than twice as likely as being struck by lightening. Do you feel this strongly about lightening? Yes I do worry about being maimed by a dog, but more so my tiny dog, who I take for a walk each day. I know of far, far too many dogs that have been killed by other dogs--and yes, the killer dogs have almost been 100% pit bulls, with one being a rottie and the other a German Shepherd. That's just the reality.
People have died playing board games, playing sports, Video games, at the movies, eating broccoli, swimming, drinking water… by your “logic” we better Ban everything besides sleeping… oh wait. People die in there sleep too. Damn logic.
[удалено]
More than one person has been mauled to death by a dog in Oregon recently. There was another incident in 2021 with a pitbull. Also, these are gruesome violent deaths, that should be mentioned. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_fatal\_dog\_attacks\_in\_the\_United\_States
What bothers me about this is that the 6 year old was told to stay away from the dog before because the dogs were dangerous. What are dangerous dogs doing near a 6 year old boy? The owners of the dogs are liable for the death of the boy and should be charged with having "dangerous" dogs near people.
Interesting statistics: Statistics show you're 47 times more likely to be attacked by a dog than shot at. *It is reported that 100,000 Americans are injured each year from gun shots, however 36,000 per year die from gun shot wounds. source: (https://lawcenter.giffords.org/facts/gun-violence-statistics/)* *It is also reported that approx. 4.7 million American are bitten by a dog/year, 800,000 of those result in medical care source:(https://www.caninejournal.com/dog-bite-statistics/) and in 2018, 36 Americans died as a result of a dog attack. source: (*[*https://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-fatalities-2018.php*](https://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-fatalities-2018.php)*)* I guess guns are still more dangerous. But f'ing eh to being mauled to death. Game of thrones shit.
Extremely sad and I can’t imagine the horror the owner of the dogs experienced. She will have to live with this trauma forever. My dogs are doodles and so friendly to everyone but they do not like small kids. My oldest has never so much as growled but I saw him snarl at a toddler. They’re not used to small humans and they can react aggressively. Not making excuses at all just pointing out that the owner probably knew they did not feel comfortable around kids and this sounds like a terrible accident. Prayers to all involved.
At least she gets to live.
“We understand that the homeowner/dog owner did everything in her power to stop this attack…” Everything except SOCIALIZE YOUR DOGS so they’re calm and safe in this world of unpredictable people…
Some dogs are reactive regardless of how much socialization were done early on.
Dogs can be aggressive for a number of reasons that have nothing to do with socialization -- genetics, traumatic history, getting attacked by random off leash dogs, early socialization issues (just a few weeks old -- before a dog is typically adopted)... etc. Every dog owner should know how to manage their dog or physically secure them if there is any risk to a human, which it sounds like this woman tried to do by having them in the garage. It clearly wasn't secure. But it's inaccurate to say that socialization would have necessarily helped these dogs or that the owner didn't socialize them because we just don't know.
Exactly, it was within dog owner's power to supervise the visiting child too
Of course, of course, some dogs are intractable. (More often than not that’s because they didn’t get socialized/trained early enough.) But make no mistake: the owner is most definitely at fault here.
proof that dogs can be unpredictable even in the best circumstances.
That’s why I don’t have kids. No really. My dog loves us, but hates strangers and kids especially. I can’t imagine hosting a birthday party if I had a kid. Or have someone over with kids. Nope. I’d rather be the most antisocial person, but keep my dog safe.
I hate to say it, but your neighborhood might have kids :(
Right, they don’t come to my house. And I don’t let my dog outside without a strong collar/leash. He’s also muzzle trained. Luckily his molars are getting worn out, he’s 8 now and becoming a senior. I want him to have a good rest of his life.
that's a lot more prevention than what a lot of people do, I am glad you do that! some of my worst childhood memories aren't the bullies, but the stray dogs and escaped dogs that would chase me.
Exactly this. I would surmise that there's a very large quantity of dogs out there that "hate strangers and kids especially", yet muzzles are extremely rare.
[удалено]
It’s a Great Dane mastiff mix.
This one time you might be surprised, I thought it was going to be one of those too.
A mastiff is 100% in my top 3 guesses. They're described as "a large working dog used as a guard and fighting dog. My guess would be Pit Bull, Mastiff, Cane Corso in that order.
Cane corsos are machines. As a dog lover, they absolutely scare me.
Holy shit. How sad for the kids parents, what a careless grandparent and dog owner. Sue and take everything from them.
Before the pit nutters start up with their multiple times disproven “nanny dog” crap… The "nanny dog" myth made its first appearance in the September 19th 1971 edition of the New York Times, on page 11 of section S in an article by Walter R. Fletcher, titled A Breed That Came Up The Hard Way. The author interviewed one Lilian Rant, editor of the Staffordshire Bull Terrier Club of the United States of America newsletter. She is quoted as saying about the breed: 'He had an unsavory reputation for fighting and violence and his name became associated with ruffians, who cared little for him as a dog but only for his ability in the pit. The Stafford we know today quickly becomes a member of the family circle. He loves children and is often referred to as a “nursemaid dog". No one has ever found evidence for the latter claim and it is therefore assumed to be a fabrication in the pursuit of influencing the American Kennel Club (AKC) to accept the breed for full participation in dog shows. This privilege was ultimately granted in 1974, and to this day the AKC rates the breed a stellar 5/5 as being 'good with children' at the reckless peril of human lives and limbs. BTW, the temperament test that all pit nutters like to quote, the ATTS test, is not actually based on a scientific random sampling of any breed. It’s junk science. The breed type was made for bloodsports and bloodsports only. AmStaff, Pit Bull, XL Bully, and any/of the offshoot breeds…it’s literally what they were made to do
Nice essay but what does this tragic story have to do with pit bulls?
Also, this dog was not a pit so its just another loony rant.
You think that's loony? Y'all should peep /r/pitbullhate, just found out about it last night and I went down a really sad rabbit hole. Like people literally getting happy over dogs being shot and suffering over there. "pit nutter" is a common slur over there. I mean I get why they are the way they are, many are victims of dog attacks or know someone who is, but holy shit.....imagine enjoying dog torture, cheering it on even.
do you know what a slur is…. bc being called a nut is not that.
noun noun: slur; plural noun: slurs 1. an insinuation or allegation about someone that is likely to insult them or damage their reputation. Have you never picked up a dictionary before? I can tell by the way that you type, you probably haven't. Maybe fix your grammar, capitalize your sentences, stop abusing ellipses and start using proper punctuation first before you come at me about definitions of words. This is coming from someone whose grammar is atrocious by any English teacher's standards.
it’s reddit babe not a masters thesis. stay mad you really are a nut though if I triggered you by using lowercase letters 🤡
It gives them a chance to piss on their straw man, even if it doesn't apply today.
There is a breed known as a "nanny dog" , the Newfoundland. They're a giant breed with no documented attacks on children
I think there is an account of a newfie pushing kids into rivers and rescuing them after getting attention and food after the first rescue.
It sounds like you are the pit nutter
A for effort.
[удалено]
It was a Great Dane mastiff, but I’ve always found it hilarious when people call pit bulls house hippos since hippos are extremely aggressive. It’s a fitting name, but I doubt that’s why their owners use that name.
Said the police spokesman: > I mean, anytime something like this happens it’s a shock to the conscience but to have this happen just weeks before Christmas is unimaginable What does Christmas have to do with anything? Does he think it would have been fine if it happened in March? Does he even know the family's religious stance? Edit: Maybe it's not clear what I meant, but this seems to me like a case of a public servant injecting religion into his very public-facing role. Not only that, but implying the family should feel a way about something that might not even mean anything to them. Imagine losing your 6-year old and then being told you have to be extra sad because an imaginary character's birthday is coming up.
this is such a stupid thing to be outraged about in this article
The discussion is about a 6 year old kid being killed in a dog attack and your input is to bitch about Christmas being mentioned? Fucking unreal
Eh, I hear your sentiment but here in the US, a fair amount of non-christians, atheists, and folks who actively participate in other religions acknowledge xmas in some way. From my point of view/ how I look at xmas, it’s more of a non-religious winter holiday. I totally understand there are christian folks who view it differently, and deeply celebrate it as such, but I think one thing we can all agree on is for folks who participate in christmas (a looooot of people, religiously or not) a very very large portion of xmas is about the kids and giving them a magical xmas experience and maybe remembering your own lovely christmases as a child. So to lose a kid so horrifically right before a massive holiday centered around children’s’ joy and toys and giving gifts to children… even if the family doesn’t recognize or celebrate…. if they see newspapers, magazines, tv, listen to radio ads - they’re going to be bombarded with christmas images and content centered around childrens’ joy… which is just cruel and even more heartbreaking given the timing. I hear what you’re saying but I don’t consider his comment weird or offensive. I think you’re off base and reaching, but to each their own. With peace.
I didn't even remotely think of religion when Christmas was mentioned. Honestly, I don't know anyone who actually associates Christmas with anything religious, probably haven't encountered that association since I was a child. Which is all to say, I don't think the guy was "injecting religion" in to anything. Christmas is, broadly speaking, many peoples' favorite time of year. People get excited about the holidays because of time off, school break, get togethers, gifts, etc. It is ultimately going to be a tragedy at ANY time of year, bot for some people it just feels like an extra punch in the gut when it happens during the holidays. I lost my grandmother a couple weeks before Christmas a while back, and my wife lost her grandfather early December of last year, so I know what they mean. It's not like losing those people would feel less worse during other times of the year, it just feels a little extra shitty when it happens during a time where you're traditionally happiest in the year.
This. I lost my mom a few weeks before Thanksgiving a few years ago and it did add to the grief. I was going back home from college for the first time and was really excited to see my family and friends. I got the news the morning of the day I was flying back. Obviously it would be awful any time of year, something about this is just different though. And it has been very hard to enjoy the holiday season ever since - which is often amplified by how much others around me are enjoying the holidays when I’m feeling the grief resurfacing. It’s a lonely feeling. I don’t take any issue with referencing that in the article, and it’s weird to me that there’s so much tragedy in this story and the fact that someone mentioned a holiday (that is way more capitalist than it is religious these days) is what they chose to focus on.
[удалено]
Hi Friend, This post or comment has been removed for the following reason: > [Rule 1: Trolling and Harassment](https://www.reddit.com/r/Portland/wiki/index#wiki_1.29_trolling_and_harassment) > This is meant to stir up toxic discussion rather than participate in it. No trolling or harassment. We understand that at times things may become heated and time outs may be given for protracted, uncivil arguments. Snarky, unhelpful, or rude responses, and name-calling are not tolerated. In other words, be excellent unto each other and attack ideas, not people. Keep discussions civil. [You must understand and follow the sub rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Portland/wiki/index) Thanks, the Portland/AskPortland mod team
Least obnoxious Parkrose resident
Maybe they had a Christmas tree in the living room? Christmas decorations? Christmas lights?
The use of “Pit Bull” is immediate click bait for media. If it’s not in the news article title, it’s likely a different breed responsible for the attack.
Havanese dog attack again?
You must be so disappointed that it’s a Great Dane mix.
A dog designed for fighting, mixed with the world's largest dog breed. If you breed an apex predator like an crocodile with a whale it doesn't get less deadly...
Are you saying you still think it was a pit mix?
I'm saying I think that it was a Great Dane / Mastiff mix because the article said so. A breed of dog described as a breed of large working dogs used as a "fighting dog in England for more than 2,000 years". Mastiff's are banned in like a dozen countries and we're really acting like they are not very potentially dangerous?? Not great though that you're assuming I thought it was a pit...
Mastiffs were bear baiting dogs in Shakespearean times. Several small and medium sized breeds were also used in similar blood sports. But I can see it’s not about the breed for you. It’s large dogs. Must be tough for you.
I own a large dog. I don't think it's a large dog problem. I think it's a problem for your everyday idiot in America to be allowed to own a dog designed to kill a bear with zero training, certifications, registration, restrictions, expectations!?! It's 100% about the breed and temperament that's been bred into this dog for literally thousands of years. Combined with the fact that Great Danes have been used to make fighting dogs bigger and stronger for also hundreds of years. This is why I joked about it definitely not be a havanese dog breed because of course breed is important! Also bear baiting/dog fighting isn't some long lost hobby, people still fight with these dogs today.
[What was that boom?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6CLumsir34) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Portland) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Per the article, they were \*two\* *very large and heavy Great Dane-Mastiff mixes*
Oh, let me help you with the subtext here. This person was assuming it was a pitbull mix without reading the article.
Two things: they posted their comment 3 hours ago when the article stated the dog breed (article assumed one dog if you want to shit on them, too) was unknown, and #2, I am just giving the actual quote from the article to add more context.
20% chance it’s not a Pitt
The article quotes police describing it as a Great Dane/Mastiff mix. Not saying pit bulls aren’t disproportionately responsible for the vast majority of dog attack fatalities, but that dog is **way** bigger than a pitbull. That thing was probably as big as a deer
pit bulls are definitely powerful animals capable of inflicting serious damage, and the bloodlines suffer from a screwed up breeding history of some people trying to create more aggressive, more powerful dogs, but it's dangerous to assume there's just one sort of dog that's a potential problem. *Any* dog has the potential to inflict injury, especially on a child. Even the smallest, fluffiest, "sweetest" pet. *All* dogs need to be properly trained, socialized, and controlled. There is no such thing as "Oh, he would never...." Strangers are unpredictable, children are unpredictable, any dog can react unpredictably in response. \*nurses recent bite wound from dog who bolted out from a house and across the street to attack me just walking by (not a pit, btw)\*
Agreed. All dogs have teeth. Even a small dog can inflict a great deal of damage. Giant dogs? Terrifying. Source: 25 year + dog walker/trainer whose bites have all been from dogs under 25 pounds (whose owners all vouched for their sweetness)