KEY POINTS:
Here is an earlier selection of your views:
Tracey Truman
Maybe this old lady shouldn't have bent over a strange dog and tried to pat it. Anyone with dogs will tell you bending over them is seen as threatening to a dog, especially if the dog doesn't know that person. If someone I didn't know bent over me I would bite them too.
Michelle
Dont try and pat dogs that you dont know this is clearly the old womans fault not the dog or their owners! I find it disgusting that the dog owner could possibly be punished for the stupidity of the woman!
Keri
I understand that this lady was only bending over to pat the dog and was bitten but...As a child your parents teach you not to pat animals that aren't family pets! A supermarket is a busy place and a dog could very easily be unsettled in an area with so many strangers walking past. If some one leans over even the friendliest dog it's going to freak out and try to defend itself if it feels unsettled. My own dog we call a flowerpot because it's a rotti X and might as well be a cat it's that unferocious but when she was put into an environment with huge amounts of foot traffic and heaps of other dogs around barking she freaked! She lay down on the ground and wouldn't let anyone near her and this was completely out of character for her. Personally I think perhaps the owner shouldn't have taken the dog to the supermarket but the lady shouldn't have walked over and stood over it to pat it never-the-less.You dont walk up to strangers animals!
Sanjesh
The question is how many more loved ones do we as a community have to loose like that before something is done about it. Its just plain unacceptable that someone dies like this - theres no two ways about it. Yes the responsibility lies with the dog owners, after all they are the ones who have brought the dog into the community. We can criticise gun laws in America all we want but it seems we need some serious changes to dog regulations in our own country. How many dog owners out there a willing to live with the fact that their dog killed an innocent person??
Lisa Young
he law itself is not the problem. It's that the laws made by the government are not enforced. No law is going to be any good if it is not enforced. In regard to the recent fatal dog attack, of course the family doesn't want to press charges as the owner of the dog is one of their own. I bet if it was not a family member then they sure would want to press charges.
Robert L
These types of dogs are nothing more than killers that have been breed to fight. People insisting on owning these dogs should be subject to screening similar to firearms license holders. Fee' would apply to fund the management overhead, inspections of the owners properties and interviews held with potential owners to establish the need for owning such a dangerous animal. In the event of incident harsh jail sentences apply - it's all about "responsibility for ones actions" something Labour seems to struggle with.
Anne Cross
Dog laws as they stand are adequate, they just need to be put into practise and managed properly. The public also need to be educated - one does not bend down and pat any tethered dog. Leave them alone when tied up - Rottweiler or not!We tried to ban pitbulls a few years ago, but oh no, the Government knew better.
Mark
Dogs can't be bred to be vicious anymore than humans can. Unfortunately too many people live with this belief system. Dogs like kids are predominately products of their environment. When a child or dog acts up it's up to the parent to sanction the inappropriate behaviour. Unfortunately kids and dogs have bad parents/owners. What breed of dog is responsible for the most dog bite in the United States? Golden Retrievers. Parents and dog owners need to be held responsible for their kids and dogs misbehavior. Licence dog owners? Yes Licence parents? Yes!
Jason Lake
A clear example of the useless Labour Government and their ridiculous 'Dog Micro-Chipping Law'. Once again, the dogs responsible for this attack were not registered, therefore not Micro-Chipped. Well done Labour, you have such a great handle on the real issues at hand.
Robert
Interesting so many people blame the owners and defend the dogs with talk of their loyalty. I guess the Staffy cross was perhaps being fiercely loyal and was protecting it's owners patch, however misplaced. A number of dangerous dogs are not labelled as dangerous because of their size or power, but because they can be unpredictable. When they snap, they can kill. How many kids and family members have been savaged by their own dogs? How many dog attacks on family members are never reported? I'd like to see an increase in the number of dog rangers with the ability to euthanize dogs after a three strikes rule. If a dog is found out on the street once, there is a fine. Next time, the fine is bigger. A visit to the owner's home is made and they are warned of the consequences and assisted with ideas on making the premises dog escape proof. After that, if the dog is found on the street, the owner is just being negligent, and the dog can be put down. The owner is then not allowed to own a dog for a period of time - say 12 months. Dogs that aren't chipped or registered when found on the street are euthanized immediately, unless an owner is present who can pay for these to be done straight away. It seems to me that people need to take some responsibility for the actions of their dogs (and children, but that's another matter). Unfortunately, many of the meanest dogs are found in some of the meanest streets, where people may have little regard for the law, or cash to pay fines, let alone registration and chipping fees. How to get these people to understand that having dogs is a privilege is an uphill battle.
Paul
Forget dogs, licence the owners. Just like a car, you want a dog?, you need a licence, farmers as well.
Ronaldo Xavier
This case is definitely a tragedy, and the negligent behavior of the owners leading to the attack and death of that poor woman is unacceptable. But I agree with those who've replied in stating that the onus of responsibility lies completely with the owner. If you can't control your dog, you should be held accountable.If that means a security clearance and certification to own a dog deemed "menacing", so be it.Banning the breed is akin to "cutting your head off to cure a headache". it doesn't solve the root of the problem...which is people/owners. And those of you presenting your opinions as facts, can you please provide evidence/links to your claims? if you're gonna make a claim, please back it up with evidence, a link, a report/research etc.quote:'"It's not a Rottweiler problem or a pit bull problem," said Randall Lockwood, the Humane Society's vice president for research and educational outreach. "It's a people problem."'
Richard
Yes this could have been avoided, but it has nothing to do with breed. The best dog laws in the world are useless without enforcement, As long as this is left to local government the situation will not change unless funding is increased and this won't happen either. Banning particular breeds of dog has never worked anywhere else so why would it work in NZ. What has been shown to work are strong registration, containment and leash laws along with publicly funded spay/neuter programs. Have a look at the City of Calgary to see what can be done.
Dorothy Martin
The District Councils and the Government and pretty much everybody in NZ knows that these breeds are bred to kill and protect, but mainly kill.....they should be banned - the councils are aware of the killer breeds and they should all be banned. Too many people have lost their lives and/or quality of life through dog attacks and most of these attacks have been done by the said killer breeds. Get rid of them, and their owners also need to take responsibility. Owners and breeders of pit-bulls are aware of their behaviours and accept full responsibility the minute they take one into their care - they should be held accountable !!!!!These breeds have even been known to attack their owners, therefore, they are uncontrollable at the best of times.
Karen
Any marauding dog is a danger to the public. The only reason the public perceive the bull terrier type as more dangerous is because the media have demonised them. If every dog attack was published the public would realise what a hatchet job this is. If Dog Control had done their job that poor woman would still be alive. Get out in your vans and pick up the problem dogs - you know where they are and who owns them. fine the b'jeezus out of those feckless owners and if need be ban them from owning dogs. If you haven't the courage to do your job then do something else. There is no excuse for this problem.
Keith
Dogs should have an annual test were they are assessed for their likelihood of attacking a stranger. Dog that fail the test can then be classified as dangerous. The current laws are strict. They should be enforced. It sounds that there are not enough dog control officers in the area where the latest attack happened.
I Hutcheson
To all those that propose banning dangerous breeds. What about the labrador that bit me, as well as the foxy, the german shepard e.t.c..., all dogs that have bitten people I know. My nanas poodle that would growl and bite anyone who came close (which our family sees as a good thing). All dogs have the potential to do harm, as humans do. The criminals will simply call their dog a cross-breed or mongrel. I have owned a so called dangerous breed for ten years. She is well trained and puts the dogs she meets at the park to shame with her exemplary behaviour. My solution: all unregistered dogs are impounded and euthanasied. All dog owners and property are checked in an interview. Owners, dog rangers and councils are held accountable for any lapses. On top of that use existing laws to dish out stronger penalties for the perpetrators. Owning a dog is a privilege, not a right.
Sandra
Great - yes please do ban dangerous dogs, but since there is absolutely nowhere in the world that this has been successfully done, what sort of trip are people on if they think it can be done here? Dogs can be dangerous if they are bred in the wrong way for the wrong reason and/or raised in the wrong way or for the wrong reason and/or kept in the wrong way or for the wrong reason. This government had their chance to solve this problem but passed it as being too hard. Dog owners should be licensed just the same as car drivers and gun owners are. But that's too hard, so much easier to attack a dog that "looks" wrong to the people passing the laws.
Rob
Ban / regulate the owners not the breed. I can't comment on the 'Pit Bull' but I do know a little bit about the 'Staffie' having owned them and currently owning one. I chose a Staffie to own after much reading on the breed and it is for this 'Temperament' below that I still own one. Temperament : The Staffordshire Bull Terrier appeared in the top 10 breeds most suitable for families and especially children in a report researched and published by Southampton University in 1996. This breed is highly intelligent, eager to please and very people friendly. It has a special empathy with children and it is for this it is best known. It adapts readily to most situations making it the foremost all purpose dog. Staffordshire Bull Terrier puppies are very easy to house train.This was taken off the breed standard from the NZ Kennel Club website.Any dog can go bad especially when mistreated. It is time to regulate the owners owners to prevent terrible situations like this occuring again in the future but banning specific breeds won't work as the types of people owning 'dangerous dogs' will just find another breed to focus on.
Holly
Attacks like this can and should be prevented, as the owner of a Staffy cross (considered by some a dangerous dog) I believe it is up to the owners. As a dog owner you are responsible for training and controlling your dog (making sure it is in a fully fenced area at all times when it is not with you). As far as banning dangerous dogs such as Mastiffs, Staffy's, Bull terriers etc, I would like to point out that Labrador retrievers are responsible for more dog attacks in the world than any other breed but no one has ever thought of banning them. Staffy's on the other hand have been voted one of the top ten most popular and compatible dogs in the world. A recent ASPCA compatibility study found that both American Pitbulls and Staffy's far out ranked the Labrador in terms of loyalty, affection and nature. They only get there bad reputation because they were originally bred to fight. It is all about how the owner handles the dog as a dog will behave how you train it to. Don't blame the dog blame the owner. Dog attacks are terrible and I personally would take 100 per cent responsibility if my dog attacked anyone. That is because I do everything I can to make sure my dog cannot get out on the street, is well trained and will do anything I say without hesitation, if anything happened it would be my fault for not training her properly not hers. If all dog owners acted as such there would be no dog attacks. I've been bitten by a Toy poodle, Jack Russell and Border collie and as a child I was frequently chased down the street by a Labrador that killed my cat when I was 8. My first dog was attacked by a Labrador and my Staffy cross by a Jack Russell at puppy play school, the Jack Russell had to be prized off my dogs face where she took out a chunk of skin and was banned from the rest of the course as she had attacked my dog for no reason and my dog did not retaliate. I personally am more scared of little yappy dogs than the so called "dangerous" breeds as at least with those breeds you can't get fooled by appearances. To all you people out there saying dangerous dogs should be banned, the dogs don't start out dangerous it's the people that raise them that make them that way.
Molly
I love dogs and I hate it when people don't look after them, unlike humans dogs behaviour is based on how there owners treat them, frankly I don't think there is much you can do about it unless you have people patrolling every street. I have to say that I travel through Otara (on the bus) to work each day and there always seems to be dogs on the loose in that suburb more than others. Typical South Auckland people cant be responsible for children what makes you think they care about dogs?
Michelle D
Its not the dogs - its how they're (not) being trained or raised or loved properly.
Lindsay
How much does it take for someone to be held accountable? Many innocent people/children have been disfigured for life by these animals....and now a death! Govt/Councils/kennel clubs drag out the same old time honoured excuses every time someone gets mauled by these animals of, "it's not the dogs, it's the owners!!". Well, if that's the case, why were military AK47 assault firearms and the like banned in N.Z.?? It was not the firearm that killed/maimed, it was the person (the owner) that pulled the trigger. Yet the Govt here and Australia still outlawed the ownership of Military style firearms!. Where's the difference? Irresponsible firearm owners, irresponsible dog owners! Come on, Govt, Police....at least now have the balls to do something about it. How much does it take????...another death or two??
Cathy
have qualifications in canine behaviour so understand why dogs do what they do. Its never the dog's fault. he problem with aggression (and any other undesirable behaviour) is that the dogs were likely never socialised properly as puppies, so part of the blame should fall on the breeders' doorstep. Having said that, dogs can regress even after being well socialised because dogs learn behaviour such as aggression is acceptable if the behaviour is not corrected or worse, if it's encouraged. Puppies must be socialised from the day they are born to all sorts of things; loud noises, smells, people (especially children and men) in order for them to accept and habituate to the everyday activities of the human environment. I have known some lovely, gentle Staffies, Rottweilers, German Shepherds and knew a very aggressive Golden Labrador. As we all know, dogs end up in the wrong hands time and time again and "certain people" think it's cool or they're tough if they own a Pitbull or Doberman especially if the dog is aggressive. The mentality of these idiots is unbelievable! Another thing is that these dogs are tied up their whole lives and dogs do not like to be tethered because they feel restricted and vulnerable, not to mention bored to tears, so become aggressive as a result. Anybody can teach a dog to be aggressive, but because breeds like Pitbulls, Akitas and Staffordshire Bull Terriers were originally bred to fight, one has to be particularly watchful of these dogs and set strict boundaries from when they're puppies. If people were more educated and willing to listen to those of us who know canine behaviour and can recognise signs of early aggression, then maybe there'd be less attacks. And as for the punishment owners should get? Manslaughter.
Sherylee Teoh
Yet again responsible owners will be punished because some people out there cannot care for their dogs. I think that the owners should be punished not the dogs. I own a dog and she is registered, microchipped and safely locked up behind a fence with a big sign on the gate, yet this latest attack will end up cost people like me, in higher fees and yet another law to stop us from enjoying our dogs. It won't be long before the government says we can even walk our dogs down the street on a lead! I say punish the owner.
Mel
People say that it's not the dog that's dangerous, it's the owner, which is true to a certain extent, but when did you last read about someone being mauled to death by a cocker spaniel? Almost without fail it's a pitbull or a Staffy cross. If they are not to be banned outright, any dog classed as dangerous should not be able to be bred, sold or purchased without both the breeder and owner holding dog owner licences, and the dog being registered as part of the purchase process.
Brenda Turton
The dogs pay for their lack of training by the owner, with their lives.Automatic jail sentence for owners whose dog/s maim and kill.Also a set fine of at least $10,000.00 (lump sum) to be paid by the dog/s owner to the family of the victim. The dog/s owner never allowed to own another dog. (A killer dog reflects the nature and treatment of the owner).
Deborah
Why haven't the dog control agencies stepped up to the mark and use this awful tragedy to educate NZers. Dogs that attack don't attack from the word go - they build up to it. The neighbours of this tragedy have already said the dogs always wandered and recently were starting rush and snarl. If these careless dog owners are putting their heads in the sand we need to stand up and look after our neighbourhoods. I have contacted dog control recently with two incidents where the dogs were jumping fences and becoming (daily) progressively more territoral - now that I have complained these dog owners in particular whether being scared by fines have actually contained their dogs - in my complaining I have effectively stopped the cycle and possibly prevented a biting. I truely believe NZer's need to start looking after their own and their neighbourhoods. Stop looking the other way and contact the correct authorities and be proud of where you live!
Peter
How many more people have to die before this government takes action? Stop prosecuting law abiding dog owners and punish the owners of dangerous dog's. The pitbulls and staf teriers etc. should be banned and put down, they have time and time again been proved to be extremely aggressive breeds, once they start attacking they dont stop. If I see a pitbull roaming my street I would not hesitate to shoot it myself whether it was being aggressive or not, no question! When ever I drive through Otara I see multible dogs roaming freely, no action is taken because the dog control authorities know that they will never recover the cost of impounding them, its all about revenue gathering as usual.
SF
Pitbull Terriers are, like the other identified breeds of dangerous dogs, fighting dogs. If our Animal Control staff are unable to identify cross bred animals for classification then they need some training. It's not that hard - come on! It is interesting to see that there are always heaps of those cross breeds offered for adoption at the SPCA all over the country. Why? Irresponsible owners are the biggest problem. Why do people let their dogs roam around? They obviously don't really care about the dogs - so why have them? Animal Control staff should, rather than worry about barking complaints, patrol the streets more and pick up those stray dogs. If it's one of the breeds identified or a cross breed of, it is destroyed - without another thought. If it's not, people have the option to claim their pet back. On those patrols they may also issue demands to owners of those breeds to de-sex their animal, roaming or not and to fully fence their property. If they don't like it - though! It's their choice to have a dog like that. Staffordshire Bull Terriers in turn are not a fighting dog and not at all vicious. No, I don't own one! I am just an informed member of the public. Staffies haven't got the inclination nor the physical attributes to be able to overpower a person. However, there is a new breed in the country called the American Staffordshire Bull Terrier, who is no more than a legalised version of a Pitbull. There are absolutely no physical differences between those two breeds. Come on Dog Control people - get you act together!
Layvahson
First of all condolences for Virginia's family at this time. I love dogs and I hate to see them put down because of 'careless' owners!! Blame the owners not the dogs!! I have personally seen owners mistreat their dogs and it is so sad to see. I reported these owners and all they get is a fine. The dogs should be taken off them!
Ray Gilbert
There are so many good breeds of dogs to choose from that there is no reason to allow the ownership of such dangerous breeds as pitbulls. Destroy them all now. Secondly, owners of dogs which attack should be automatically held liable as if they themselves had committed the assault. In this particular case manslaughter would be a copout - the owner should face murder charges
Tuffy Schott
We, as a society, require that a person demonstrate the ability to operate motor vehicles, own firearms, use explosives etc. After proper training and testing we then give that person a licence, and hold them responsible, legally and financially for any miss use of the item. Its a case of licensing the owner as well as the dog.
Stacey
I agree the owner should be held responsable. It is obvious these dogs were not your average friendly household pets & the owner clearly would have known this. They should have been restrained or fenced so that they were not a risk to people around them. Shame on those ignorant people who own animals with no idea how to care or control them. If you choose to own an animal then you are responsible for it. Its the same story with animal abuse. It is only the by the fault of the owner they be neglected & abused. What is wrong with some people!
Brett
These aggressive dogs very often are owned by people who want to intimidate others. It is not surprising therefore that they are very often owned by gang members, families of gang members and gang member wannabees. All too often the owners lack an education, responsibility, good judgement and a clue. They refer to them as "Pities" (oh how cute). These dogs aggressive killer instincts are usually a reflection of their owners or to make up for the lack of strength in their weak character. They enjoy observing people as they cross the road to avoid them. Very often in places like south Auckland you will see the infants of these dog owners feebly walking them with a lead ready to snap or wandering around looking for their next victim. I say let's ban them...fast, before another mother is killed or baby is mauled.
Sarah K
These people who turn these dogs into aggressive animals need to be investigated. Why do they need to have such vicious pets? I think the underground dog fighting is way more prevalent than we would like to think. I'm sure if all these people owned sausage dogs, we would be getting attacked/mauled by these dogs instead. I also think that pitbulls etc should be banned in NZ as unfortunately it is up to the owner to give them the best care and love, so it does not turn into a human threat. This is not the intention of these types of scum, as we can see in this latest attack. It's animal abuse that turns into human tragedy.
David
The solution to wandering dogs (as involved in the attack in Murupara) is to shoot them, dogs should not be allowed to wander. This would also reduce worrying of stock. This wouldn't prevent dog attacks completely of course, many people are attacked by their own pets or those of friends and relatives. It would probably help though.
R.J
This incident is the 4th fatal dog mauling in New Zealand since 1997.That's 1 fatal attack every 2.5 years? The stereotyping that comes out at times like this over Pitbulls is ridiculous. The idea of banning a breed of dog is a joke u can't just ban something because of a tiny percentage at fault.I would like to refer to Diane M and her comment: "even the low lifes who seem to have a need to own the more 'dangerous' breeds. Maybe cowards would be a better word than low lifes." As a proud Pitbull owner I would like to say, you have never owned a Pitbull, This is fairly obvious from your comment,How could you comment on "dangerous" dog ownership when you have never owned a "dangerous dog? Would you tell me how to drive a car if you have never driven? Keep your personal digs to yourself and dont comment on something you know nothing about. I have owned pitbulls for years and I have never had any problems along with the hundreds of owners that share my opinion If raised properly these dogs are no more a risk to children/adults than any other breed of dog.
Mont
Stop these dogs being in NZ....ie outlaw the breed.
Albert
I am a dog lover, but would like to see ban on all dangerous dogs. Some says it is not the dogs, but the owners. How then do we know if the owner/s are responsible? Until someone gets hurt badly or die? It's too late when that happened.
Diane M
Can attacks like these be prevented? Yes...see my earlier view. If everyone who owned a dog, regardless of breed, were prosecuted automatically if their dog attacked someone, let alone immediately charged with homicide if the victim died, and the full sentence was given, surely this would ensure everyone was more careful with their pets, even the low lifes who seem to have a need to own the more 'dangerous' breeds. Maybe cowards would be a better word than low lifes.
Kathy
I dont understand why people are wanting to ban a particular breed just because they hear about these attack. Dont they realise, just like kids, the way these dogs behaves is a refection of "their parents". Not the breed. Otherwise, shall we do the same thing with cars??? They are so dangerous with people got run over and killed by it. Lets ban it. But no, nobody would even think about banning them. They will say, its not the car that kills but the driver. Well the same thing with dogs. If they were trained well they wont kill. Look at our criminals. I can bet 99.999 per cent of them grew up in a very dysfunctional family and majority of were abused when they were kids. And for our PM to say that she wants to ban all dangerous breed. Well what does she know on bringing up anything. No kids and probably no dogs either. Once again, it is not the dogs dangerous, but the owners. Please go ahead and ban abusive and irresponsible people from owning any dogs. I support for this one.
Rachel Thomson
Registration of dogs will not solve this problem! Roaming dogs will roam whether they have a tag around their necks or not. I feel strongly that it comes back to the owners of the dog and the quality of life they give them. Feeding, bedding, fencing of home etc Put the owners down not the dogs. This sort of thing makes me furious.
Dianne Choquenot
It is clear that the changes to the dog control laws have not worked. The only way this type of attack can be prevented is if the ownership of dogs is regulated the same way as gun ownership. Both have the ability to kill and injure, and only responsible, knowledgeable people should be allowed to own them. I am a dog owner, with a dog that is registered, microchipped and in a fully fenced property. I consider it a privilege to be allowed to have my dog and realise it is a significant responsibility. If stricter regulations were in place then the number of mistreated and abandoned dogs would also decrease. It is insane that such an incident can occur.
Diane M
What more is there to say? The dogs were unregistered, roaming free and of a dangerous breed. What more is there to say? It was a homicide perpetrated by the dog owner/s and they should be prosecuted for manslaughter. Come on New Zealand Police. Stand up and be counted. Let's see some positive action- we're fed up with 'wishy washy charges. Surely this case doesnt need much investigating?
Eldon Wright
Unregistered dangerous dogs: Charge the negligent owner with manslaughter.
Richard Z
I heard a comment by Helen Clark on the radio that while her preference would be simply to ban all dangerous dogs, there was a problem about how to find the right words to define such dangerous dogs and have it enacted into law. I would suggest that if it was Helen Clark's mother, or child, that was killed by one of these dogs, she would have no trouble finding 'the right words'.
Matt
Some dog breeds are notoriously dangerous, e.g pitbulls and Staffi's. Let's not kid ourselves, just ban the wretched things. And the utterly negligent owner in this case should face the full force of the law. But at the same time there's no need to take it out on all dogs or all dogs owners. There are tens of thousands of dogs in NZ and proportionately they are a lot less dangerous than humans.
Barry Hobbs
Of course these attacks can be prevented. Make it illegal to own this type of dog. It's been done in other countries, why not here?
Gabrielle
This problem occurs all over the country. My hometown Wairoa has so many dodgy dogs that there are places that you simply cannot walk along the street for fear of being attacked. Often they are owned by dodgy people - and people are afraid of complaining about the dogs. The dog rangers should enforce the dog laws and not be busting in on p[people and taking their dogs and putting them down as happened with the sickness beneficiary a few weeks ago. They only go for the soft targets while others have clearly illegal and dangerous dogs. What an absolutely horrendous way to die - my sympathies to the family.
Fed up citizen
This is horrible, shocking but not a great surprise given the sad state of things in NZ. This country is now so ridiculously liberal that anyone can own a lethal, unregistered weapon (which is basically what those revolting dogs are) and let it roam around at will. They are far more dangerous than firearms because they cannot be controlled and because any crim can have one. A gun left untouched is harmless, but a psycho dog is not. When the animal kills an innocent passerby, the powers that be just tut-tut and mutter about how terrible it is. The negligent owner, who has been breaking the law, will not receive a fitting punishment. Why the hell is anyone allowed to own these dogs anymore, when they have been banned in many other countries? why can the authorities not react to (or even pre-empt) such tragedies rather than just watching them be repeated? it is well known that many of these dogs are kept for fighting, which is a common hobby of a certain group. "Murupara has a dog control problem" - oh what a surprise! It als