Did K9 Magazine “go too far”
Submitted by Sean O'Meara on August 17, 2006 – 2:27 am2 Comments
Yesterday, K9 Magazine recieved a phone call from a reader who was upset and angry, that we had unfairly commented on an incident in which a man lost his finger after it was bitten by a dog whilst pushing a leaflet through a letter box.
We claimed that this was an accident and that by all accounts the dog’s owner was otherwise a responsible one. Were we wrong to describe this unfortunate incident as “an accident”?
We were being unfair to claim that the owner “was being responsible”?
We raised the issue of negligence and asked readers to consider the implications of not protecting people who make deliveries to their home from their dog.
Highly Recommended: What dog owner wouldn’t want a piece of THIS action? – Get FREE dog food!
Related posts:
Loading ...
Yeh, he should have a sign of warning on his door.
Reply
I don’t believe that K9 was reporting irresponsibly; an owner can only restrain an animal within reasonable bounds. The man stuck his finger into the dog’s home. This was, to the dog, an invasion of his territory. Neither was this a delivery; the man seems not to have been invited, so the owner cannot be culpable. In the hysteria to find someone to blame for our own actions, too often animals pay the price; no one is vocal enough to stop this behavior.
Reply