Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I tell you what, though. I think all of us are capable of reading the city animal code. I'd like to have him point out where in that code it excuses a dog from biting a child in their own home. Which was basically what he claims.
Then I suggest you ask him to explain his decision to you. There may be more to this than the article you posted says.
Last edited by Metlakatla; 01-22-2019 at 03:38 PM..
At the bottom of page 7, there is a section about how to lawfully keep a vicious pet - and one of the requirements is they have to be restrained from contact with other persons or animals. In other words, when the neighbor girl comes over, the dog is in the kennel.
How is this even relevant? It's specific to Tennessee. This didn't happen in Tennessee, and I'm not sure why you're expecting LE in Texas to adhere to Tennessee statutes.
ETA I see you found the right one for the Texas count and posted it a few pages in.
Section 6 B. should explain it to you, but I do encourage you to contact the sheriff for further explanation.
Last edited by Metlakatla; 01-22-2019 at 04:22 PM..
I would have the sheriff deem the dog a "dangerous animal" and preclude him from being off-leash anywhere in public, and say this is his one get out of jail free coupon, next time he attacks a human, he'll be removed and humanely euthanized.
And require the family to carry extra insurance to cover a known dangerous animal on their premises.
You know. The way it's done in any other municipality I know of.
Suburbia is not typically in a municipality. Its in the country where people can spread out and live idealistically amongst the flora and the fauna of the land. It's beautiful, quieter, usually cleaner with fresher air and people are nicer. That's why we have a sheriff calling the shots. It's small town/rural America.
Sometimes, the flora, which is normally serene and beautiful can give you a nasty rash that lasts for months and may come back repeatedly for years. Sometimes the fauna bites you.
I think the punishment should fit the crime. I can agree that precautions need to be taken to protect people, but I will never agree that Fluffy the elderly Pekingese with a nasty temperament needs to be 'humanely euthanized' just because she nipped at people a couple of times. Fluffy has a message - "leave me the @#$% alone!"
I would feel worse about this situation if the 7 year old was mauled or maimed, but she wasn't. Her injuries will heal and she will be laughing and probably playing with the dog again in the future as she grows up.
She might try to pet or play with a raccoon one day, or other wild animal she may come across in her neighborhood. She might get bit or knocked down by any number of things as she lives out her ideal childhood life in suburbia.
I would have the sheriff deem the dog a "dangerous animal" and preclude him from being off-leash anywhere in public, and say this is his one get out of jail free coupon, next time he attacks a human, he'll be removed and humanely euthanized.
And require the family to carry extra insurance to cover a known dangerous animal on their premises.
You know. The way it's done in any other municipality I know of.
wow!!
seriously??
really glad none of my dogs are in your vicinity.....
I don't see in the article linked where Whitney was actually IN the neighbor's house.
This is so unfortunate. The child will undoubtedly be afraid of dogs all her life. I know we all want someone to pay.
The dog didn't know the little one. Whitney was a stranger playing with the children that the dog considered its own pack and the little one was on the dog's property. The adults, Whitney's father and the dog owner, were right there not paying attention.
I don't usually respond to snarky posts, but yes, usually a dog gets one "free bite", and at that time they're deemed a dangerous animal so that the next time this happens it's documented that he's a known biter, has bitten before, and that won't be tolerated.
Because second time around, there's no way to say "we had no idea he'd bite" when there is already a case on file against that animal.
I tell you what, though. I think all of us are capable of reading the city animal code. I'd like to have him point out where in that code it excuses a dog from biting a child in their own home. Which was basically what he claims.
What needs to be discussed here is the difference that exists in state laws Many states have adopted something called "The Dog Bite Statute". This law provides that if a dog bites someone--unless that someone is a prowler--the owner or keeper of that dog is strictly liable for any injuries that result. It is not necessary to prove prior knowledge of the dog's viciousness. It is not necessary to show the dog bit someone else. If you live in a state with a Dog Bite Statute than you are simply responsible when your dog injures another.
Most states now have a Dog Bite Statute. Thirty two out of fifty states according to this.
Some states though adhere to the common law rule and do not have a Dog Bite Statute. Texas appears to be one of those states (this is where this incident occurred). In states that follow the common law, the owner of the dog must have had prior notice of the dog's violent propensities before he is responsible for harm that the dog does. Such notice can take the form of a prior biting incident or it could just simply be based on observations of the dog growling and acting in a threatening and dangerous manner before a biting incident occurs.
I'm not a fan of dogs or irresponsible dog owners and I wish all states would adopt the Dog Bite Statute.
I don't see in the article linked where Whitney was actually IN the neighbor's house.
.
Quote:
"When a family's pet is inside its own home and a child is inside the home of where that pet lives and is bit, then the code says you cannot deem the creature a dangerous animal," Commander Deaton said.
I'm willing to take this guy's word for it. Whitney's parents, on the other hand, strike me as laying the groundwork for some sort of "pain and suffering" lawsuit with their talk of their children being afraid to play outside. Nothing at all has been said about this dog running at large in the neighborhood.
It would be interesting to hear the other family's side of it, but they don't seem to be talking, probably because they were rightly advised not to by their attorney or homeowners insurance company.
As evidenced in the statutes that Clara posted, there are several scenarios in which the sheriff made the right call — and the article didn't provide enough information for anyone here to make that particular call. The sheriff probably also got two different sides of the story from the parents involved.
This kid can grow up to be fine with dogs, but that's up to the parents, so I doubt she will be.
Last edited by Metlakatla; 01-22-2019 at 06:16 PM..
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 2 days ago)
35,604 posts, read 17,927,273 times
Reputation: 50626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metlakatla
How is this even relevant? It's specific to Tennessee. This didn't happen in Tennessee, and I'm not sure why you're expecting LE in Texas to adhere to Tennessee statutes.
ETA I see you found the right one for the Texas count and posted it a few pages in.
Section 6 B. should explain it to you, but I do encourage you to contact the sheriff for further explanation.
I acknowledged that later in this thread, and posted the actual animal code from the county involved in this story.
I acknowledged that later in this thread, and posted the actual animal code from the county involved in this story.
If you'll notice, I caught that as well as pointed out which section of the applicable animal code likely caused the determination by the sheriff's office that you're objecting to. We can't know for sure without more information about what actually happened, but one of those scenarios was probably at play.
The outrage here, that makes this story stand out, is Law Enforcement in this case is not doing a single thing to declare this dog dangerous or censure it, or the owners, in any way.
What about dangerous breeds like Newfoundlands, Bichons, and Black Labs?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
