Order comes after unrelated savage attack on 5-year-old
A because of the mother’s and canine caregiver’s stupidity. The dog’s caregiver had a co-worker and the co-worker’s 2-year old son and boyfriend crashing at her place along with the greyhound, which she took in to help another friend. It sounds to me like someone doesn’t know how to say no to people and she is taken advantage of easily. That’s irrelevant though. Anyway, the dog bit the 2 year old once on May 8 and again on June 1. After the first incident one would think the girl’s mother would have found elsewhere to crash or take measures to ensure the dog was never around the child ever again. The 2 year old was probably left unsupervised with the dog and he probably pushed the dog’s buttons causing it to bite the child. I don’t fault the dog at all. Those idiots should have been supervising any interaction of the child and the dog if the mother truly had nowhere else to go. The child’s mom even admitted that an argument was taking place when the second incident occurred. What bothers me is that the dog bit a child twice and obviously shouldn’t be around children period. The fact is the dog bit a human not once but twice and needs to be euthanized. The selectman sentenced the dog to be euthanized, which is the responsible thing to do because it could bite another child in the future; however, the selectmen felt sorry for the dog and gave it a reprieve:
Selectmen gave the dog, Firewall, a bit of a reprieve and will ask a greyhound rescue group if it wants to try and place him, with the stipulation the town is released from all liability. But the window of opportunity is only 15 days, after which the dog will be put down, unless the owner appeals the decision.
Now, if this had been a pit bull or any dog faintly resembling a pit bull the town would be in the streets demanding death for the dog. Derek A Masky, one of the selectmen, states, “It was the owner’s responsibility to protect the child from the dog and that didn’t happen.”
I couldn’t agree with him more but then he says it “bothers him” that the dog is the one who is paying for the idiocy of the child’s mother. Would it bother him if it were a pit bull? Or a Rottweiler? Or a German Shepherd?
The owner of the greyhound and the caregiver do not believe the dog would have been sentenced to death if not for an ; the culprit was a 100lb American Bulldog who mauled a boy and its owner in an attempt to get it off the child.
The greyhound is going to be given a second chance if the greyhound rescue can adopt him out but the caregiver and its owner said they are going to try to adopt him, which should NEVER happen. These two are not responsible enough to have a dog. Period.