Allahu Mick-Bar my Friends!
When a dog offends against a person or another animal, who is at fault? The dog? The owner? Another entity entirely?
The current politically correct atmosphere demands that the victim and/or the complainant is to blame. ALWAYS to blame. This stems from the cultural First Principle that dogs and dog owners are always the agents of Good. Therefore, both dog and owner are automatically removed from blame, accountability and responsibility in any scenario.
An interesting case popped up the other day where a pit bull dog apparently killed the individual giving CPR to the owner. Dogsbite.org has the details. Both men are dead as a result. I refer to this as a "TwoFer" as the dog's behavior likely resulted in BOTH deaths.... if the dog had not killed the man giving CPR to it's owner, both may still be alive. If I were to kill someone in the act of saving YOUR life, would I not be accountable for YOUR death as well?
Hilarity ensued when the Apologista horde came out of the woodwork granting absolution to the dog.
"So sad. A very freak and tragic happening. The dog was being loyal & thought he was protecting his incapacitated owner. I will pray for the families of both the heart attack victim and the victim that was attacked by the dog".
The above sort of mental vomitus has spewed forth in every news article and forum reporting the incident. The prevailing attitude is that a dog killing someone who is trying to save the life of the dog's owner is acceptable dog behavior. Hell, not just ACCEPTABLE, it is COMMENDABLE! [EDIT: Click on this!]
Yawn. Hey, its OK for the dog to bark at people in their OWN (not the dog's) YARDS, and attack invited guests, so whats the big deal about this? Wouldn't YOU want YOUR dog to kill me if I was in the act of saving your life? Fido is always the better judge of things, better just leave everything up to him!
Moving along, who IS to blame for dog attacks, endless barking and the like? I take the minority opinion that it is generally NOT the fault of the complainant and/or the victim. Further burdening victims with multiple household rules, consecutive disruption laws, one bite rules and the like is not conducive to solving the problem.
I hold that both dog and owner are at fault and affirmative action should be taken against both parties. However, it is the owner who is responsible and accountable for the act(s).
The owner is at fault because it is THEY that created the risk. If you can't be held accountable for what your pet does, you can not have one. For those who want to place all the blame on the dog, consider this: Why was the dog there in the first place? Who put him there? Who is allowing him to act as he does? The owner created the scenario that led to injury via a series of deliberate acts.
The dog is at fault, or to be more accurate HAS a fault, because it will use violence or engage in some type of destructive behavior to meet its needs. There is no place in human society for an animal like that. They do not have rights, nor do they contribute to society in any meaningful way.
In closing, I would like to add that there is one more party to blame. Ultimately, the fault is with our corrupt, degenerate dog worshiping culture. A culture that automatically grants absolution to these anti-social and destructive acts, and lays the groundwork for the acts to continue.