To: JudyB1938
It can't be blamed on an animal who knows no more then the child. It is the owner's fault and the mother of the child for letting her three year old run around unattended a six year old can not be responsible for a three year old. My three year old and six month old have been raised with a pit bull, rotweiller and three other large dogs. Not one of the dogs has even growled at one of my kids. My pitt is pertective of my kids which makes me feel comfortable in my neighborhood.
15 posted on
01/14/2004 2:25:09 PM PST by
sinful_luv
(Pitts are loving)
To: sinful_luv
It can't be blamed on an animal who knows no more then the child. Yes you can. If your dog is capable of killing someone, then it should be behind a fence. Where I live, you have to have a fence around a swimming pool because they pose a danger.
20 posted on
01/14/2004 2:33:53 PM PST by
Snowy
To: sinful_luv
You are INcorrect sir. See post #6.
23 posted on
01/14/2004 2:46:02 PM PST by
ThreeYearLurker
(Dogs are not the equivalent of humans. People who think so are mentally ill.)
To: sinful_luv
Chained pit bulls in the backyard next door to a 3 yr old is a recipe for disaster.
To: sinful_luv
And pit bulls DON'T growl before they attack
To: sinful_luv
Welcome to Freerepublic.
28 posted on
01/14/2004 3:01:42 PM PST by
Pan_Yans Wife
(Freedom is a package deal - with it comes responsibilities and consequences.)
To: sinful_luv
It took 14 posts before someone came on defending the breed (Pit Bull)
Amazing.
36 posted on
01/14/2004 3:28:20 PM PST by
altura
To: sinful_luv
attractive nuisance doctrine There is normally no particular care required of property owners to safeguard trespassers from harm, but an attractive nuisance is an exception. An attractive nuisance is any inherently hazardous object or condition of property that can be expected to attract children to investigate or play[emphasis mine -- hedgie] (for example, construction sites and discarded large appliances). The doctrine imposes upon the property owner either the duty to take precautions that are reasonable in light of the normal behavior of young children--a much higher degree of care than required toward adults--or the same care as that owed to "invitees"--a higher standard than required toward uninvited, casual visitors (licensees).
See: degree of care, invitee, licensee , negligence, nuisance, trespasser
from Rupp's Insurance & Risk Management Glossary. © 2002, NILS Publishing. All rights reserved.
43 posted on
01/14/2004 4:38:08 PM PST by
hedgie
To: sinful_luv
45 posted on
01/14/2004 5:18:19 PM PST by
Pan_Yans Wife
(Freedom is a package deal - with it comes responsibilities and consequences.)
To: sinful_luv
My three year old and six month old have been raised with a pit bull, rotweiller and three other large dogs. Not one of the dogs has even growled at one of my kids.Of course they haven't--your kids and dogs are part of the same "pack", hence your dogs protectiveness of your kids. Everyone else isn't part of your dogs' pack and hence suspect, just like the 3 year old kid in this story.
47 posted on
01/14/2004 6:58:25 PM PST by
randog
(Everything works great 'til the current flows.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson