Along with people stating the dog was not realy being aggressive !!

Thats just it the owner didnt see anything because she wasnt watching which is her own words, she looked away and the dog snapped, for all we know in the time the child could have pulled the dogs ear, poked the dog in the side, pinched the dog, stood on its foot, pulled some of its hair out! we didnt see anything, and nor did the owner..so know we dont know what truely happened nor does the owner, so we can not say that this 'attack' was for no reason.

who said that?

And my point was none of us where within a thousand feet of her or the dog, while the attack went on, yet its funny how so many can say , it was not a real attack, or the child must have done something to the dog!!

So given its all speculation on our part, I think I will go with what the poster saw,,, she looked away for a second or two, she was in the room, she did see the attack, and she did have to pull the dog off the child... that enough for me to make my judgment on!!

You may see it as irresponsible for those of us who say, they would have the dog euthanized, but its even more irresponsible to tell her she got it wrong , the dog did not attack, and they have dealt with aggressive dogs, and fixed them...

would you keep this dog in your house with a child , if it did to you or a child , what she said it did to hers. so unless you can answer yes you would to her.. then its irresponsible of you to suggest that the dog should be given a second chance!!

Its up to Kitty to do what she has to do, and not be made to feel she is awful if she makes the decision to have the dog euthanized.

I don't think anyone said it wasn't a real attack. Although a few have suggested it might not be as bad as we have perceived it to be.

Read the thread,

With respect Pidge, a few have said if this was a "real" attack the dog would have not just scratched the child's face!!

Not once have i said its irresponsible to have the dog pts, i said at this stage i would try other options first.
I have not once said what the owner saw was wrong, i said she didnt see what made the dog attack (which she said herself).
and i also never said the child done something to make the dog attacked, i said it was possible! ohh and i also never said this wasnt a real attack i said it wasnt a very serious attack because i have no doubt in my mind if it was a higly serious attack the child would have had more than a scratch..

I have also never told the women to give the dog a second chance or keep it..I said if it was me then i would want to see if i could get the dog into a home with some one that knows the breed, or into a breed rescue where it will be properly assessed and vet checked! You see i think your putting words into my mouth to fit what you want to say!

and I have read the thread and not one person that i have seen has said the dog wasnt being aggressive, members have just been trying to 'work' out why the dog was aggressive!

ermm,if it meant 'business' it wouldnt of
no-one is saying the dog should stay where it is either

i feel for the family , but i also feel this dog needs a chance too, not an instant death sentance

I'm sorry again, just my two pennies worth.

Keeping the dog seperate from a three year old would be an impossible task, impossible.

My toddler is two and a half years old and can open dog/safety gates, I know this because we have them!

Muzzling the dog on a temporary basis I couldn't go with either it really could cause more issues with him and something I would deem cruel not knowing his full history.

With all due resect just for a few seconds, place yourself in the OP's position, place yourself in the childs position poor baby must have been terrified

I dearly love my dogs, but I love my children more, sorry.