Mom of Mauled Boy Says People are More Concerned About the Dog


They should have put the dog down.



The link is about the Sterling-Clippers story…


Hey Ringil, is that the link you intended?


Sorry Sorry. I’ll see if I can fix it.

There we go. Sorry about the messy OP. :blush:


Putting a dog in prison is absurd.


Yes, stupid, and actually cruel. Stupid.


When my son was 3 years old, we were walking down the street to visit a neighbor when a German Shepherd ran from behind his house and attacked my son, unprovoked. We were not even on the property. I had to get myself between him and the dog, he had already left huge scratch marks down his little thighs and was going for his face when the neighbor called the dog off.

I took my son home and called the dog pound and they came out and confiscated the dog. The woman who owned the dog was not one bit concerned about my son’s injuries and the fact the dog attacked him without provocation, she just screamed and cussed at us because they took the dog.

She never got the dog back, I don’t know what happened to it. Some people do not have any common sense. In reality, I should also have called the police, but my main thing was to get the dog confiscated.


The Holy Father has echoed the concern with the amount of adoration that is given to pets, which can come at the mutual exclusion of people. The cuteness of a pet can become a type of carnal pleasure, in which, because of the animal’s superiority in being more easy to love & cuddle than a human being (which takes work), the animal becomes a diabolical substitute to Love Thy Neighbor.


CCC 2418: It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly. It is likewise unworthy to spend money on them that should as a priority go to the relief of human misery. One can love animals ; one should not direct to them the affection due only to persons.


Its never the dogs fault, its always the owner in my experience.


I agree. However, the dog is the one who caused the injuries. I think it would be better to evaluate the animal and see if rehabilitation is possible. If not, it is better to put the dog down than to torture it for life.

In the case of the owner (if there is one), they should be paying for all medical bills and the loss of wages due to the mother having to quit her job to care for her poor son.


Releasing crooks is even more absurd!

They throw people in jail for destroying an eagle’s egg but make killing human unbabies legal. Figure that one out !! God Bless. Memaw


It looks like the dog’s owner was going to have it put down, then a third party group stepped in to have it kept alive. Apparently, it was being taken care of very well to begin with - they reported it had worms and discharge from its eyes - so I doubt they cared either way.

It is kind of scary, as a dog owner, the way the media attention is playing out here though. It is bad that it happened, but why is nobody asking what the babysitter was doing when she was supposed to be watching the child. Why was the 4-year-old outside of the house and on somebody else’s property, close enough to a strange dog to get bitten (or allegedly try to take a bone from it)?

I keep my dogs inside during the day because of stories like this, and because I have seen kids in my neighborhood reaching over and through fences to poke at dogs and throw rocks at them. My neighbor had 2 Rottweliers get loose and had animal control called on him for “allowing” them to run lose, because some of the neighborhood kids openend the gate and let them out so they could sneak into his yard and use his swimming pool while he was at work. If they had bit one of the kids in their own yard, would it have been right to hold him responsible for their injuries?


As soon as I read that headline, I assumed it involved a pit bull. Not because of the dog, but because of the people defending the dog.

The people who defend that breed are overboard in protecting individual dogs which are vicious. Yes, blame the dog, don’t blame the breed. But pit bull protectors have a bad habit of defending violent dogs.


True. And cases like this make it more difficult for them to be taken seriously in cases where nonviolent pit bulls are put down (some animal shelters do it as a matter of course - they don’t adopt pit bulls and automatically euthanize them, regardless of behavior, if the owner can’t be found). They also fail to realize tha, by stepping in on cases like this where the dog has harmed a child, it just increases media attention on pit bull attacks and gives the breed a further bad name.

On the other hand, the news media has a bad habit of reporting “pit bull attacks” in cases where the dogs look vaguely similar to pit bull terriers and often when they are other breeds entirely. The one I most remember was a widely-reported pit bull attack here in North Carolina, by an AKC-registered Labrador Revtreiver. A lot of people will call any bully breed or one of many unreleated breeds a “pit bull”. I worked with a pit bull rescue at won’t point that had spun off from a large breed rescue (in both cases, to take animals our shleter wouldn’t house) and less than half of the “pit bulls” brought to us were pits or even showed a substantial APBT mix. The sad ones were when people had a “mutt” for a while with no problems and a conerned family member or landlord told them it was a pit bull and convinced them to get rid of it. - is a good sample of some of the brreds people confuse with them.


I originally thought “Doberman” or “German Shepherd” or “Pit Bull”.


I learned the hard way that calling the police is fairly useless in a case like this. I was attacked by two dogs who actually ran two blocks to reach me. My injuries were minor due to heavy winter clothing, for which I am very grateful. We called the police who had me call the pound. They came out and seized the dogs, one small and one large. The large dog was eventually put down. The owners had to pay my bills.

Now, in a case like mine (the owners were home and did nothing to help, but tried to hide the dogs) I do think putting the dog down was the correct thing. It was a red retriever. And I think in this case that should have been done, which apparently the owners felt as well. But sometimes it is just not the dogs fault, and we don’t seem able to tell the difference.

I blame animal behavior on the owners and their inability to train an animal or take good care of it. In many cases the dog should be salvaged and the owners be the ones in jail and paying off the victims medical bills out of their own pocket. Banning breeds helps nothing either, as again it is owner neglect and ignorance that causes the problem.

A couple of years ago one of our dogs started growling at us. He never did that before and was a beautiful gentle animal his whole life. But bone disease was causing him a horrible amount of untreatable pain. We made the difficult choice of having him put down because we often have a small child in our house. We would not take the chance of him biting her, or us. It broke our hearts. But if a dog suddenly develops aggressive behavior that has not done so in the past folks had better take a hard look at why and make choices in favor of human safety.


In my area you may legally kill an aggressive dog, and the owner is automatically responsible for any injuries you may sustain from the dog.


As is often the case, too simplistic in it’s view.

Spending money on animals is part of our economy by providing jobs for thousands of people. Vets, vet techs, vet clinic, pet food stores, and pet food industry (which includes ranchers) provides income, (read food, shelter, etc etc).

Human misery will/does increase when people lose their jobs, and that includes those people who work in industries that deal with animal care.




DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit