Well the Police have just admitted that it was in fact an illegal Pitt Bull AND the specific report they recieved in February was that illegal Pitt Bulls were being bred in the house. Sounds pretty clear cut to me. There will now be a criminal investigation.

If as the reports say the owner is a serving British soldier then it should be an interesting case to say the least if a serving soldier is charged with breeding illegal Pitt Bulls. I wonder how that's going to work out?

why am I not surprised ...

Lets see how many folk try & blame the police instead of the stupid irresponsible owners. Having said that I think that it's about time that something was done on a large scale. There should be some sort of amnesty involved & phone lines available for people to report offenders. I have quoted before about a friend who was looking for a bulldog. She was chatting to a policeman at the gym & he told her not to be tempted to go & see any 'old time bulldogs', as the police are aware that this sometimes is just a name given to pit-bull crosses. They were banned as a breed many years ago & yet there are hundreds of dogs on the streets, who are owned by very dubious characters.

> I to just don't see why the child should not be up in the night. Children staying in a strange house may well not sleep as well as at home and may need to go to the bathroom etc
> Surely common sense says that if you have a large powerful dog which might injure or kill a child then the dog should be restricted if you are not there to actively supervise it. Much easier to put the dog in a cage or locked room than a child.

I agree, there is no reason why the child shouldn't be wandering around the house (looking for a drink, looking for nan etc..).

My dog is very friendly and has always been fantastic with my boys best friend, however when the boy stays overnight at my house, the dog is kept shut in the living room so if the kids need a drink from the kitchen they can get to it without the dog being loose. The kids are under instruction to not take thier friend down stairs unless I am there but you know what kids are like, which is why the dog gets shut in the livingroom. Depsite the fact that my dog is friendly, has always been friendly and has never shown any slightly suspicious behaviour around kids, he is still a dog and I do belive that when you trust any dog 100% you leave room for 'accidents', when accidents between dogs & children happen they can be fatal - not worth the risk. (this is not just a rule I have brought in since getting a Mastiff, I had the same rule when I only had my 'softer' lab-cross = supervision of my kids & my dog and strict supervision around other peoples kids and my dog).

What a tragic, tragic loss of an innocent life :( :(

> Lets see how many folk try & blame the police instead of the stupid irresponsible owners.

I agree that the owners are to blame, but as the police had allready been informed of illegal dog(s) at the property they should also take blame. There is no point in having ANY laws if the police wont inforce them :( This is one instance where the police could have stopped the loss of a childs life by removing the illegal dog(s) and prosecuting the owner.

> There should be some sort of amnesty involved & phone lines available for people to report offenders

That would only work if the police acted on reports they recieved.

ok so the kids being up , not their fault of cause , BUT are they allowed up and to be running about at all hours with NO proper adult supervision and is the dog just left to roam around as it likes ,
either way it comes down to the Adults in the house to be aware of whats going on with children and dogs,

He was 4 years old. At that age, they can open child gates, they can open doors, they can get out of bed -but they don't necessarily do as you tell them to do. Even adults sleep sometimes and you cannot always know if a young child has got out of bed quietly and opened doors, let a dog out etc.

they should be prosecuted for manslaughter.

That's a really interesting point. I wonder if, in the eyes of the law, that could actually happen.

A quick Google search shows that Australia has a law:

"Causing dog to inflict grievous bodily harm or actual bodily harm"

UK Laws seem to be around a dog out of control in a public place.

I wonder if a law such as in Australia would be of use - of course, the police would have to enforce.

We need stricter prosecution and deterrent as opposed to a blanket ban on specific breeds or the ridiculous notion of muzzling all dogs! 

you cannot always know if a young child has got out of bed quietly and opened doors, let a dog out etc.
If you've got dogs and children that wander and/or don't do as they're told, then you put bolts up high on doors etc. that the children can't reach.
With young children you have to one step ahead of them all the time!  The adult is always responsible - or should be. :(

then you put bolts up high on doors etc

No way would I do that - it's a fire hazard. All doors should be able to be opened in my opinion.

No way would I do that - it's a fire hazard. All doors should be able to be opened in my opinion.
And look what happened. :(  It's all about risk assessment.

> No way would I do that - it's a fire hazard. All doors should be able to be opened in my opinion.

I agree plus the kids were staying over with grandparents from what I've read and I know that my parents would have been absolutely horrified if I suggested they put bolts on their doors to keep their dogs away from my kids or vice versa!

That's true West.

I don't have children but have collies. One of my dogs I would never trust around children given a high risk of him nipping. I think my risk assessment would involve him being crated when I was in bed or, better still, an outdoor kennel but definitely not bolted doors.

I'm not talking about bolting the children in, but bolting the dog in a room so that the children couldn't get in or let the dog out if it could possibly be a problem with the child.  Their dogs appeared to already have been a problem for neighbours.

I took 2 of my Roughs to stay with friends who also have dogs.  I was given a downstairs bedroom and took 2 canvas crates for my dogs for night time and when we would leave them.  There were 2 children in the family, an older boy who took no interest in dogs and a 5 year old girl who was fascinated by the fact she could cuddle my girls - theirs were in kennels in the garden.
I told her that if my door was open she was welcome to come in, but if the door was shut, then she mustn't enter.  I obviously shut the door if I wasn't in there - my girls were in their crates.  I twice found that she'd disobeyed and had let the girls out of their crates and pinned them both in a corner.  They are used to children, were used to going to Brownies while I talked about taking care of pets and residential care homes, but I could see the fear in their eyes at being trapped by someone they didn't know.  I sat her down and repeated my instructions, but she did the same thing again an hour later.
Much as I can say my girls had particularly good temperaments, all dogs (and us humans!) have their limits!  Rather than put dogs and child at risk, as the parents also couldn't control her, I cut short my stay and left in the morning. :(
I would have been happy to bolt the door with my dogs in there to protect the child.

Why is everyone assuming the child must have got up in the night and opened a door? Has anyone considered he might have been sleeping on a sofa downstairs already in reach of the dog?

Good on the person who reported the owner for having and breeding the dog , even tho the police sadly didnt act on it , at least it shows people are more aware of the dangers maybe if more people reported the people who have dogs like this the police would next time take notice so as to avoid this situation again,
or even a call to social services where kids are in the house with one of these dogs , lets say that for Anybreed of dog, if neighbours or people around the area new , let say my oh was walking round with our rottie having him act like a savage dog grawling and snarling then i would expect that social services to pay me a visit maybe with a police officer and asses the situation in my home,

my dogs are good with everyone but even if people outside here dont know that and someone reported me having the dogs i have, just because that person thought i had dangours dogs then id have no objections to letting a police officer into my house to see my dogs for themselfs , i have in the past had officers in my house when my son got mugged and i never locked the dogs away once i invited them in all my big dog wanted was a stroke on the head ,the police were quite suprised at how friendly he was, 

i know not all of your dogs maybe good with stranger but surley you can tell if its just that or if a dogs actully a savage especially when the hooded youth holding it cant stop it barking or grawling, do you all not think

I don't know what to say anymore, because nothing changes, how many more deaths, how many more injuries, how many more innocent lives taken?

My heart just goes out to the parents and the poor child, how does anyone learn to live with such a thing? It's one fo the worst things that could happen, for those who witness such things it must be unbearable to live with.

RIP little one.

Loads of people to blame for this. The dog's owner (knowing it was an illegal breed), the Police (for failing to act on reports that banned dogs were being bred) and the social housing authoritiy (who were apparently also told that the house was being used for this).
They'll all pass the blame and say "We will learn from this tragic case".
Personally I'd like to see all adults in the house being charged with manslaughter but no doubt they'll get a 2 year ban from keeping dogs.

> they should be prosecuted for manslaughter.
>
> That's a really interesting point. I wonder if, in the eyes of the law, that could actually happen.

CPS tried that with the Ellie Lawrenson case.  Didn't work.  The uncle who owned the dog in that case got 8 weeks for owning an 'illegal' dog.  Grandmother acquitted.

> or even a call to social services where kids are in the house with one of these dogs , lets say that for Anybreed of dog, if neighbours or people around the area new , let say my oh was walking round with our rottie having him act like a savage dog grawling and snarling then i would expect that social services to pay me a visit maybe with a police officer and asses the situation in my home,

I wish it were that simple. An internet friend has had problems with local gangs of youths intimidating her & her dog every time she goes out with it. It affects the dog very badly and although at all other times it is a nice friendly well-socialised dog, well-trained & owned by someone responsible, when these little scumbags do this, it turns the dog into a snarling frustrated mess. The police have done nothing, they just keep saying they need to know who the individual kids are. The dog becomes so upset he has bitten the owner out of redirected aggression/frustration. To avoid meeting these kids she can now only take the dog out between 3am and 7am. She is working with a behaviourist but it only takes another incident from the gangs and the dog is back to square one... and unavoidable - the vets isn't open at those hours, and there are always other reasons you need to take a dog out during daylight hours! I feel for her, as she is now thinking she might have to rehome it... which would devastate her.

Where are the laws protecting her & her dog?

Copied from a news report:

From The Times December 1, 2009

Mrs Foulkes, who suffered bite marks to her leg and body, was treated and discharged later from the Royal Liverpool Hospital. She shares the property with the dead boy's uncle, Christian, 21, said by locals to be a serving soldier. Neighbours have named him as the dog's owner.

Amos Ankara, a neighbour, said: "Christian seemed to like parading around the neighbourhood with the dog on a lead and it would snarl at everyone he walked past. It was an accident waiting to happen, keeping that ferocious dog in the house with a young boy. Even Christian's friends would not go near it. Everyone in the street was wary of it."

Much of the terraced street remained sealed off by police throughout the day as forensic science experts worked at the scene.

Residents complain that the ownership of fighting-style dogs has long been a problem in the area. The dogs are said to be a status symbol for their owners. Gillian Watson, 46, said: "There are lots of dangerous-type dogs around here. You always see young lads with pitbull dogs roaming around. I have a dog myself and when I take him for a walk sometimes it is quite terrifying because you think your dog is going to be attacked."

Another neighbour said residents had complained to the local housing association about dogs. "About 12 months ago one of them tore a pet cat to pieces in the middle of the street," he said.

****Residents complain that the ownership of fighting-style dogs has long been a problem in the area. The dogs are said to be a status symbol for their owners. Gillian Watson, 46, said: "There are lots of dangerous-type dogs around here. You always see young lads with pitbull dogs roaming around. I have a dog myself and when I take him for a walk sometimes it is quite terrifying because you think your dog is going to be attacked." ****

This is exactly what I said earlier it is a common occurance in Liverpool and probably in all big Cities around the UK . (Only I have to admit it is usually Staffies that I see , not the friendly type either , its a status symbol to the youth of today.

I know people are saying the police should have acted sooner on this illegal dog - but my money would still be on this being an American Bulldog rather than a pitbull.    If you google Scott type American Bulldogs or Standard American Bulldogs you can see that they aren't the very bully type of dog that the Classic American Bulldog is - the body can be quite athletic.

The police may be hoping that they can argue it is "pitbull type" and that this will lead to a prosecution - if they came out now and said it's an American Bulldog but a pitbull type then it looks a lot more confused.    The neighbours identified it as a bulldog or American Bulldog - some said a mastiff type or a Bull mastiff - all those dogs are way bigger than a pitbull and sound to me much more like a description of an AB - the colouring matches the most common AB colour - given the publicity over pitbulls I think it's unlikely someone would call one a bulldog - more likely the other way round. 

Does your father live abroad DerbyMerc, or are these just shows that a Club sets up?

> Lets see how many folk try & blame the police instead of the stupid irresponsible owners. Having said that I think that it's about time that something was done on a large scale. There should be some sort of amnesty involved & phone lines available for people to report offenders. I have quoted before about a friend who was looking for a bulldog. She was chatting to a policeman at the gym & he told her not to be tempted to go & see any 'old time bulldogs', as the police are aware that this sometimes is just a name given to pit-bull crosses. They were banned as a breed many years ago & yet there are hundreds of dogs on the streets, who are owned by very dubious characters. <IMG class=qButton title="Quote selected text" alt="Quote selected text" src="/images/mi_quote.gif" width=20 height=10>

That family have suffered such a terrible tragedy, BUT, them and only them had that dog in their home around that poor liitle boy. They and no one else are responsible for this tragedy...IMO

> That family have suffered such a terrible tragedy, BUT, them and only them had that dog in their home around that poor liitle boy. They and no one else are responsible for this tragedy...IMO

Yes, you are right.  Which is why they should be tried for manslaughter.

Funny you should mention this, I couldn't agree with you more Beardy--these dogs attacks on children are becoming here what fatal shootings are in the US where kids have access to their parent's and even their own firearms and either accidentally or deliberately shoot family, friends, school kids and god knows what else. In the light of the tragedy for the children involved it seems cold to put it in these terms, but it would be interesting to look at the similarities between these cases: children left with people other than their parents, possibly not in their own home, in the range of powerful dogs easily able to maul or kill, and the seemingly BYB approach of the adults. Is there a subtext about low income, exploitation of dogs for financial gain, even links with 'protection' for people engaged in criminal activity dealing drugs, etc? In Germany dogs must be licensed, the fee structure means you pay more for larger breeds and a lot more if they are not neutered, and for each additional dog you pay more. I'd be paying a small fortune for my three, relative to what I earn, but I would rather see this system than nothing at all.

A post-mortem examination has determined that the animal, named Uno, was an illegally bred pitbull.

Out of interest, and slightly off the main topic which of course is that this terrible tragedy has happened in the first place, how does a pm determine breed? 

It's a long story but it will be the guidelines drawn up by DEFRA advising authorities on how to identify a Pitt Bull 'Type'. The post mortom will form part of that because they are told to look for certain key features such as distance between ribs, shape of skull, width of shoulders at the eighth rib etc & you can't really do that with a live dog, especially if it's in the process of attacking someone. If you read the guidelines the Police have been given by DEFRA on how to identify 'type' then you'll understand what they are up against. Even a professor wouldn't be able to work it out.

Page 14 of the following document will give you an idea.

http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-pets/pets/cruelty/documents/dogs-guide-enforcers.pdf

With respect flyball, I've read that literature until I'm blue in the face, and to be honest I think it could describe quite a few bullbreeds.
(Myself and some of my colleagues have had many a discussion about it :))  (The flowchart particularly interested me).

i.e. old fashioned pump handle tail, good depth from the bottom of the head to the base of the jaw, straight box like muzzle.

I can understand they're up against it that's for sure, because half the descriptions in that booklet could apply to my Staffords!

Wasn't the dog already dead?  It was shot by a police marksmen wasn't it.  Do they really need to pm the dog to ascertain certain parts of information as indicated in the guidelines?

I was thinking more along the lines of DNA, genetics.  Surely that would be just as impossible?  I don't know.

> Out of interest, and slightly off the main topic which of course is that this terrible tragedy has happened in the first place, how does a pm determine breed?&nbsp;

I heard that the breed was determined by genetic testing. My daughter (who works in genetics) tells me that the dog genome has been sequenced and this how they can determine the breed.

> The neighbours identified it as a bulldog or American Bulldog - some said a mastiff type or a Bull mastiff - all those dogs are way bigger than a pitbull and sound to me much more like a description of an AB - the colouring matches the most common AB colour

What is a Bulldog - about 16" tall? An American Bulldog is up to 27" tall and mastiffs can be taller lets use my Mastiffs height of 30", so to sum it up, the GP have descibed the dog between 16" to 30" tall.
I've had a quick look for the height of a pit-bull, it's 18-22" and the American Bulldog is 20"-27", either of these dogs would fit the very loose size description the GP have given and a large pit bull would be bigger than a small American Bulldog.

mastifflover,

I am not replying directly to you, just adding a comment in general.

If this dog was snarling at people in the neighbourhood to the extent that they avoided it for fear they would be bitten, that is arguably grounds for it to come under the DDA, even if it was on a lead because it was still unmuzzled. It doesn't really matter what breed it was, it is described as a large powerful dog that people in the neighbourhood were wary of. Their fears were proved because it finally attacked and killed a child. One could argue that all the warning signs were there and therefore a prosecution under DDA, in addition to a manslaughter charge, could set a useful precedent. The key point is that the owner was not only swaggering around with a large aggressive looking dog, but the dog actually behaved aggressively to people, enough to get it a reputation.

Perrodeagua - no I live in the UK.    These are non-KC American Bulldog shows at Alfreton in Derbyshire.   I've never attended one but my father in law and recently deceased mother in law showed theirs at them and father in law has a number of books on them.  


What is a Bulldog - about 16" tall? An American Bulldog is up to 27" tall and mastiffs can be taller lets use my Mastiffs height of 30", so to sum it up, the GP have descibed the dog between 16" to 30" tall.
I've had a quick look for the height of a pit-bull, it's 18-22" and the American Bulldog is 20"-27", either of these dogs would fit the very loose size description the GP have given and a large pit bull would be bigger than a small American Bulldog.

OK you are right a big pitbull may be taller than a very small American Bulldog - though the shorter ABs tend to be very bully bitches and still physically bigger than a big pitbull even if they aren't as tall - in the same way a manchester terrier may be taller than a bulldog but they aren't bigger than them.    Basically what I'm saying is if neighbours described it as a mastiff/bullmastiff/americanbulldog coloured white and light brown that doesn't sound like a typical description of a pitbull.

> mastiff/bullmastiff/americanbulldog coloured white and light brown that doesn't sound like a typical description of a pitbull.

I was trying to get accross the fact that if people could describe a white dog as a Bull Mastiff, and give such a range of size, it is more than likely they could not pick out any of these breeds from a line up of different dogs. The GP tend to use 'bull' and 'mastiff' to describe powerful looking dogs, regardless if that is actually part of the breed. So the GPs description (allready rather vague) can not be used to ID the dog.

Whatever the dog was, it had previously been reported as being dangerous, police never followed up the reports and now the dog has killed a child.  Mindless owner for having a dangerous dog and allowing it to be in close proximity to a child and neglegant police for not following this up, they could have prevented this one :(

> I heard that the breed was determined by genetic testing. My daughter (who works in genetics) tells me that the dog genome has been sequenced and this how they can determine the breed.

Thanks for the info. rjs.  Just been having a quick read up on several articles about genomes, etc.  Wow!  Mind boggling stuff.
But still intrigued how they would identify a pitbull by genetic makeup. 
Anyway, as I said, it's kind of by the by.
Thanks again.

criminal neglect, maybe?

It's not an exact science though Tracey. Look at how many dogs there are that might show one or more of those criteria but not be a Pitt Bull 'Type'. Remember the Police  probably couldn't tell just by looking in an emergency situation, that's why each constabulary has a specially trained DDA officer to be able to identify what constitutes 'Type'. Personally i think the term Post Mortom was just a figure of speach and what they really meant was they just needed time to determine if it was of 'type'.  you don't really need to determinbe a cause of death if you've just emptied 2 bullets through a dogs brain afterall.

The Daily Record (glasgow paper), have mentioned the story today and printed a photo of a mastiff but named it a pitbull!!!

Typical red top.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2751733/Illegal-deadly.html

Arrrr makes me so mad that this fool had a dog like this and was a typical thug with a dog by the sounds of it, the guy has a baby of his own and everything he joined the army and every thing oh it makes my blood boil,

he left a tribute to John Paul , He left flowers and a note reading: "To the best nephew in the world. God bless."

Arr at this point i'd like to give this idiot a right punch on the nose for being such a *rat ,

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/12/02/tears-of-uncle-whose-danger-dog-killed-lad-115875-21866274/

http://www.itnsource.com/shotlist//ITN/2009/12/01/T01120907/

the sun photos of the dog are apparently off the owners facebook page.
regardless of what breed it actually was fact is it was sufficiently frightening that people had reported it previously.  I suspect with a different owner it may well have been a normal dog but a large powerful dog with guard/fighting bloodlines in its ancestery needs a good owner. all dogs do as any dog can be turned nasty by bad owner but these dogs need them more as they pose so much more danger then say an out of control yorkshire terrier ever could and although even gundog breeds can bite and bite badly it is I think unheard of for a gundog to carry on till a child mortally injured.
I don't know what answer is. breed specific legislation does not work as they just cross other breeds to make their own version of banned ones-or just dreadful illadvised crosses such as rott x dobermann or staffy x mastiff and then rear them badly so as they are the snarling weapons they need to boost their own self esteme.  ownership laws like licenceing I suspect would be ignored by underclass who like to have vicious dogs .

i know what you mean, on seeing the dog today in the sun i felt quite bad for him to like you say maybe with a good owner lots of care a love being brought up right from a pup this poor dog may not have ended up with 2 bulliets in his head, im sure it was no life for this dog being with an idiot for an owner,
and since the boy in the army owned the dog and was away , we already know the dog was nasty when out with the boy so who was walking it while the boy was in the army then,
surley not the 63 year old granma,  phew,

A man has been arrested on suspicion of manslaughter after a four-year-old boy was mauled to death by a pit bull-type dog in Liverpool.

John Paul Massey was attacked by the illegally-held animal on Monday as his grandmother fought to free him.

Merseyside police have apologised after an earlier report of dog breeding at the house in Wavertree was not investigated.

Police said the 21-year-old, from Wavertree, would be interviewed later.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/merseyside/8392842.stm

Deja vu anyone?

just adding onto the end of the thread

I admit I haven't read every little bit of these news reports, but am I correct in that the 21 year old still lived at home with his mother, that at the time of the attack he was in the army, the dog yes was owned by him but resided at the property of his mother/the grandmother?

If so then maybe I won't be popular in saying this but yes, he is an irresponsible young man to be wanting and using a dog like this as a status symbol and yes, at 21 he is classed as an adult, but is the owness not on his mother/the grandmother?

My heart goes out to this young man a little, at the age of just 21 to perhaps be charged with manslaughter as per some reports, he is obviously very upset and devastated about what has happend and after all only 21 with obviously no real idea about the loaded weapon he was housing, guidance should have come from those family members older than him.

To be honest it wouldn't matter how old my sons were if they still lived at home they wouldn't get a dog like that through the front door, I wouldn't allow them to have a dog like that, (pitbull cross) is not the mother/grandmother just as much to blame here if not more so? The son is young and will learn a terrible lesson here, but the mother should have been wiser and it was her home with reported breeding going on, I don't believe for one minute that a 21 year old boy was the main carer of pups and any breeding going on, therefore it must have been his mother.

IMO the boy and the police are not to blame for what happened, the real adult his mother/the grandmother is responsible for this in so many ways.

Just my opinion, but it was her home, therefore her responsibility to keep it safe and not allow an illegal dog in her property. Boys and young men can be real idiots we know this, the curse of the adolescent stage, but his mother has no excuse. IMO she should be charged with possible manslaughter more so than the young man.

You're missing the point. The person the Police will obviously want to bring to justice is the OWNER of the dog, not the Mother of the owner. His mother was not the owner. He is a grown man as far as the law is concerned & is only a couple of years younger than the Uncle of Ellie Lauwrenson, her Grandmother was also charged over her death & i daresay the Grandmother in this latest case will possibly face charges but i fail to see how she should be faced with charges 'moreso' than the actual person who owned the animal, or how a 21 year old man is not a 'real' adult. Out of interest, at what age would you view a man as a real adult? 25? 35? 40? If he is old enough to join the Army & fight for his country then surely he is old enough to be held responsible for the behaviour of HIS dog?

If your 21 year old son lived with you and owned a dog that killed your grandson in your home, would you be satisfied that it should be you who should face charges, moreso than your son who brought the dog into the house? I don't understand your logic.

I thought the law said that the person in charge of a dog at the time of an incident is the one who is held responsible? Was the dog's owner in the house at the time?

If your 21 year old son lived with you and owned a dog that killed your grandson in your home, would you be satisfied that it should be you who should face charges, moreso than your son who brought the dog into the house? I don't understand your logic.

Absolutely, it would be my fault, it's my home, my rules, my choice to allow the dog in the house. A 21 year old or even older may well be my son, (my eldest is 18.5 not much different) but he would be acting as a guest in a way as he is no longer a child I have to legally support, therefore the dog would be there at my invitation.

As JG has already quite rightly commented, the son was also in the army, the mother chose to be the sole carer of the dog, she allowed it to still be there.

Also what age was the son when he actually bought the dog, was he under 18? His parent/s either bought the dog for him or allowed him to have it, he may well be the owner, I owned my first dog at 14, but the parents own or rent the home that they both live in and chose to let it live there.

I understand the police need to question the 'owner' but I really do not feel he is responsible for this tragedy and don't see how the police can, as I said mine may well not be a popular opinion, but it is the opinion I have of the situation.

> If your 21 year old son lived with you and owned a dog that killed your grandson in your home, would you be satisfied that it should be you who should face charges,

Yes. As the person responsible for my grandchild and as the person in charge of the dog.

> I don't understand your logic.

(I know this question was not for me, but I'd like to answer anyway)I take full responsibilty for my childrens safety, and protect them from any danger, regardless if that danger is from something somebody else has brought into the house. For example, if my dad brought a bottle of white-spirit into my home and left it here I would still not allow my children to drink it, even though I did not bring the white-spirit into my home.

If I was looking after my sisters Boxer, I would still supervise any interaction between the dog & my children even though I am not the owner of that dog (frankly I still supervise my children around dogs even if the owner is present, you can never be too carefull). If my sisters dog was an illegal breed, I would not allow it in my house, in the same way I would not allow any illegal weapon or possesion into my house.