I think so. I mean I don't feel like a dissociative identity but who knows? What's your problem?

I do not have a problem, but anyone who thinks that taking on a dog that has killed a six day old baby is acceptable and would not bother you...

...sorry dear, but you really do have a problem.

Its not my baby. I don't know the family. Apart from thinking it is an awful shame I'm not sure what else is expected. From a management perspective it wouldn't bother me. I'd use the same methods to control or contain a dog that's killed a baby as I would use for a dog that's killed a cat or sheep.

Your message #79. My message #80.

Did you or did you not say

I pray that you never have a child of your own.

edited see above.Considering I said I don't really like children, I'm not sure why you would think I would ever want any. Though if I'm being honest older children are ok in small doses. Its babies and little ones I'm no good with. Doesn't mean I wish harm on them. I just lack the instincts to deal with them. There's enough people breeding anyway without me adding to it.

I think this thread is taking a rather 'silly' turn now all focussing on whether people like children or not or have any or not.

You're acting very immature and condescending with the whole subject of children. I have truly enjoyed all of your dog related posts, but this one is showing you in a different light. Your comments are rude and down right wrong to say to someone who feels different and had different opinions than your own. I hope you continue to post on other topics but this one as you seem like a very nice person.

I am as entitled to post my thoughts on subjects raised on Dogsey as all Dogsey members can.

I do not expect everyone to agree with me, just as I do not agree with everyone else all the time.

Calling me "immature and condescending" was uncalled for.

And I was not rude. I just stated exactly how I felt about the tragic situation.

You were rude, calling me "immature and condescending".

But you WERE rude, Malka. There was no reason to say "Are you for real?" to her. And there was also no reason to say "Dear you do have a problem" or "I pray that you never have children of your own."

Those comments ARE condescending. Because she doesn't agree with you, it means that she has a problem? Maybe it is YOU who has the problem. Ever think of that?

You are judging people, Malka. You really should not do that. Jen, me, DogloverLou, Deltaforcedog and a few other people here (and others worldwide) would also take on such a dog if we had the space or time.

Are you saying we ALL have a problem? Tell me how much sense that makes? We simply don't agree with your thinking. It doesn't make us wrong.

Just because you think any dog that hurts or kills a child should DIE on the spot and doesn't deserve a second chance at life or a proper home, doesn't mean it's the right way of thinking.

It also doesn't mean that everyone else is automatically cruel, barbaric, thinks nothing of children, and it makes them have "a problem". It doesn't. It merely makes them different from you.

Taking on a dog that had killed or hurt a child doesn't mean we don't care about children... it simply means we believe the dog should get another chance at life despite it's past and we'd be willing to give it that chance because we all have very limited/no access to children and believe we could prevent this accident from ever happening again.

If we are correct in our thinking, then why does the dog need to die? As revenge? What good will that do if the dog can live a happy life away from children? Killing the dog won't bring the child back. It won't make the parents feel better.

Kill the dog to prevent another attack? Okay fine. That's reasonable... I understand that completely. But give the dog to someone with no children and ways to handle the dog to prevent another attack? Also fine IMO if it can be done.

It usually cannot and killing the dog is the only reasonable action, I KNOW that... but that is beside the point. The point is that you are having extreme trouble accepting the comments of people who don't agree with you.

I think its all very well for some to state "they would be willing " to give such a dog a home, but lets face it its an empty statement, , simply due to the facts 1) such dogs will be in some form of custody 2) what organisation is going to give these dogs a second chance anyway.

Its an empty statement because it would never happen.

mjfromga I would be very careful if I was you in making such bold statements about your dog and how she would kill a child if she got the chance........ once you write these things down its there for all to see, and God forbid she ever did attack a child you are going to be prosecuted due to the you "knew" she was dangerous.

There is one thing having reactive dogs, but to boldly state you know how dangerous your dog is and it would rip a child's face off if it got the chance ...........well it begger's belief .

I notice the "it would be kept away from children and not get the chance to attack" seems to be the train of thought here by some ,but that's not the point of issue, its the issue that a dog killed a baby most people will never get passed that .. but as its been stated already we done know why these dogs or any for that matter attack and kill a child, and my own thoughts are it may never do it again if it was in a different environment..... but that wont give the dog a get out of jail card.

But the truth of situations like this is, that if a dog kills a human, particularly a child our sense of horror will dictate the outcome of said dog.......for most people the horror of the attack would outweigh any sentiment for said dog........

I think we are all dog lovers but for most of us we can see why such a dog will never get another chance.......

Its easy to say " well I`ll take it on" when the reality of doing so is near non existent.