More San Diego Dog Stupidity,Dead Baby…

Pet dog fatally mauls 3-day-old baby in San Diego

The story is below the picture…but here is what is absolutely stupid……— no one should allow infants near ANY dog, especially a dog which is larger in size, no matter how “tame” the dog is….and especially when such dog is a mixed breed which may have been “rescued” and the parent dogs temperament is unknown.

Further, we don’t believe any dog belongs in anyone’s “bed” or even  bedroom for that matter. Regardless, had these two rules been followed, even if we are to believe the story of how this dog allegedly killed the baby, that baby would be alive (although if we did believe the story, which we do not, we would think the parents are not very bright and the kid might have been killed later due to parental stupidity anyway…)

Animals, including dogs–are not people. They are animals. Birds will bite, cats will bite, dogs will bite, most animals on various occasions, WILL bite, or at least take some unforseen action that PEOPLE may not think will be done. Hello??  They are animals!!!!

But the ultimate absurdness here, is that the article clearly states:

“It will be up to the owners to decide whether to reclaim the dog, DeSousa said…”

Who are we kidding here??? This DeSousa character is nuts. Animal Control will arrest people for alleged animal abuse, but the parents leave the 3 day old in the bed watching TV with a large dog right there, then someone allegedly “coughs”, then we have DEAD baby?

Unless that baby died of a heart attack, it’s the dog/parents fault, and no– the parents should not be able to keep the dog, nor should that dog stay alive, assuming we are to believe that “coughing” made the dog kill the baby???  INSANITY. [But watch—-some AR group will come forward to SAVE that dog from being put down, we just about guarantee it..]…Well, days after this, the purported parents supposedly agreed to have the dog killed.

The news does not say the parents did ANYTHING wrong…in fact, it is alleged that the entire situation was just an “accident.”  [To us, it’s more like accident waiting to happen.]

Only in few instances, such as the golden retriever that strangled the kid with her own scarf by dragging her around the yard, choking her to death–did the owners not only want to save the dog, but gave the dog to the Helen Woodward Center from Rancho Santa Fe (near San Diego) and THEY ADOPTED OUT THE DOG WHEN OVER 200 PEOPLE APPLIED TO ADOPT THE DOG THAT KILLED THE KID.

These situations show that no one really cares about a kid that got killed when it could have been prevented by simply using common sense.

Instead, we are to believe  “coughing”  caused a kid to die because the dog was “startled.”  Well, ask any criminal attorney– who  would believe that story?  …… and we don’t think you will ever find many that will buy that story.  “Coughing”, in our OPINION, does not constitute provocation nor anything remotely near what it would take to provoke a dog, period.  In fact, it indicates exactly the opposite of what any common sense logic will tell you about a canine, especially one that’s already two years old (reported online by news that dog was 2yr old…)

We think it’s negligence because it’s so stupidly obvious. This goes to show for us, how stupid people have become due to “animal rights.” The animal’s rights are higher than an infant’s right to live apparently.

And the parent’s rights to be idiots are supreme.