No. Definitely not. It would be the same as shooting a horse that had kicked or a cow that charged. We are losing the ability to see animals as animals, not hairy people. Sometimes I despair when hearing people attribute human motives to their dogs...`he`s wilful / naughty / attention-seeking. He`s doing it on purpose ...to show you he`s the boss...to make you feel guilty.
Animals react. They have learned behaviour. They really don`t have a hidden agenda. They are stressed or frightened or desperate or enraged when they attack. It is never unprovoked unless the animal is sick (rabid or brain-damaged).
Because we have become so civilised that we rarely have contact with other species, unless they are food or entertainment, we are in danger of losing the link with the natural world.
oh dear i didn`t mean to rant...sorry.

No. I agree with the others. & i disagree with the suggestion that humans mean more than a dog, are "better" & therefore any dog that "dares" to bite a human must be destroyed ...never mind the hell us humans may have caused to that dog

snorri your such a rebel

Needless to say, this didn't happen in the Twilight Zone, but in a major city "doon sooth". Twilight Zonians generally have an affinity with animals and tend not to abuse them (although there have been one or two incidents with yoofs tormenting cats and dogs - few and far between).

Snorri

it all depends on the situation,i rehabilitate dogs that have done just that,bitten.....some dogs must be put down because of blood line history and there is no way of ensuring puplic saftey .in most cases there is a ligit reason,and training of humans is needed ....but when a dog kills a child there is no question for the reason.....

sorry, what do you mean by the last sentence?

Only pts if there is no other option. Life is precious - dog or human! However, if a dog was totally out of control and not responding to training, then I feel pts would be the only answer.

when a dog kills a child or anyone ,that dog should be killed with out any investigation........sorry so vage...phil

I think there is a huge difference between a single bite and a full on attack.

As a general rule (there are bound to be exceptions!) I think that those dogs that give a single bite - whether out of pain or fear (or even warning 'aggression') should be given a second chance. But even with a single bite, if there is no obvious reason and there was definite intent by the dog, I'd be very uneasy about the dog's future.

Where the dog goes in for a 'full on' attack, personally I'd be less keen to see these given a second chance for various reasons.

Well said

I rem getting bit when I was a kid (not nasty) and I got told off for making the dog bite me (and it was my fault)

If I heard any dog I know had bitten I would ask what the person had done to deserve it

I guess there will be some cases where the dog is so hyper reactive and there just isnt an experienced person who is willing to home them and take the care to make sure the dog is never in a situation where it can attack
and there are so many dogs needing homes that I guess it is understandable that some dogs will need to be PTS

But with any pet the first thing should be to find out why, then figure out how to train the dog a better way of coping with that situation
PTS should always be the last option