Michael A. Ball ) wrote:

Frankly, the man seems to be a victim of diminished mental capacity.

Not at all, he's quite smart, a college professor. It's denial, for some
reason he wants to rationalize a serious bite away. He said it doesn't
have anything to do with his relationship with the dog.

What I'm looking for is outside information, since he doesn't believe me.

Like other people's perspective on the idea that a dog could seriously
bite someone because of being "startled", that if you reach down and pet
your dog and the dog sinks his teeth into your thumb, that it could have
been an "accident" in a sense, something that probably won't happen again,
and it doesn't indicate there's a problem. Not that the dog necessarily
_was_ startled or asleep when his wife petted him - that could just be his
excuse for the dog.

If dogs bite once, do they usually go on to bite again? It seems to me
the bite was likely a bid to move up he dominance hierarchy - bite the man's
wife, who the dog probably sees as less dominant.

He seems to find it normal to have a dog that snaps that much, or bites
now and then. It doesn't seem normal to me - the dogs I've met out
walking don't generally snap. Maybe a little, if they want my dog to stay
away.

Yes, I've cringed inside seeing him sometimes in the woods cheerfully
greeting people and letting them pet his dog - knowing that the dog's reaction
could easily be sharklike. He's obviously running a big risk of
liability. I wouldn't have petted the dog even before he bit. He
doesn't somehow inspire approach. Maybe it would make an
impression on him, if I pointed out
that somebody out there could sue him for everything he's got, if his
totally unsupported theory about how it won't happen again if they're
"very careful" around the dog, turns out to be wrong.

Anyway I hope to get some outside opinions - if I can tell him, I asked
other dog owners and not one of them thought his theory was even possibly
true, maybe it'll make an impression. It seems like transparent bullshit
to me, if that isn't a strange concept.

There are all sorts of people in the world, with all sorts of ideas, that
often don't make the slightest sense when exposed to the light of day.

Laura

On 28 Feb 2007 21:18:39 -0500, (Lacustral)
wrote:

Michael A. Ball ) wrote:

Frankly, the man seems to be a victim of diminished mental capacity.

Not at all, he's quite smart, a college professor...

Neither precludes one from being warped.

What I'm looking for is outside information, since he doesn't believe me.

Well, you can begin he http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/dogbite.htm

...Not that the dog necessarily _was_ startled or asleep when his wife
petted him - that could just be his excuse for the dog.

Many folks have heard this saying: "Let sleeping dogs lie."

If dogs bite once, do they usually go on to bite again? It seems to me
the bite was likely a bid to move up he dominance hierarchy - bite the man's
wife, who the dog probably sees as less dominant.

I believe that, whether or not a particular dog bites more than once, is
more up to the dog's guardian, than to the dog itself. Dogs are what we
make, or fail to make, of them.

I'm not sure dogs perceive a "dominance hierarchy." I believe they go
right to the top.

He seems to find it normal to have a dog that snaps that much, or bites
now and then...

That sounds like dementia, to me. No, I retract that! He is quite smart,
and that's why he is establishing his insanity defense, in advance of
prosecution/litigation.



________________________
The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs
is to be ruled by evil men - Plato