It is in the genetic make up of dogs and humans to kill. We both eat meat and defend ourselves and the ones we love or things we need.

I'm assuming that the 'only the baby' is referring to my post??? I'm not sure that you read any of the rest of my post. I cannot say how badly I feel for the baby, nor even the parents who must feel awful especially the dad who brought home the extra dog. This poor dear baby never had the chance to do anything, who knows who she could have become. I never meant to belittle the value of her life, and would always say her life was priceless. But mealy that in these situations the dogs are not thought of as they (IMO) should. They are labelled as being vicious and nasty when actually they were just doing what dogs should.
Anyway my point is that I didn't mean to offend anyone by saying 'only the baby and the parents are thought of' and I'm not sure how or why that has anything to do with me or anyone else has children. You do not know me or my situation, even if in fact I may have previously had children or what has happened in my life, so I really do have an issue with the comment I think 'only a person with no children' could possibly use a phrase like that.
In these situations trainers, breeders, behaviourists, vets, the news etc should be explaining to owners/parents (especially new parents) the signs to watch out for and measures that can be taken rather than branding these 2 specific dogs as monsters as ALL dogs act on impulse and have some pray drive.

Her phrase said "often only the baby and parents are thought of." There is often no sympathy for the dog who didn't even know that what he did was wrong, yet usually loses his life for that same mistake.

It's unfair to quote only that part, because it's a part of an entire line. People with children don't realize that to people without them, their dogs sometimes mean far more to them than they do to people with children.

It's easy for a person with a child to say "Of course my dog dies if he hurts a child". Malka even said she'd kill the dog with her own hands. But to people like me, with no children and no attachment to human beings I don't know, it's much harder.

As a person with no fondness for children and no desire to ever have any, I can sympathize with people who truly would want their dogs back if the dog hurt or killed a baby. I understand their feelings.

I would not willingly sacrifice my dog for someone, I don't care who that person is. I don't love them, I love my dog. I don't even know them. They have done nothing for me. It may sound cruel, but all of that is true.

I could shoot my own "only" statement regarding people with children and dog attacks on children... but I won't do that. Make no mistake about this... I'd fork over any of my dogs to the law if they mauled a child.

If you have a child, you will never understand how some people don't think of random kids as "higher" than their doggy companion. I go around kids often, I want to make sure Nigredo never becomes aggressive with them... but I cannot say that I take any delight in it.

If my dog hurt or killed a child, I'd fess up but I'd fight to get the dog back. It would help none most likely, but I can't say I'd let them put the dog down without a fight.

I KNOW that people are higher up on the scale (since we are the most harmful, malicious, and destructive creatures on the planet, it's arguable whether we should be)... but if my dog was facing death, I wouldn't be able to accept it at that point.

An excellent well balanced post without the hysterics of other posts.

Any woman who has ever carried a baby inside her for nine months, who eventually delivers that baby [and believe me, it is not called "labour" for nothing], has heard that baby's first cry and has smelled the special newborn odour - which is from where it came, ie from inside your body - would never ever want a dog that then killed that baby near them again.

It is very easy for people who have never carried and then delivered a baby to say that they would forgive their dog and do anything to keep it ...

...but as I have already said on this thread, if my beloved Pereg, who I love more than I ever thought it possible to love a dog - killed a baby - I would kill her.

Thank you for that.
And my dog is as much part of my family as my parents, siblings and nephews and even my OH. We have been together nearly 9 years now and I still put my dog first. Yes if I had any current of my children maybe that would be different, but I don't think he would mean any less to me or my OH. I understand he is a dog and he is treated like one regarding training etc but he is a family member too.
I would report it if he attacked a child just as I would report my OH or brother if they attacked a child, but while I would disown a human as they know why it's wrong I couldn't give up on a dog who doesn't understand and have the morals and empathy to understand. They need training before the attack has chance to occur and supervision for their whole lives. To protect themselves as well as humans or other animals who lose their lives because of it.

I totally agree!

How on earth would you "kill her" then? Stab her to death, strangulation, bullet through the head? What would be more "gentle?" Shocking.

My dogs mean as much to me as someone's children do to them. They are MY family and as such their needs and welfare comes before that of a stranger's, whether that be human or canine. Some of us with such relationships with our dogs take as much offense as those of you who claim "only parents" could understand the devastation that occurred in the tragedy in question.

This is a forum with a great deal of opinionated people. It would be nice to see that while not everyone agrees with each other and the various viewpoints expressed here, that people can have their say without being jumped upon and having their posts picked apart.

I agree with you, but please... take it easy on Malka. It's just like she said, we don't understand their viewpoint, and they do not understand ours. She feels that all children are worth more than her dog. She believes that any dog that kills a child should die on the spot.

I cannot see Malka being inhumane or cruel to Pereg in any way, regardless of how harsh she might have stated that. I don't think she'd beat her to death or stab her or anything. I hope not.

However; I can't agree with her mentality and I'm with you. My dogs mean as much to me as other people's kids mean to them. I could never turn on my dog for attacking a stranger, it's not even the dogs fault, it would be my fault.

Understand where death and tragedy are in place, that emotions WILL run high and people that don't agree will get defensive at least a little bit. I tried hard not to get defensive, but was unable to do so.

At the end of the day... there is simply a huge disagreement that cannot and will not ever be resolved. We all have to agree to disagree or this WILL get VERY ugly (it's already starting to get ugly).

She stated she wouldn't wait for her to be gently PTS though? So how would she rather she go? Unless Malka herself is a vet and could humanely euthanize her dog then and there of course. I have no idea.

If Pereg killed a baby she would not wait for the baby to be put gently "to sleep". She would have killed it. Stum. Just like that.

Now I know she would not do such a thing because she never leaves my side and has never been near a baby, newborn or not. But in such a situation that is unimaginable to me that she did so? No. I would not wait for my vet to come out and euthanise her.

Actually I do not know what I would do.

I felt bad enough when some bar steward dumped a tiny two or three week old kitten outside, knocked on my door and ran away - and me not seeing the kitten opened the door with Pereg on her tether, and she killed it.

Of course there are feelings for the dog/s too. It/they didn't kill from spite, but from instinct.

That instinct though is what would make any dog that has proven to be a killer dangerous and is exactly why no one would take on such a dog.

Would it even be fair to the dog to do so. No one can say categorically with a 100% guarantee that the dog would have no opportunity to kill again. Such thinking would be very dangerous.