She did not kiss him, he went for her before she made contact.  Vets can get pretty close when they have to inspect inside a mouth and they will hold a dog still to do so.  None of mine would ever object to that.

> As it stands right now there is no where to note that the owner knew this dog was dangerous.

I think anyone choosing to own this breed should be well award of its potential.  The way he is gripping that collar suggests he was.
I doubt the woman has ever been to training classes as I keep saying, it is not for the rest of society to adapt themselves to accomodate protentially dangerous dogs.  Owners have the responsibility of fully protecting the public.  I think the law sees it in the same way :)

well what a silly women,, wonder if she had her producer in her ear saying, "go in for a kiss" lmaolooooooool,

> TBH a lesson most of us were taught as children, and a lesson most of us still always teach our children

I showed my boys the video earlier (12 & 13 yrs), I paused it a about 10 seconds in (a while before the bite) and asked if they thought anything was wrong about the what they were seeing or was everything OK. Both of them thought the woman was too close to the dogs face and the youngest also thought the way the dog was being held by the collar so tightly was wrong and the way the woman was grabbing at the dogs face was wrong (he added it could frighten the dog).
I took pause off and let it play through, my boys thought the woman was stupid and the dog was defending itself, they weren't suprised in the slightest about the dog biting, they didn't think he was a nasty dog, just reacting to what was happening to him.

Sad that children can see this but a grown adults can not.

None of mine would ever object to that.

But, why do you assume that this one would Stooge, is it the breed? I dare say it has had vet checks, I dare say it has been kissed before too.  Dogs will react differently in different situations, nothing indicates that this dog has previously turned on a vet whilst being examined a judge or an Auntie for that matter. Your presuming it is unsound and would turn in these situations, that all dogs should always in all situations allow a stranger to have close contact.

I have always trusted my dogs to never do that, but I would never, ever, guarantee it.

The owner was giving signals himself of being uncomfortable by comfort stroking his dog too. I dare say he wishes now he had told her to back off, it was not nice viewing I would have been inwardly squirming even if my dog licked the woman to death.

Grabbing a collar tight will add tension to a dog which was probably? stressed being in an unknown environment as in the tv studios which i'm sure would possibly stress out a lot of dogs for the first time. This dog from reading it was fine with all people petting him etc for the 45mins leading up to it, so dangerous dog?? Not in my eyes from that.. Wonder if this would of made headline news had it been a Lab or Goldie?? Doubt it.. The owner is from what it seems partially at fault too.. The dog no.. Human error all the way on this one..

> I think anyone choosing to own this breed should be well award of its potential.

It is nothing to do with the breed atall. Any breed is capable of acting like this, it is a CANINE behaviour, not a breed-specific one.
When people realise this, there will be a lot less dog bites.
I will repeat what I said earlier as it seems to have been missed. A local girl suffered several injuries to her face (lip, cheeks, nose,) after ramming her face in that of a collie.
Whan ANY dog feels threatened and trapped it has the option to shutdown or to try to tell the threat it isn't happy - warning snap. A dog that has never bitten before is STILL capable of biting in a situation that makes it feel threatened, even if it has been in that situation before, a few changes can make the dog feel more vulnerable and snap (not feeling well, allready feeling stressed form something else, put up with that situation for too long and can no longer cope with it).
A dog that launches a savage, sustained attack in such situations is not behaving like a normal dog, a dog that gives a warning snap is behaving like a dog.

Anybody who thinks their dog is NOT capable of acting like a dog, they are kidding theirselfs :(

> The way he is gripping that collar suggests he was.

He could well have been holding it, to stop it running off to investigate the set.

> But, why do you assume that this one would Stooge, is it the breed?

Yes

> Anybody who thinks their dog is NOT capable of acting like a dog

If that is how you think your dog is capable of acting then you have a duty to protect the public at all times.

> That should not be a problem.  Vets, judges, your auntie do this all the time, so the average non dog owner or even dog owner that had never had a difficult dog may very well not react badly.>

Really???  It's an animal for goodness sake.

My auntie doesn't and judges who have gone over my dogs don't put their faces in my dogs faces.

Vets on the other hand....
Did you read what I posted before on this thread that a qualified vet tried to rub his face in my dogs face?  I don't think that's normal behaviour for someone who is supposed to be a qualified 'professional', let alone someone who is a non dog owner.

That doesn't mean the dogs always react badly.  Mine didn't, but I wouldn't advocate doing it!!

Are we assuming that this dog is badly behaved because of this reaction, or is it something we know for sure?

> or is it something we know for sure?

He bit a woman on the face!

Ohhhhhh Stooge, I know it is not funny and I dare say you are being very serious in your replies, but you are making me laugh out loud.

You have definitely got tunnel vision with this dog haven't you, at least you are honest in saying it is the breed itself.

This dog is very lucky you are not it's judge and jury. :-D

> He bit a woman on the face!>

I was asking if the dog had had previous poor behaviour PRIOR to this incident... and it seems not according to other posters.

From what I watched, the dog tried to warn the woman with a snap at her face when she put her face in his (and AFTER his body language indicated how uncomfortable he was), when he was clearly stressed and agitated.

All other stress indicators did not stop the woman from putting her face in his.

MY dog had a qualified veterinary surgeon put his face in his.  Istopped that because I knew that my dog didn't like it.
Which is why I said blame in this 'news' incident can be apportioned equally between the dog owner and the news anchor.
Nothing to do with the breed whatsoever. 

The dog felt threatened,that is clear from the video footage. His owner was at fault for allowing the situation to continue. But that does not make the dog a bad dog. He tried to tell the woman to leave him alone by his body language but that was ignored and when the woman finally got right up close to his face he was left with no option but to snap. This was a very stressed dog,the footage of him being rescued from the lake showed him in a far better light. He accepted the fire fighter handling him with no problem.

> Istopped that because I knew that my dog didn't like it.
> Which is why I said blame in this 'news' incident can be apportioned equally between the dog owner and the news anchor.

How have you come to that conclusion?  The owner, in this instance, did not warn the woman.
I really don't think we can expect the general public to know that if they talk friendly to a dog, chuck it under the chin and the owner says nothing to the contrary that the dog will not be friendly in return.
When we know differently about our dog, or dogs in general if you like, as the person responsible for that animal, it is up to us to ensure their safety.

> But that does not make the dog a bad dog.

I agree.  He is was he is, what he is bred to be.  It is the human in charge of him that is responsible for anything he does.

> If that is how you think your dog is capable of acting then you have a duty to protect the public at all times.

Yes, as we all do.
But suprisingly I don't EXPECT him to act like that, I am aware it is a possibility - because he's a dog.
He gets a lot of attention when out, I expect he has to put up with more idiots than most dogs as he's so big, he's seen more like a fairground attraction than a dog.

I've had a child run at him shouting he will climb on the dog and ride him like a horse - I shout back that he will NOT be doing that. I try to move away, the child chases us and he starts to try to climb on my dog - I have my hands full shoveling treats into Buster, while turning him in circles to get the kid to get off (as well as my mouth in full swing TELLING him). It took several minutes to get the kid off (think he has learning difficuties)- my dog did not bite, he did not try to bite despite being uncomfortable with the situation.
I've had kids run full-steam at his face GROWLING at him, groups of kids running at him screaming in excitement, crowding him, patting him all over (many little hands from every direction).

He is handled with the fact he is a dog in mind. If in any of the above situations, I stood idly by and smiled sweetly, doing nothing to try and manage the situation, he may have bitten, he may not have, I don't know - I can not guarantee his behaviour in stressfull/arousing situaitons if I have no input - because he's a dog - so I err on the side of caution and handle situations to avoid him getting to a point to feel like he needs to bite.

But, you would imply, that as I think he has the potential to bite under certain circumstances, that he is a danger to society. Do you think a dog should NEVER be capable of biting a stranger, no matter how they make the dog feel??

On the other hand, if in those situations I had my sweet, cuddly looking lab-cross, I would bet on the fact he WOULD bite. I couldn't allow any stranger to touch him near his ears/top of head while out - he'd snap at them.

People have no business getting in a dogs face, but people seem to think they know best. My lab-cross bit the post woman, he was teathered in the garden, and was barking at her (couldn't reach her), she asked if she could stroke him - I said NO, he doesn't like people in any sort of uniform, he'll bite, with that she bent forward to stroke him - she got bitten on the sleeve and it actually shocked her.

So that's 2 different dogs, different types, the guarding breed has been in many situations that a dog could be forgiven for biting in, but he hasn't bitten. The lab cross would bite if somebody got their hand close to his face (he had lots of trust issues when we got him as a 4yr old rescue, it took ages before he was comfortable with us touching his ears). Biting dogs is not to do with BREED or TYPE, it's about canine behaviour.

> Biting dogs is not to do with BREED or TYPE

Not entirely but I think it is naive to deny breed traits along with all the other factors.

>so I err on the side of caution and handle situations to avoid him getting to a point to feel like he needs to bite.

That is obviously the sensible way.

> I think it is naive to deny breed traits along with all the other factors

Good point.

>When we know differently about our dog, or dogs in general if you like, as the person responsible for that animal, it is up to us to ensure their safety.

All dogs, from the biggest to the smallest, have the potential to bite. Every owner should be aware of this and make sure their dog is never pushed beyond its tolerance level (which, like us, will vary from day to day).  Only a fool would say "My dog would never bite".

Very strange vets some people know.  My vet nor anyone I know would shove their faces into a dogs face, even if they know it well.  It's just not the way you go up to a dog even moreso one you don't know and one who had a recent traumatic experience.

> Only a fool would say "My dog would never bite".

True, and if we saw our dog getting uncomfortable with something we should do something about it.
I doubt in the UK, you and your dog would expect to be let off by saying the victim got too close.

At least this case is on film so it's not one person's word against another's. There is clear, unbiased evidence.

I don't mean that people would not believe that the victim was close but that in the UK that would not be seen as an excuse for a dog to bite.

However with the film evidence a good lawyer could prove to a court that the dog had given plenty of warning before the bite; that it was, in fact, provoked.

I doubt many of the general public would see it as provoked and I think it more likely the court would say how can the public possibly know how close is too close?
I don't recall any cases where the dog was let off because the child was screaming or eating crisps or the person walked past too close to the dog who could not back off.
I think public opinion is more likely to be that dogs should not bite and I think as dog owners we should always be concious of that.

Stooge. I've just got to ask, are you a lawyer playing devil's advocate?. You argue/discuss a point like an 'untrained' dog with a bone, which you just won't give up on.

> Stooge. I've just got to ask, are you a lawyer playing devil's advocate?

No.  Are you? :)

> I don't recall any cases where the dog was let off because the child was screaming or eating crisps or the person walked past too close to the dog who could not back

Screaming children and a packet of crips are hardly the same thing as getting your face so close to a dog that you are inhaling it's breath while grabbing at it's face & body!!!

I recall a case where neither the owner, or the dog in question were charged or even accused of anything - the case which I have mentioned twice previously on this thread - a collie repeatedy bit a girls face when she approached the teathered dog and stuck her face in it's face (requiring surgery and stitches). All that happened was the owner was advised to not leave the dog tied up unatended. It was decided by all invloved that the girl, running up to, hugging and getting her face that close to the dog was provocation.
The dogs owner offered, as a good-will gesture, to have the dog destroyed, the girls parents decided that that wouldn't be fair on the dog as it wasn't the dogs fault.

(the little girl recovered well, but never learnt her lesson, she is the reason I stopped taking Buster to that school for socialisation, I'd lost count of the times she lunged at him, out of the blue and bear-hugged him face-on).

> As it stands right now there is no where to note that the owner knew this dog was dangerous. Dogs are animals and surprise us all. The most docile and loving dog could turn if not happy with a situation.
>
>

Exactly. That dog had never been in a tv studio before with all the hubub, lights, etc., or had so many people pet him in such a short time. I watched the short clip and he was clearly uncomfortable and stressed with the situation. The tv presenter will have smelled strongly of cosmetics and perfume, probably unfamiliar scents to the dog, she was being over familiar even before she tried to kiss him, and the way the owner was holding him meant he couldn't get away. Perhaps if he'd been on a lead and been able to move away it wouldn't have happened. There is no way I would blame the dog for what happened from what I saw.

>I doubt many of the general public would see it as provoked

If it came to court the public's view is irrelevant (kangaroo courts and lynch mobs are illegal!); it's the judge's interpretation of the law that matters - and the vast majority of judges are sensible!

I am not sure who advised but I suspect it may have been different if the owner had been there and not said anything.

> it's the judge's interpretation of the law that matters

I'm not sure which law allows a dog to bite because someone got too close.  Again, the judge may ask the question how close is too close?

>I'm not sure which law allows a dog to bite because someone got too close.

Probably the same law that allows a dog to chase and kill a cat because "that's what dogs do".

I am not sure dogs biting people would be seen in quite the same light :). 

That's why you and I aren't judges. :-)

I'd say too close to a restrained dog is close enough for it to bite.

If a dog is tethered then getting within reach of the tether is too close.

If a dog is in a car with the window open then within reach of the inside of the car.

A dog loose in it's garden barking, too close would e entering it's territory while it is loose.

There is no reason for anyone to get so close to the biting end of a restrained/contained dog to be bittern, they are taking a calculated or foolish risk.

Very different from a loose dog that runs/comes over and attacks.

I love dogs but would never approach a strange dog, I would invite it to come over to me if it wished and then be initially very careful with how hands on I got.  For instance my Spitz breeds and many prick eared dogs do not appreciated being patted on the head and will usually manoeuvre away from such actions preferring to offer the side of their heads, or under their chins for petting.

Maybe it was my experiences when I visited my Grandmother each Summer in Poland.  the normal reason to keep a dog was for it to bark, and bite any intruder.  This meant they were usually chained to a dog house within reach of the entrance of the property, so they act defensively of their space.  Approaching a strange dog you'd expect to be bitten.

> I'd say too close to a restrained dog is close enough for it to bite.
>

Even when the owner is there and gives implied consent?

> Approaching a strange dog you'd expect to be bitten.

I don't think that is acceptable in modern Britain.

I think by anyone that doesn't live on cloud9 it is. If you approach a strange dog you should expect to be, bitten the same if you step off the kurb you expect to be hit by a car as you haven't looked both ways. Common.sense tells us this, its.a.lesson I've learnt by being bitten as a child outside a shop, innocent nip by a jack, the dog shouldnt have been tied up outside a shop if it.didn't like.strangers approaching but people also need to learn and grow. Did you mother never say to you 'ah well its your own fault'

I think stooge is breedist and cannot possibly understand ANIMAL behaviour.

> I don't think that is acceptable in modern Britain.

Modern Britain as you call it seems to have lost all common sense, respect for others, including animals. Do something silly, get hurt & suddenly it's your right to blame someone or something for your own stupidity.

> If you approach a strange dog you should expect to be, bitten

I would hope not!

>> If you approach a strange dog you should expect to be, bitten
> I would hope not!

maybe i should have said If you approach a strange dog you should expect being bitten to be a distinct possibility.

If I approach a strange horse I know I could be bitten or kicked, any animal to be honest could react aggressively to an approach by an unfamiliar person.

It seems only with dogs are they supposed to be saints and you should be able to do 'anything' with them.  An assertion I hear many parents proudly boasting of re their own dog, and makes me shudder.

My first dog of a herding breed that could be called fairly reactive was more likely to react o invading of her space than my current breed. 

She adored my daughter and later the baby, but when we had other kids or visitors around I would watch for any signs of her looking stressed and offer her time out away from the kids/visitors as she could only take so much, and would not be a dog to allow a stranger to approach her without my presence.  As a result in her too short life she never had a need to show any aggression to anyone.

> Modern Britain as you call it seems to have lost all common sense, respect for others, including animals. Do something silly, get hurt & suddenly it's your right to blame someone or something for your own stupidity.

Personally, I would rather live in this world than the old one.

> maybe i should have said If you approach a strange dog you should expect being bitten to be a distinct possibility.
>

I was responding to Louise's post :)

>and would not be a dog to allow a stranger to approach her without my presence.

That's the thing.  Nobody expects every dog to be perfect but every owner is responsible for what that dog does.

> Personally, I would rather live in this world than the old one.

Personally, I'd prefer to live in a country 'old or modern' where people had respect for others and took responsibility for their own actions with out blaming others.

>I'd prefer to live in a country 'old or modern' where people had respect for others and took responsibility for their own actions with out blaming others.

Me too. Unfortunately Blame Culture is very much the modern way, and accepting responsibility for your own actions becoming a thing of the past.

> Personally, I'd prefer to live in a country 'old or modern' where people had respect for others and took responsibility for their own actions with out blaming others.

No they didn't, not in my lifetime anyway.  People objected strongly when guard dogs were savaging children and brought in laws to prevent it.  People objected strongly when people were injured at work because of shoddy equipment and practices and consequently laws were brought in to protect workers.

How anyone can think this woman showed less respect in talking kindly to that dog and chucking his chin without realising how dangerous he was than his owner who almost certainly did is beyond me but what really concerns me is, as long as people think it is acceptable to consider dogs rights over humans and therefore not take appropriate responsibility and care we could all face tighter and tighter restrictions in owning dogs when society gets fed up of it.

By the way, what does breedist mean? :)

> For instance my Spitz breeds and many prick eared dogs do not appreciated being patted on the head and will usually manoeuvre away from such actions preferring to offer the side of their heads, or under their chin

Buster, although not prick-eared in not overly comfortable with strangers stroking him on the head, if too uncomfortable, he'll get all playfull. Aswell as telling people to only stroke his shoulders/back, I've also trained him to turn sideways on to strangers that stop to talk to us, so his head is closer to me than them and his rear his closer to them. That way, any petting of him, a stranger may do without thinking, is not going to be on his head.

> How anyone can think this woman showed less respect in talking kindly to that dog and chucking his chin without realising how dangerous he was

It is not just a reaction from that particular dog - it is a reaction ANY dog that feels threatened will do. And yes ANY dog can be dangerous, given the 'right' circumstances.
If one has no idea what a dog may deem threatening or not then is it really a good idea to put ones FACE inches from it's teeth??

> what really concerns me is, as long as people think it is acceptable to consider dogs rights over humans and therefore not take appropriate responsibility and care we could all face tighter and tighter restrictions in owning dogs when society gets fed up of it.

A person has every right to go about their own business and not get injured by a dog. If, however, a person is deliberately interacting with a dog, they are putting thierselfs in the situation of their own free will, they are not having the dog forced upon them.

Giving permission for a person to stroke your dog is not giving a person permission to try and snog it.

> If one has no idea what a dog may deem threatening or not then is it really a good idea to put ones FACE inches from it's teeth??

We know that because, by the very nature of this board, we are all familiar with dogs.  Not everybody is.  The woman was not unintelligent, she clearly had no idea how dangerous the dog could be or she would not have gone within yards of it, the owner did.

You have taken a second quote from me but not really addressed it.  I would have particularly thought you would have shared those concerns with me and shared the believe that this is why we have to be particularly careful of safeguarding others quite apart from their rights to safety as your post generally indicate an understanding of that aspect.