Dog attack on three year old - who should be responsible for dogs outside shops?

[Keesters]

Solution to ending the stray dog population in a humane manner is possible. Anyone with a working brain would know that. Anyone who thinks it is not possible is of the mai pen rai brigade and just throws their hands up in despair. and would allow more injuries such as happened to the girl this thread is about.

[dick dasterdly]

17 minutes ago, Keesters said:

 

Reported. Go take your cause elsewhere. This thread is about injuries received by being attacked by a stray dog and who is responsible. Your cuase does not belong here unless you're trolling which I suspect you may be.

 

Its fairly obvious that we're not going to agree .

 

You think those annoying stray dogs shouldn't be allowed to live in human areas - whilst experience tells me that 99.9% of them are harmless and would give anything for a home.  A home that few are going to find.

 

But I congratulate you on reporting me because I have a completely different perspective to your own .

Edited August 26, 2016 by dick dasterdly

[kaorop]

4 hours ago, Jimdbim said:

 

Face what stuff ? Dogs on the street? On daily basis 

 

or let me guess it's the dogs fault you chose to live or walk in the middle of nowhere?

 

just keeps getting better and better, and yet humans suppose to superior race, I guess someone went wrong somewhere 

no you dont

completely unfathomable?

some kind of weird dogs are equal to humans agenda

yep cb troll

[dick dasterdly]

2 minutes ago, Keesters said:

Solution to ending the stray dog population in a humane manner is possible. Anyone with a working brain would know that. Anyone who thinks it is not possible is of the mai pen rai brigade and just throws their hands up in despair. and would allow more injuries such as happened to the girl this thread is about.

Nobody's saying its not possible - the Soi Dogs charity on Phuket is doing its best to sterlise stray dogs, but its a never ending task.

 

They are the only organisation doing this however, which is why I'm still interested in your "humane" solution - something you keep ignoring - pretending to believe in some utopia where the stray dogs would be rounded up and live in caring shelters....

 

I know you don't believe these exist - so please tell us what you think should happen to those removed stray dogs.

[Keesters]

7 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Nobody's saying its not possible - the Soi Dogs charity on Phuket is doing its best to sterlise stray dogs, but its a never ending task.

 

They are the only organisation doing this however, which is why I'm still interested in your "humane" solution - something you keep ignoring - pretending to believe in some utopia where the stray dogs would be rounded up and live in caring shelters....

 

I know you don't believe these exist - so please tell us what you think should happen to those removed stray dogs.

 

Go back and read what I've written.  I shall not repeat myself.

 

Time also for me to take my own dog for her walk. Often a traumatic experience for me as we get many stray dogs coming for a look and objecting as we cross what they think is their territory. In truth it is public property paid for by taxpayers like me. The stray dogs did not contribute a cent/satang. Their only contribution is a pile of poop that never gets cleaned up.

 

Edited August 26, 2016 by Keesters

[Keesters]

4 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Pray tell, precisely to which home(s) do you suggest that those always dangerous () should be removed?

 

Go back and read. I shall not repeat myself. You are most definitely trolling now,

 

 

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, Keesters said:

 

Go back and read. I shall not repeat myself. You are most definitely trolling now,

 

 

Sounds like a good back-out plan to me .

 

And incidentally, please don't call me "dumb" just because I don't agree with you.

 

Please also note that I didn't report you for being so rude .

[richard_smith237]

Culling, euthanising, neutralising, spaying... whatever we call the control measures, I think everyone is in agreement that something needs to be done.... 

 

What seems to be in dispute is the method in which this is carried out. 

 

We all wish for humane treatment of animals...  what about the future generations of stay dogs ?

 

By doing nothing, we (or those in charge if you wish to blame someone else), are securing future generations of pain and suffering of numbers of Soi Dogs... IMO the humane thing to do would be to prevent this from occurring in the first place by preventing the future generations.... Spaying YES... of course, this is the solution of choice, but who is going to pay. 

 

If we are to be realistic a 'cost effective' and 'permanent' solution is required.... a one off...  

 

 

AND... the idea that the parents are to blame for 'momentarily being distracted' is idiotic...   the Dog 'could' have bitten anyone, any child... the difference is that an Adult would have received a bite on the leg, a child received a bite on the face...

 

Perhaps because of the Childs size the Dogs animalistic instinct caused it to react aggressively whereas with a larger adult the dog may have backed down. We don't know what caused it, however, a step on the tail is perhaps a likely reason as any... 

 

It would not have happened if any of the control measures being discussed were taken. 

 

For those arguing that Dog's should have equal rights to humans... they don't... Dogs don't have empathy, they don't have conscience... (and neither to some humans and personally I'd see them removed from society too). 

 

And... for those arguing that Soi Dogs have an equal right to a little Girl..  I doubt they've had children who may face similar risks when doing something as simple as walking out of a 7-11.

 

 

 

 

[dick dasterdly]

3 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Culling, euthanising, neutralising, spaying... whatever we call the control measures, I think everyone is in agreement that something needs to be done.... 

 

What seems to be in dispute is the method in which this is carried out. 

 

We all wish for humane treatment of animals...  what about the future generations of stay dogs ?

 

By doing nothing, we (or those in charge if you wish to blame someone else), are securing future generations of pain and suffering of numbers of Soi Dogs... IMO the humane thing to do would be to prevent this from occurring in the first place by preventing the future generations.... Spaying YES... of course, this is the solution of choice, but who is going to pay. 

 

If we are to be realistic a 'cost effective' and 'permanent' solution is required.... a one off...  

 

 

AND... the idea that the parents are to blame for 'momentarily being distracted' is idiotic...   the Dog 'could' have bitten anyone, any child... the difference is that an Adult would have received a bite on the leg, a child received a bite on the face...

 

Perhaps because of the Childs size the Dogs animalistic instinct caused it to react aggressively whereas with a larger adult the dog may have backed down. We don't know what caused it, however, a step on the tail is perhaps a likely reason as any... 

 

It would not have happened if any of the control measures being discussed were taken. 

 

For those arguing that Dog's should have equal rights to humans... they don't... Dogs don't have empathy, they don't have conscience... (and neither to some humans and personally I'd see them removed from society too). 

 

And... for those arguing that Soi Dogs have an equal right to a little Girl..  I doubt they've had children who may face similar risks when doing something as simple as walking out of a 7-11.

 

 

 

 

Re. the emboldened part - your solution is to kill stray dogs?

 

You don't think abandoning and dumping puppies/dogs will continue in the future?

Edited August 26, 2016 by dick dasterdly

[dick dasterdly]

9 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Culling, euthanising, neutralising, spaying... whatever we call the control measures, I think everyone is in agreement that something needs to be done.... 

 

What seems to be in dispute is the method in which this is carried out. 

 

We all wish for humane treatment of animals...  what about the future generations of stay dogs ?

 

By doing nothing, we (or those in charge if you wish to blame someone else), are securing future generations of pain and suffering of numbers of Soi Dogs... IMO the humane thing to do would be to prevent this from occurring in the first place by preventing the future generations.... Spaying YES... of course, this is the solution of choice, but who is going to pay. 

 

If we are to be realistic a 'cost effective' and 'permanent' solution is required.... a one off...  

 

 

AND... the idea that the parents are to blame for 'momentarily being distracted' is idiotic...   the Dog 'could' have bitten anyone, any child... the difference is that an Adult would have received a bite on the leg, a child received a bite on the face...

 

Perhaps because of the Childs size the Dogs animalistic instinct caused it to react aggressively whereas with a larger adult the dog may have backed down. We don't know what caused it, however, a step on the tail is perhaps a likely reason as any... 

 

It would not have happened if any of the control measures being discussed were taken. 

 

For those arguing that Dog's should have equal rights to humans... they don't... Dogs don't have empathy, they don't have conscience... (and neither to some humans and personally I'd see them removed from society too). 

 

And... for those arguing that Soi Dogs have an equal right to a little Girl..  I doubt they've had children who may face similar risks when doing something as simple as walking out of a 7-11.

 

 

 

 

Re. the emboldened part, I partly agree.

 

But by arguing that dogs are less worthy than humans, you're only showing that you have little empathy towards other animals which negates the argument that humans have empathy or conscience!

Edited August 26, 2016 by dick dasterdly

[xylophone]

Jeez, this is getting ridiculous........... a poor young girl gets bitten by a stray dog which was probably very painful and traumatic for the girl and may well "scar" her for life one way or another.

 

I'm sure that I will fall foul of the folk who advocate leaving the stray dogs as they are, but here's my solution: – the local authorities should take control, all stray dogs should be rounded up and put in a large compound and if they are not claimed within "X" days, then they should be euthanised.

 

Simple and effective and takes potentially dangerous dogs off the streets/sois, as well as alleviating the suffering of many thousands of them, and also prevents stinking, possibly disease infected faeces from being deposited all around the place, and of course it makes it a safer place for children and adults by virtue of not being bitten, not being attacked whilst on a scooter, not having an accident as a result of a dog running into the road and not having to worry about the children picking up something nasty from dogs' faeces.

[dick dasterdly]

5 minutes ago, xylophone said:

Jeez, this is getting ridiculous........... a poor young girl gets bitten by a stray dog which was probably very painful and traumatic for the girl and may well "scar" her for life one way or another.

 

I'm sure that I will fall foul of the folk who advocate leaving the stray dogs as they are, but here's my solution: – the local authorities should take control, all stray dogs should be rounded up and put in a large compound and if they are not claimed within "X" days, then they should be euthanised.

 

Simple and effective and takes potentially dangerous dogs off the streets/sois, as well as alleviating the suffering of many thousands of them, and also prevents stinking, possibly disease infected faeces from being deposited all around the place, and of course it makes it a safer place for children and adults by virtue of not being bitten, not being attacked whilst on a scooter, not having an accident as a result of a dog running into the road and not having to worry about the children picking up something nasty from dogs' faeces.

You're right - we'll never agree as a very few of us don't think every animal that annoys us should be destroyed because one of those animals has hurt a human.

Edited August 26, 2016 by dick dasterdly

[richard_smith237]

6 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Re. the emboldened part, I partly agree.

 

But by arguing that dogs are less worthy than humans, you're only showing that you have little empathy towards other animals which negates the argument that humans have empathy or conscience!

 

On the contrary.... I empathise hugely with these poor suffering animals, which is why I would like to see preventative measures in place to prevent future suffering.... 

 

On the other hand, doing nothing because we 'love the animals' only serves to secure that future generations and hundreds of thousands more will suffer... I don't consider this a particularly human response.

 

-----

 

In response to the 'cost effective' comment - this is borne of a realistic nature...  I'd much prefer to see existing populations 'spayed'...   However, the child who was bitten could have been bitten by a spayed animal, so this doesn't solve the immediate situation it only reduces further generations.

 

So yes, In response to the Immediate Requirement to Reduce the Soi Dog Population and prevent from further incidents of people / children being bitten, scarred, maimed and diseases passed on I see Culling as the only viable option. 

 

Its not humane, its not nice, in fact its quite atrocious... Its the 'least worst option'...., this is a realistic opinion from someone who doesn't live in a 'zippeddy doc dah' world and instead chooses to discuss realistic solutions rather than over liberalise a simple situation and solution by trying to be too nice.... 

 

*(this is all opinion and what this discussion forum is for)... 

 

 

[SOTIRIOS]

...this is what happens when nobody is wrong...nobody is to blame...nobody is responsible....here....

 

...does not apply to 'others'.....

[dick dasterdly]

1 minute ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

On the contrary.... I empathise hugely with these poor suffering animals, which is why I would like to see preventative measures in place to prevent future suffering.... 

 

On the other hand, doing nothing because we 'love the animals' only serves to secure that future generations and hundreds of thousands more will suffer... I don't consider this a particularly human response.

 

-----

 

In response to the 'cost effective' comment - this is borne of a realistic nature...  I'd much prefer to see existing populations 'spayed'...   However, the child who was bitten could have been bitten by a spayed animal, so this doesn't solve the immediate situation it only reduces further generations.

 

So yes, In response to the Immediate Requirement to Reduce the Soi Dog Population and prevent from further incidents of people / children being bitten, scarred, maimed and diseases passed on I see Culling as the only viable option. 

 

Its not humane, its not nice, in fact its quite atrocious... Its the 'least worst option'...., this is a realistic opinion from someone who doesn't live in a 'zippeddy doc dah' world and instead chooses to discuss realistic solutions rather than over liberalise a simple situation and solution by trying to be too nice.... 

 

*(this is all opinion and what this discussion forum is for)... 

 

 

At least you're honest.

 

How does this show us humans to be more empathetic and with a greater conscience?

[Jimdbim]

1 hour ago, aquario33 said:

how you justify stray dogs chasing motorbikes and causing accidents ? would like to see you after such happening, must to pay for a damaged car and hospital bill etc....or , lets say somebody of your innocent beloved ones would loose life ? still backing up the right of the street dog????

 

Great vivid imagination?

Sort of like its guns who kill people not people who kill people 

[connda]

Farang understand the concept of liability, but on the other hand it makes the West a litigious nightmare.  So, to keep your sanity keep repeating, "This is Thailand, it is not the West".  Whenever you are outraged, repeat the mantra.

 

Now, if Thais are finally becoming outraged, well, it's up to them to change their system.  Until then, dogs have more rights than humans.  That's just the way of it.  C'est la vie.

[richard_smith237]

18 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

At least you're honest.

 

How does this show us humans to be more empathetic and with a greater conscience?

 

I have more empathy for the Girl who's face is scared for the rest of her life and feel that those responsible should have a conscience and feel terrible for not solving this issue decades ago. 

 

I feel empathy to those poor suffering animals who otherwise wouldn't exist to suffer today had this issue be adequately handled in the past. 

 

It is through such empathy that the recognition exists for the requirement of an adequate solution, not a half measure and not going around in circles because our empathy is misplaced. 

 

 

[KenKadz]

Who stopped the trade in dogs being shipped to Cambodia and Vietnam for food?

[oldlakey]

8 hours ago, Kasset Tak said:

I was bitten by a dog my first year here in Thailand, I hit it hard to get it of me but I was stupid enough to go to the police to report it (back then I lived 100m from the police station). 2 police officers went with me to see the dog and it's owner and when they had made sure that the dog was not hurt they just told me that there was no problem... They would not prosecute me for harming the dog.

Now thats funny really funny

Just to clarify it for a few of our members, I am referring to the police attitude not the dog bite

[Keesters]

12 minutes ago, Jimdbim said:

 

Is it not parents sole responsibility to protect the child from all dangers?

 

or is everyone and everything else responsible for someone else's stupidity and mistakes ?

 

In a truly caring society everyone should take some responsibility. Had proper responsibility been taken by the citizens of this country and its elected officials to realize the dogs should not be there  the girl would never have been injured.

 

[farcanell]

11 minutes ago, Jimdbim said:

 

Is it not parents sole responsibility to protect the child from all dangers?

 

or is everyone and everything else responsible for someone else's stupidity and mistakes ?

 

Asked and answered many times over in the above 185 posts.... But... Once more, just for you...The short answer is NO... It's way more far ranging than that, although, undoubtedly, the parents do need to "share" in the blame.

 

All parties that have allowed circumstances to develop, that have led to the event, are partly to blame... From a safety perspective... This is now commonly referred to as all the holes in the cheese lining up.

 

its really not to hard to come up with analogies to show were others are culpable in any event, and not just to poor unfortunates such as this wee child.... Think on the issue of public safety, and who is responsible for the safety of the public.

 

in many countries... This would lead to a lawsuit, against other individuals or institutions, as we all know... But this is Thailand, so that won't happen... But saying that, does not mean that other parties or institutions do not bear some responsibility for what has happened.

 

 

[metisdead]

Inflammatory posts and replies have been removed. 

[farcanell]

With "best" perhaps meaning  the most advantageous outcome.... Of course there is a "best" solution.

 

it might not appease all, but that is beside the point.... But this needs to be determined by those authorities in place, to ensure public safety, (the same ones that I earlier attributed a portion of "blame" too)  perhaps in conjunction with the community.

[stegee]

the idiots who continually feed them should be held responsible.. if they weren't being fed then they'd move on..

[Jimdbim]

42 minutes ago, Keesters said:

 

In a truly caring society everyone should take some responsibility. Had proper responsibility been taken by the citizens of this country and its elected officials to realize the dogs should not be there  the girl would never have been injured.

 

 

And if 7-11 was not built there then parents would not have gone shoping there and no attack would have happened?

 

No . Sorry , no scapegoating to support your point.

 

parents are to blame and parents only.

 

parents who are well aware of the dangers, parents who have been well aware of the dangers and parents who failed in their duties no matter what the excuses are.

 

naturally it does not justify the pain and suffering of the little girl, nor does the scapegoating.

 

this time it was a dog , next time it could be a car or a bike or other millions of dangers facing a child on the main road.

[Jimdbim]

41 minutes ago, farcanell said:

 

Asked and answered many times over in the above 185 posts.... But... Once more, just for you...The short answer is NO... It's way more far ranging than that, although, undoubtedly, the parents do need to "share" in the blame.

 

All parties that have allowed circumstances to develop, that have led to the event, are partly to blame... From a safety perspective... This is now commonly referred to as all the holes in the cheese lining up.

 

its really not to hard to come up with analogies to show were others are culpable in any event, and not just to poor unfortunates such as this wee child.... Think on the issue of public safety, and who is responsible for the safety of the public.

 

in many countries... This would lead to a lawsuit, against other individuals or institutions, as we all know... But this is Thailand, so that won't happen... But saying that, does not mean that other parties or institutions do not bear some responsibility for what has happened.

 

 

 

No body cares what happens in other countries and what other countries do is hardly a role model for the rest , otherwise you would not be here.

 

you can say same thing over and over again, may be in your mind it will make it a fact, but it does not.

 

parents duty to ensure child safety at all times , it is parents duty to educate the child in all aspects 

 

it is no one else's responsibility.

 

as already pointed out countless times , this time it was a dog, next time a car, a drain a pot hole and the list goes on.

 

time people start taking responsibility for their actions, inactions and just plain stupidity.

 

roads have speed limits , yet it does not stop idiots from speeding.

 

thailand has Soi dogs yet Idiots continue to let kids play around them without supervision.

 

in this case , you do not know if the dog was sleeping and child started to pull its tail or tongue or whatever. Clearly this dog lived there and did not attack anyone.

 

kids are known to do silly things to animals , and parents were not there to stop it. 

[StrandedBusinessPerson]

Seems like there is plenty of blame to go around, but the OP asked "who should be responsible for dogs outside shops?" - well, that would be the people running the shop, who should report strays to the appropriate government agency - that is unless they want to be sued. Just like they should report sticks of dynamite or clean up shards of glass on the pavement, shop owners are responsible for the safety of their establishment, within reason. But who is responsible for the child's safety is ultimately up to the parents. Who knows what the little girl did to provoke an attack... after all, most street dogs are harmless if left alone. Regardless, here's hoping the child recovers.

[evadgib]

Neutering/spaying of strays has failed completely in Thailand. Elsewhere we used to receive  bounty payments for squirrel/rabbit/fox/stoat tails, crow/pigeon wings etc. If they introduced similar here for dog and cat tails this feral menace would be eradicated in as little as 2 years.

Edited August 26, 2016 by evadgib

[chainarong]

If the law states dogs are protected,  ( for whatever reason )including stray Soi dogs , then it is the government who is resposible , but I wouldn't hold my breath , maybe Prayut will invoke the versatile section 44 on the dog.........................