Dog owners liable for dog bites

[The Nuge]

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-08-09/local/35493805_1_pit-bull-dog-owners-high-court

So know they want to make owners liable for any dog breed biting a person. So if my schutzhund trained German Shepherds bite you, because you assault me - it's my fault. First you take my guns, than you take the bite out of my dogs. So does that mean police K9's are under the same rules?

[Monky]

Well if you didn't have an 'assault' dog

- sent by the free-range electronic weasel attached to my hip.

[Colorado_Outback]

Its all about circumstance.
If you shot a guy walking through the park its murder, if you shot a guy assaulting you with a deadly weapon in the park its self defense..

If an off leash dog runs up on someone in the park and bites them hell yeah the owner should be held liable.

[russian]

Well if you didn't have an 'assault' dog

- sent by the free-range electronic weasel attached to my hip.

Or better yet: high capacity mouth on that dog! Limit the tooth count to 10 and everything will be fine.

[ROFL1]

[The Nuge]

Its all about circumstance.
If you shot a guy walking through the park its murder, if you shot a guy assaulting you with a deadly weapon in the park its self defense..

If an off leash dog runs up on someone in the park and bites them hell yeah the owner should be held liable.

That distinction is not being made. ANY BITE, ANY BREED

[hatidua]

That distinction is not being made. ANY BITE, ANY BREED

-as it should be.

[cstone]

Maryland (my native state)??? In many ways as "nanny state" as any of the other east coast regions.

There used to be an accepted standard that "all dogs get their first bite free." Basically, until an individual dog (nothing breed specific) demonstrated violence, normally through biting a human being, the dog was not put down and the owner was then put on notice that they now possess a violent dog. This would make any subsequent violence by the individual dog a liability for the owner. Some owners would then choose to put their dog down to limit their liability. Other owners would take additional precautions, and yet some other owners would just carry on as usual and take no responsibility for the damage caused by their dog.

Maryland's legislature apparently has not acted swiftly enough for the state courts, so in typical judicial activist fashion, the courts in MD have declared Pitts to be "inherently dangerous" and put all owners on notice that these dogs would not get any "free bites." Owners were on notice just based on the breed of dog. The state legislature's method for countering the courts was to make the decision broader and declaring that "all dogs" are essentially dangerous and all owners will bear full responsibility for their dog, if/when they bite someone.

I love the location. Maryland and the mid-Atlantic region is really a great place. The laws and political climate just plain suck. I am sad that I will never again be able to live where I grew up. The majority of the people living there are willing to cede to the government all individual liberty and rely on the government (state and federal) to provide whatever protection and liberty they may need. It does make me sad. I wouldn't want to be a dog living in Maryland today.

[Jer]

-as it should be.

Agreed. Put the onus on the owners of the dog. If you can't control them then you shouldn't have them. Leash laws exist for a reason. I also think parents should be DIRECTLY accountable for the actions of their children. I bet that would make some of them try just a little bit harder to be better parents.

[Sawin]

Agreed. Put the onus on the owners of the dog. If you can't control them then you shouldn't have them. Leash laws exist for a reason. I also think parents should be DIRECTLY accountable for the actions of their children. I bet that would make some of them try just a little bit harder to be better parents.

Amen.

I have no objection to dog bites being the responsibility of the owner. In fact, I was under the impression that was already the case, is it not? Aren't roughly a third of home-owners insurance claims due to dog bites?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lv2wPsTp-Pw

[Jer]

Amen.

I have no objection to dog bites being the responsibility of the owner. In fact, I was under the impression that was already the case, is it not? Aren't roughly a third of home-owners insurance claims due to dog bites?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lv2wPsTp-Pw

Another fun fact and I'm not solid on the numbers here because I can't remember exactly what they were (remember... fact: 99% of stats are made up. lol) but when I looked into the stats on dog attacks/bites on humans it was done by a male dog 98% of the time and of those 97% were not neutered. Pretty tough to ignore those statistics even though they are +/- 1% of what the actual numbers were.

As a dog owner I'm ALL for owners being held accountable for the actions of their dogs. After all, they are a direct reflection of their owner's training and control methods.

[Great-Kazoo]

Which is why you NEVER place a Beware of DOG sign on your property. That show you have knowledge your dog may be viscous.

Remember
It's the DEED not the BREED

[rondog]

AFAIK, the owner has ALWAYS been responsible if his dog bites someone. But you mentioned your dog biting someone that was ASSAULTING YOU, and IMO that's a game-changer. I'd fight that tooth and nail. Someone's attacking me and my dog's not allowed to protect me? BOOLSHIT!!!

[Jer]

Which is why you NEVER place a Beware of DOG sign on your property. That show you have knowledge your dog may be viscous.

Remember
It's the DEED not the BREED

I post signs on the gates so that if some jackass utilities guy decides he needs to come into my hard he'll close the gate behind him so the dogs don't get out if they're out. That's the thought anyway. I was lied to when we built this house and was told there were NO utility pedestals on this lot. I was able to get the utilities to move one of them but the other I was told it wouldn't be possible as there wasn't enough slack in the line. Holy shit, is this a thread about utilities? I'll shut up now. lol

[Jer]

AFAIK, the owner has ALWAYS been responsible if his dog bites someone. But you mentioned your dog biting someone that was ASSAULTING YOU, and IMO that's a game-changer. I'd fight that tooth and nail. Someone's attacking me and my dog's not allowed to protect me? BOOLSHIT!!!

Agreed. I don't see where this is anywhere near the same. Just like you can't go around shooting people but if they're attacking and your safety is in question then it's a whole different ball game. I think that in most cases this will be relatively easy to prove in the case of a dog bite too. I'm sure there might be a few that are relatively difficult to sort out but that's what our judicial system is for.

[Drilldov2.0]

Funny that we are now trying to regulate animal's behavior by the owner.

[Jer]

Funny that we are now trying to regulate animal's behavior by the owner.

Funny? How so? If you're trying to draw a correlation between firearm control and animal behavior then you're WAY off. A gun is an inanimate object that cannot harm another human w/o the input of a human. A gun is also a protected constitutional right to own. Show me where in the constitution that a well regulated canine pack is fundamental to the free state and that a dog can't harm anyone w/o the input of a human and you may have something.

[Monky]

-as it should be.

+1


Which is why you NEVER place a Beware of DOG sign on your property. That show you have knowledge your dog may be viscous.

Remember
It's the DEED not the BREED

You aren't admitting knowledge. You're warning others. Dog bite cases are lost when those signs are posted.



- sent by the free-range electronic weasel attached to my hip.

[Sawin]

I think both guns and dogs (heck, ALL pets) are the responsibility of the owner.

Every bite and every bullet. What's hard to accept about that?

Sure dogs have minds of their own, and they eat stuff, take craps where they shouldn't, hump people's legs... that just makes them a harder responsibility to manage than a gun, IMO. But it's still the owners responsibility nonetheless.

Moral of the story: Be a responsible FILL IN THE BLANK owner!!!

[Aloha_Shooter]

Which is why you NEVER place a Beware of DOG sign on your property. That show you have knowledge your dog may be viscous.

You're feeding it WAY too much if your dog is viscous. ;-)

[Jer]

I think both guns and dogs (heck, ALL pets) are the responsibility of the owner.

Every bite and every bullet. What's hard to accept about that?

Sure dogs have minds of their own, and they eat stuff, take craps where they shouldn't, hump people's legs... that just makes them a harder responsibility to manage than a gun, IMO. But it's still the owners responsibility nonetheless.

Moral of the story: Be a responsible FILL IN THE BLANK owner!!!

What?!? This SO goes against our current society's unwilling to appoint blame to those actually responsible for things. How dare you!

[Great-Kazoo]

You're feeding it WAY too much if your dog is viscous. ;-) [Bang]

Where's the grammar nazi's? Wait that's meetoo.

[Drilldov2.0]

That is just retarded Jer. Liking an animal's unpredictable behavior to a Constitutional right... what are you drinking?



Funny? How so? If you're trying to draw a correlation between firearm control and animal behavior then you're WAY off. A gun is an inanimate object that cannot harm another human w/o the input of a human. A gun is also a protected constitutional right to own. Show me where in the constitution that a well regulated canine pack is fundamental to the free state and that a dog can't harm anyone w/o the input of a human and you may have something.

[Jer]

That is just retarded Jer. Liking an animal's unpredictable behavior to a Constitutional right... what are you drinking?

Reading comprehension must not be your strong suit. That's the same position I took. You were starting to draw the correlation between this topic and our current struggles and I was going to let it happen.

If, as the animal's owner, you can't control it's behavior then you don't deserve the animal. That would be common sense to most.

[Sawin]

.....

Moral of the story: Be a responsible FILL IN THE BLANK owner!!!

Let me repeat what I interpret to be the moral of this story....^

[condoor]

Which is why you NEVER place a Beware of DOG sign on your property. That show you have knowledge your dog may be viscous.

Remember
It's the DEED not the BREED

I agree that owners should be responsible for any dog bite, for any breed, as a result of owner negligence. I disagree with the above statement however. I have a "no trespassing, no turnaround, beware of dogS" sign at the beginning of my property. If someoe STILL decides to trespass on my property, and happens to get bitten by one of my dogs I can't imagine a court or jury that would would be sympathetic to the suspect.

[trlcavscout]

I post signs on the gates so that if some jackass utilities guy decides he needs to come into my hard he'll close the gate behind him so the dogs don't get out if they're out. That's the thought anyway. I was lied to when we built this house and was told there were NO utility pedestals on this lot. I was able to get the utilities to move one of them but the other I was told it wouldn't be possible as there wasn't enough slack in the line. Holy shit, is this a thread about utilities? I'll shut up now. lol

Generally if I cant get in the yard the popo lets me in. Sometimes the dog has to be removed from the yard.

I have been bit several times usually by the "my dog is harmless and never bites" dogs. I use to just blow it off but do to so many owners who dont take responsibility i now call the doggie cops and let them handle it.

[Jer]

Generally if I cant get in the yard the popo lets me in. Sometimes the dog has to be removed from the yard.

I have been bit several times usually by the "my dog is harmless and never bites" dogs. I use to just blow it off but do to so many owners who dont take responsibility i now call the doggie cops and let them handle it.

So you're 'some jackass utility guy' then, huh? [LOL]

[rondog]

Water meter is on the front porch, electric meter is on the westside of the house, gas meter is on the east side, ain't no fucking reason for ANYBODY to enter my backyard without my express permission. My Beagles are sweethearts and love everyone, but if someone comes in the yard and gets bit, that's their tough shit. They're trespassing. If they open the gate and let my dogs out, I'll crucify them to the fullest extent. Somebody needs in my back yard, they'd better ask me first.

[Sawin]

Water meter is on the front porch, electric meter is on the westside of the house, gas meter is on the east side, ain't no fucking reason for ANYBODY to enter my backyard without my express permission. My Beagles are sweethearts and love everyone, but if someone comes in the yard and gets bit, that's their tough shit. They're trespassing. If they open the gate and let my dogs out, I'll crucify them to the fullest extent. Somebody needs in my back yard, they'd better ask me first.

I can't disagree with that scenario one bit. If someone trespasses or lets out an unattended dog, they get what they deserve if they're bit.

[Jer]

Water meter is on the front porch, electric meter is on the westside of the house, gas meter is on the east side, ain't no fucking reason for ANYBODY to enter my backyard without my express permission. My Beagles are sweethearts and love everyone, but if someone comes in the yard and gets bit, that's their tough shit. They're trespassing. If they open the gate and let my dogs out, I'll crucify them to the fullest extent. Somebody needs in my back yard, they'd better ask me first.

The unfortunate reality is that if you have a utility pedestal in your back yard then they have an easement. Trust me, this fight was big once our house was nearly done and the plopped utility pedestals in our back yard for this exact reason. If you don't have them then you're right, they need permission to enter your yard.