79-year-old man loses arm after being attacked by a neighbor’s dog in Chonburi

[IvorBiggun2]

8 hours ago, JensenZ said:

certain breeds should be outlawed and never be allowed to live in a community of humans.

No such thing as a dangerous dog. It's the owner that creates the problem.

 

 

[jacko45k]

16 hours ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

So that should make it okay for him to stick his arm through the gate? In his situation I assume you'd have done exactly the same as he did?

Well yes, children are likely to do the same too. 

They not only had a dangerous dog, they had a pack of dogs, so it went beyond one to guard the house. People like this, and many here, are so wrapped up in their doggy love, they are blind to the risks. 

[IvorBiggun2]

1 minute ago, jacko45k said:

People like this, and many here, are so wrapped up in their doggy love, they are blind to the risks. 

I wouldn't call Thais dog lovers. They use dogs for a purpose and that is to protect their property. In this case the dogs did just that.

[jacko45k]

7 minutes ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

I wouldn't call Thais dog lovers. They use dogs for a purpose and that is to protect their property. In this case the dogs did just that.

Rubbish..... they chewed a mans arm off when he wasn't even inside the property!

Many Thais are way overly besotted by their dogs too, and as we see here, they can do no wrong.....

I would have them put down before a neighbours kid is seriously injured or worse, heaven forbid they get out.

[IvorBiggun2]

29 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

they chewed a mans arm off when he wasn't even inside the property!

Which side of the gate did the dogs latch on to the arm? Oh yeah, on their side. The dogs weren't in a public place and therefore doing what they were meant to do. Protect the owners property. Wake up people.

[jacko45k]

5 minutes ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

Which side of the gate did the dogs latch on to the arm? Oh yeah, on their side. The dogs weren't in a public place and therefore doing what they were meant to do. Protect the owners property. Wake up people.

Wake up dog owners.... the man was not on their property. He foolishly put his arm through a gap that should not have been there. He was presumably standing on public land, was supposedly known to the dogs and making an unthreatening act of kindness.  So apparently dogs are meant to chew up and attack on anybody in their vicinity and in reach..... you know nothing about dog training. 

Edited August 22, 2021 by jacko45k

[IvorBiggun2]

I'd imagine that the old guy in this story will not gain much financially.  First of all his medical charges will be paid for by the state. Nothing more there really for him to claim on.

 

Quote

 

Section 433 of the Thai Civil and Commercial Code states that the owner of an animal is bound to compensate an injured party for any damages caused by the animal. Thailand is a civil law country based on the German Civil and Commercial Code, so the New Zealand man can only file a claim for any actual expenses arising from the incident, such as medical bills and loss of property.

Unless the dog owner could prove that the man intentionally provoked the dog, she will be liable to compensate the victim for his medical bills and any other costs directly attributable to the attack.

 

 

Edited August 22, 2021 by IvorBiggun2

[IvorBiggun2]

Good old Thai police.

 

 

Quote

 

Thai Police Force Eagerly Recruits Dogs That Killed Children - One Country's Solution

What should be done with dogs that kill children and are too unruly and vicious to be used in war? Here is an idea: the local police can take them for "keeping the streets safe." At least, that's how one city in Thailand is doing it.

A dad purchased two Rottweilers to "protect" his wife and their 2-year-old daughter. The dogs more or less immediately killed his girl. Not wanting to euthanize his pets -- after all, they probably were not getting enough love -- he attempted to give them to the Thai army. 

The army unfortunately rejected the dogs, saying they "lack the qualities of military dogs." Translation: too violent for the battlefield. Undeterred from his humane objective, however, the dad turned to the local police force. Happily, they accepted them! 

I am sure this dad feels safer already. 

 

 

[bbko]

So because I have dogs that protect my home and a gap at the bottom of my front gate where the wheels are, and the gap is big enough for anyone to stick their hand/fingers, I should be sued if my dogs bit the person that came along and stuck their hand under my gate?? Ridiculous.

[steven100]

10 hours ago, JensenZ said:

 

 

Certain breeds shouldn't be kept at all, anywhere. Not long ago a dog killed it's owner (did you forget?). Dangerous dogs inside gates can get out. They are deadly weapons.

exactly,  what happens if one or all of these dogs get out through a hole in the fence or the gate left open ?

they attack a kid playing in the street ?  .....      same ... same ... excuses !       

 

[IvorBiggun2]

2 minutes ago, bbko said:

So because I have dogs that protect my home and a gap at the bottom of my front gate where the wheels are, and the gap is big enough for anyone to stick their hand/fingers, I should be sued if my dogs bit the person that came along and stuck their hand under my gate?? Ridiculous.

Unfortunately BBKO there are some posters on here that think dogs should be housed in airtight containers.

[Rampant Rabbit]

12 hours ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

So in your opinion what width should those gaps be bearing in mind that you're talking about a child's hand or fingers.  

If  I need to  tell you, you  are  beyond  hope

[Rampant Rabbit]

14 minutes ago, bbko said:

So because I have dogs that protect my home and a gap at the bottom of my front gate where the wheels are, and the gap is big enough for anyone to stick their hand/fingers, I should be sued if my dogs bit the person that came along and stuck their hand under my gate?? Ridiculous.

Yes you should  be  sued.

[Stargeezr]

How would you posters like to be in this old guys shoes. 78 years old and had been going to this 

neighbors house,  more than once.   Now he has to live the rest of his life with one arm.    Some say

it was totally his own fault. Some say, Oh please do not destroy the dogs.    Those dogs who have

had a taste of human blood, and will they be nice dogs in the future, and not a threat to anyone else?

  How about next time it is some child who gets bitten, then what?    If these dogs were at all dangerous, the

signs should have already been up.   A very sad news story indeed, with many sad comments provided by

some posters.

Geezer

[IvorBiggun2]

1 minute ago, Rampant Rabbit said:

If  I need to  tell you, you  are  beyond  hope

Yes I'm beyond hope so please tell us what size of a gap is permissible to you? 

[jacko45k]

22 minutes ago, bbko said:

So because I have dogs that protect my home and a gap at the bottom of my front gate where the wheels are, and the gap is big enough for anyone to stick their hand/fingers, I should be sued if my dogs bit the person that came along and stuck their hand under my gate?? Ridiculous.

If my neighbour's dog gets under my gate is it acceptable that I attack it with an axe and take a few of it's limbs off? 

[IvorBiggun2]

3 minutes ago, Stargrazer9889 said:

78 years old

For all we know of this 78 year old he may mentally impaired to the extent of where he shouldn't have been allowed out unaccompanied. <deleted> stop blaming the dogs. The dogs are the innocent party in this. Not that  I'm saying don't destroy them but lets get the full facts first. And in this case I don't think we have.

[IvorBiggun2]

Just now, jacko45k said:

If my neighbour's dog gets under my gate is it acceptable that I attack it with an axe and take a few of it's limbs off? 

Do what you like it's your property.

[jacko45k]

3 minutes ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

Do what you like it's your property.

Right, thanks, I will go get my axe. 

[bbko]

42 minutes ago, bbko said:

So because I have dogs that protect my home and a gap at the bottom of my front gate where the wheels are, and the gap is big enough for anyone to stick their hand/fingers, I should be sued if my dogs bit the person that came along and stuck their hand under my gate?? Ridiculous.

 

28 minutes ago, Rampant Rabbit said:

Yes you should  be  sued.

I guess I need to talk with my homeowner insurance agent. 

And I'm ever in need of some money I'll just stick my hand on someone's property that has dogs ????.

[IvorBiggun2]

Humans kill (homicides) more humans per year than dogs do. How do we control that? We could euthanize people that look the murdering type. Better to be safe than sorry.  

[jacko45k]

2 hours ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

Humans kill (homicides) more humans per year than dogs do. How do we control that? We could euthanize people that look the murdering type. Better to be safe than sorry.  

No, just the guilty ones. And put into jail those that go about ripping arms off! It stops them doing it again! Dogs can just be put down. 

[Sydebolle]

Well, did not know that sausage dogs can be that aggressive ........... I hope that the two women pay straight through their noses for their negligence - neither the old man nor the dogs were at fault - me thinks! 

[richard_smith237]

6 hours ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

For all we know of this 78 year old he may mentally impaired to the extent of where he shouldn't have been allowed out unaccompanied. <deleted> stop blaming the dogs. The dogs are the innocent party in this. Not that  I'm saying don't destroy them but lets get the full facts first. And in this case I don't think we have.

I agree...  Don’t ‘blame the dogs’..... 'blame the owners’...

 

If a child grows up in vacuum without an moral guidance is the child wrong if when it reaches age of physical strength he/she kills another human? - the ‘person’ then does not know ‘right from wrong’, nevertheless the horrible reality is that that ‘person’ cannot live within society as he/she is a danger. 

 

The same can be said of dogs which attack, with their absence of consciousness they have no idea of moral right from wrong, but that animal can not live within society as it is a danger. 

 

 

[pacovl46]

22 hours ago, KannikaP said:

Are you a veggie?

????????????

[pacovl46]

On 8/21/2021 at 11:04 AM, richard_smith237 said:

 

I agree with you up to a point, but we don’t live in a world where there is a perfectly placed line between right and wrong. Unfortunately, some humans create a mess. In this case the humans (owners) have created this mess. 

 

We have owners who have not adequately trained their animals and have not adequately secured their property so that someone cannot get hurt. For the benefit of the animals and everyone else these owners should never be allowed to own dogs. 

 

IF and owner cannot train their dog properly, why should the be allowed to have them? 

 

We now have a situation where there are animals which are known not just to bite, but to attack with sufficient severity that a person who was simply ‘delivering an item(s)’ lost a limb.  

 

Is this not enough of a warning ?....  Next time it could be a child retrieving a ball, next time the gate may not be fully closed and the dog(s) escaped, run out in to the street and mail a child playing - then we face the moronic arguments (that we saw in another thread) where posters argue that a child should not be in the street.

[in the example above, a dog ran out and mauled a child playing less than a couple of meters away from her parent]

 

So, why I agree, in a perfect world the dog should not be punished for doing what comes naturally to an animal (protecting its territory), it should either be ’trained’ or removed so that it cannot attack again. 

 

The owners are most definitely responsible for this man being attacked.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

First of all, thanks for your educated response because that’s pretty rare here! 
 

secondly, I totally agree! There should be dog keepers’ license that everyone who wants to own one should have to obtain by training with dogs and only after successful completion of said training should they get the license. 
 

In regards to the child in the street, I don’t find that argument stupid. There’s so much that can go wrong on a street, snatching, car accident, animals and young children should be supervised by someone if they allow them to play on the street.

 

Now, I’m not blaming the old man, but I’m pretty sure he knew about the dogs since they were neighbors and I’m pretty sure the dogs and their behavior are well known, he should’ve known better than to reach in there. Having said that, the dogs should’ve definitely been trained properly! 

[pacovl46]

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Very rarely I disagree with you Rob, but you are bring in a lot of flawed strawman arguments. In this case you are bringing up ‘Drink driving’ to dilute the severity of a dog attack. 

 

Both are wrong, but both are different and need to be handled differently.

 

Strict punishment as a deterrent against DUI is in place (often not strict enough). 

 

A Sign does not prevent a dog from attacking. 

 

Should emergency services not render assistance to someone in their home because there is a ’sign’ outside someones home that there is a ‘dog inside’.....

 

IF a sign indicates that a dog is dangerous, the owner is already admitting that its dog will attack people, there is already something wrong with this.
 

 

 

A sign might as well be there to just deter burglars. Strictly speaking a guard dog is there to protect and to keep people from coming onto the property. Having said that, a good guard dog will box intruders into a corner and won’t let them leave until the owner returns instead of tearing their limbs off. But then again, people have no business on other people’s property. If there’s dog on the property that goes wild when I approach, I sure as hell wouldn’t enter the property. It’s common sense. 

 

[richard_smith237]

11 minutes ago, pacovl46 said:

First of all, thanks for your educated response because that’s pretty rare here! 
 

secondly, I totally agree! There should be dog keepers’ license that everyone who wants to own one should have to obtain by training with dogs and only after successful completion of said training should they get the license. 

Definitely agree, but in Thailand when so many people don’t even bother with a licence to drive a car or ride a motorcycle society is most definitely not ready for this. Not because society can’t follow the rules, but because they don’t need to because the rules are rarely enforced. 

 

In many countries owners are responsible for any attack or injuries, damage etc a dog may cause, as such there is a stronger incentive for pets to be trained.

This doesn’t stop the attacks from happening, but stronger penalties for an owners lack of responsibility could cut down the incidence of attacks. 

 

Within the month we’ll read of another attack, a child, mauled.... the same comments, the same debates, the same causes - poor training, poor ownership, lack of responsibility of owners. 

 

11 minutes ago, pacovl46 said:

In regards to the child in the street, I don’t find that argument stupid. There’s so much that can go wrong on a street, snatching, car accident, animals and young children should be supervised by someone if they allow them to play on the street.

In that specific case it was a stupid argument. The child was in a residential street (not a main road with passing cars) and the parent was also stood in the street as the 3 year old was riding a bike. 

A dog which had escaped from a nearby house simply ran straight up to the child and attacked it, the mother was stood in the road 2m from the child and reacted immediately, but the child had already been mauled in a matter of seconds. 

 

11 minutes ago, pacovl46 said:

Now, I’m not blaming the old man, but I’m pretty sure he knew about the dogs since they were neighbors and I’m pretty sure the dogs and their behavior are well known, he should’ve known better than to reach in there. Having said that, the dogs should’ve definitely been trained properly! 

‘Should have known better’....    perhaps, should a child also know better ?? where is the line drawn with responsibility. 

A burglar at night - I think we’d all agree that its their own fault if they break in and are attacked by dogs. 

But, other circumstances....  when someone is innocent, the man delivering lemons, a child, emergency response, a new post man etc etc...   

 

 

[metisdead]

Off topic obfuscation posts and the replies have been removed.  This topic is not related to people getting killed by drunk drivers or alcohol related deaths.

[Mr Meeseeks]

10 hours ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

Humans kill (homicides) more humans per year than dogs do. How do we control that? We could euthanize people that look the murdering type. Better to be safe than sorry.  

If I chopped someone's arm off for sticking his arm through my gate what would happen to me?

 

You're having a nightmare on this thread mate, time to step away from the keyboard.

Edited August 22, 2021 by Mr Meeseeks