From this article (http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=97d676dd-0c92-48e0-a3ee-b76533f188f6&k=13192) in today's edition of The Ottawa Citizen:A man strangled his Rottweiler to death after it attacked his friend in Carp Wednesday night, according to Ottawa Police.

The seven-year-old dog attacked a 40-year-old man in his home on Howie Road at about 8:30 p.m. The Carp man had been drinking and taunting the animal.

The owner of the Rottweiler, a 25-year-old man, strangled it to death to prevent further injury.I would have strangled the drunken idiot who was taunting my dog!

I would have strangled the drunken idiot who was taunting my dog!And if you had, you'd have been in prison. Why do you advocate the killing of humans?

to advocate - to speak or write in favor of; support or urge by argument; recommend publicly.I'm advocating the killing of humans about as much as you're advocating the killing of dogs.

My comment was very clearly meant to convey my disgust at the killing of a dog that reacted to taunts of a drunken fool. The fool deserved to be attacked. The dog did not deserve to be strangled to death by his owner.

hear hear

Okay, so the drunken friend probably deserved whatever injuries he may have sustained after the dog attacked him. But what's the owner supposed to do at that point? If the animal is out of control and he feels there's an imminent threat to his or another human's life then he's entitled to take whatever course of action he deems necessary.

Would you feel different about it if it was a kid who had been taunting the dog and was being attacked? Sure the dog isn't to blame but are you going to stand by and watch it maul someone to death?

I doubt either of these characters are Nobel prize candidates but anyone who values the life of a dog over the life of a human being would have bigger problems than merely being unintelligent.

We don't know - because the article does not state - how "imminent" the threat was to the drunkard's life and what exactly the owner did prior to strangling the dog. I submit, therefore, that the owner should have:
- tried harder to prevent his idiot friend from taunting the dog in the first place; and
- tried harder to restrain the dog.

...anyone who values the life of a dog over the life of a human being would have bigger problems than merely being unintelligent.I'll value the life of a good dog (or any other animal) over the life of a bad person any day.

Yours truly,

Mr. Unintelligent

Then you are a far worse person than either of the people in the news story and I'm frankly amazed at your lack of shame and compassion for your fellow human beings. Quite remarkable.

You'll note that no charges have been laid in that case. If you stood by and watched someone mauled to death by a dog and could have prevented it you most likely wouldn't be so lucky. It would be interesting to be at your sentencing hearing to see whether any shred of humility had crept in.

I have plenty of compassion for humans. I also have plenty of compassion for animals, something you evidently lack. Quite remarkable.

I would not stand by and watched anyone get mauled to death. Neither would I strangle a dog to death. You would kill, I would not. You are the lesser of the two of us.

But I like you anyway. :p

Here is my take on it without knowing the size or strength of the guy trying to subdue the dog....

I have a 110 pound Shepard hound mix dog. I am about 170lbs on a good day. I have had to pull my dog back from chasing a car or running after a cat. In one instance I used the leash and the other my hands and arms on his collar.

Couple of things I would have done in that situation is to restrain the dog using his collar (if he has one) or throw a blanket over him. If they were in the living room I would think there would be a blanket or pillows or something that could be used. In that situation it also takes a calm head to prevail. Obviously that guy did not have one. The drunken fool is a complete moron for taunting a dog (especially one of that breed) in the first place. The owner is a complete moron for killing his dog (in my opinion).

Once again this is all based on conjecture and opinion.

I would not stand by and watched anyone get mauled to death. Neither would I strangle a dog to death. You would kill, I would not. You are the lesser of the two of us.

If you think I'm advocating that the animal should be destroyed as anything other than a last resort then I'm sorry you got that impression. Of course you'd try and restrain it if you thought it possible before anyone came to serious harm.

My only problem is with someone who would refuse to take whatever action necessary, even if that meant killing the animal, to prevent the loss of human life. You've clearly stated your point on that matter so we can agree to disagree. But rest assured I'd still strangle your dog if it was ripping your throat out, hopefully in time so you'd still be able to thank me later. ;)

My only problem is with someone who would refuse to take whatever action necessary, even if that meant killing the animal, to prevent the loss of human life.If I could keep the average person from being killed by an animal, I would do so, even if it meant killing the animal as a last resort only. In this respect, we do not disagree.

If, however, I were watching an abusive owner getting his dues from his loyal but abused dog/pet, I would be inclined not to interfere.

But rest assured I'd still strangle your dog if it was ripping your throat out, hopefully in time so you'd still be able to thank me later. ;)Thanks! :D And I'd do the same for you. Errr...you are a good person, right? ;)

I'm actually the president and treasurer of a small but active cat strangling club in my area. A really small club. Okay, it's just me. But who in their right mind wouldn't want to strangle this:

http://photos-b.ak.facebook.com/photos-ak-sf2p/v79/122/8/506123106/n506123106_57893_4605.jpg

I mean...come on! He's asking for it and it makes me so mad. :mad:

Wow overheated bending back to courteous discourse.

My compliments to all of you. I hope one of you is around if a dog ever attacks me and rest assured, I will not have taunted it.:)

Life's too short to fight. And I need to save my strength for that cat. ;)

I hope one of you is around if a dog ever attacks me and rest assured, I will not have taunted it.:)Then you shall be saved! :p
I'm actually the president and treasurer of a small but active cat strangling club in my area. A really small club. Okay, it's just me. ... I need to save my strength for that cat.Go, cat, go!! :D

And if you don't think cat strangulation can be justified then you love terrorists and want to kiss them on the lips.

http://photos-161.ll.facebook.com/photos-ll-sctm/v72/154/51/510162161/n510162161_64235_4736.jpg

Sorry, I'll stop now. :D

Enough of the love and kisses already, back to the deadly dog action... :D

If you should ever find yourself needing to pull a vicious dog off another animal or person during its attack, the only safe method is to come from behind it, grab its hind legs as hard as you can at the very bottom just above the hoof, and run backwards, which will drag the dog away on its belly. Hopefully the dog will release its victim shortly too, and out of shock they apparently usually do. As long as you are still in motion and pumped full of adrenalin you can hopefully pull it into a caged or enclosed area that you can safely get out of.

We've foster-cared other dogs over the years and have had to do this a few times when dust-ups would happen. I did it once with a giant Rottie and didn't feel the back pain until the next day due to the adrenalin! :D We don't foster large dogs anymore - our dogs are big already and I'm getting too old for this crap. ;)

And if you don't think cat strangulation can be justified then you love terrorists and want to kiss them on the lips.If the terrorist is really hot, I'll gladly kiss her on the lips...as long as my wife doesn't find out about it. And then, of course, I will defeat her. (The terrorist, not my wife.) ;)

I'm advocating the killing of humans about as much as you're advocating the killing of dogs.It seemed after this incident, you were in preference that the victim of the attack be strangled. I'd say that this is advocating the killiing of humans.

My comment was very clearly meant to convey my disgust at the killing of a dog that reacted to taunts of a drunken fool. I don't see that a few mere taunts should put someone in danger. If you want to get into dictionaries then taunt = thing said in order to anger or wound a person. So basically the guy was calling the dog names. Clearly, if the dog was to attack merely because it didn't like the way someone was speaking to them, then the dog had a problem.

The fool deserved to be attacked.Why? I'm taunting you right now! Do I deserve to be attacked?

The dog did not deserve to be strangled to death by his owner.My understanding is that the only solution to dealing with a dog once it has started attacking humans was to destroy it.

It seemed after this incident, you were in preference that the victim of the attack be strangled. I'd say that this is advocating the killiing of humans.I said I would strangle the guy. This is not the same as "advocating the killing of humans". Re-read the definition.

So basically the guy was calling the dog names.Taunting a dog usually implies more than name-calling.

I'm taunting you right now! Do I deserve to be attacked?I would ask you to refrain from taunting me. Did the owner ask the same of his friend? Moreover, I am not a dog.

My understanding is that the only solution to dealing with a dog once it has started attacking humans was to destroy it.That may be true; nevertheless, it doesn't excuse the taunting that caused the attack. Shame to have to kill a dog because some drunken fool pestered it to the point of retaliation.