Missing two-year-old girl who wandered off with her two family dogs is found

[RadishRose]

It was at midnight that a resident on an ATV found Thea sleeping about 3 miles from her home while using her smaller dog like a furry pillow while the larger dog kept watch over her, police said. It remains unclear what breed the second dog is.

Missing girl, two, who wandered off with her two family dogs is found

Thank God!
Thank Dog!

 

[RadishRose]

I have heard, that while Rottweilers have very strong jaws and big musculature, they've been bred for a long time to be so protective as to be aggressive. The "Junk Yard Dog Syndrome".

Yet, I have also heard that while sometimes protective enough to kill, Rottweilers are often very loving with children; more so than some other breeds.

I just wish "breeders" would stop messing around with creating dogs that kill, can't breathe, have skeletal issues, can't jump, are fearful, whose ears are breeding grounds for infections, who suffer prolapsed intestines, have become so huge, they can only live for 6 or 7 years.

Pet Peeve.

 

[WhatInThe]

I have heard, that while Rottweilers have very strong jaws and big musculature, they've been bred for a long time to be so protective as to be aggressive. The "Junk Yard Dog Syndrome".

Yet, I have also heard that while sometimes protective enough to kill, Rottweilers are often very loving with children; more so than some other breeds.

I just wish "breeders" would stop messing around with creating dogs that kill, can't breathe, have skeletal issues, can't jump, are fearful, whose ears are breeding grounds for infections, who suffer prolapsed intestines, have become so huge, they can only live for 6 or 7 years.

Pet Peeve.

I think the females with many species have been known to be protective of the young across he board. Doesn't mean they will but these dogs know this family and girl. A good outcome

 

[RadishRose]

I think the females with many species have been known to be protective of the young across he board. Doesn't mean they will but these dogs know this family and girl. A good outcome

You may be right @WhatInThe . Females want to protect and support life, generally. While males thrill at killing. waging war. Seems nothing has changed much since the Cave.

 

[Lilac]

I've been around Rottweilers & they are very nice animal when bred properly. These guys were either imported from Germany or been bred from imports. Just very large lap dogs for the most part & just wanted the fur rubbed off of them, but protective of their people if need be. I can just see one of them following that little kid around no matter where she went.

 

[mrstime]

The parents of the child have to be thrilled and hope they gave the dogs a nice big meaty bone!

 

[Jace]

Heard that on the news..she was 3 miles away, when found..

 

[Murrmurr]

I have heard, that while Rottweilers have very strong jaws and big musculature, they've been bred for a long time to be so protective as to be aggressive. The "Junk Yard Dog Syndrome".

Yet, I have also heard that while sometimes protective enough to kill, Rottweilers are often very loving with children; more so than some other breeds.

I just wish "breeders" would stop messing around with creating dogs that kill, can't breathe, have skeletal issues, can't jump, are fearful, whose ears are breeding grounds for infections, who suffer prolapsed intestines, have become so huge, they can only live for 6 or 7 years.

Pet Peeve.

I totally agree.

 

[David777]

So love that story. Makes me want to just hug those loving caring intelligent dogs.

 

[Mike]

That is a really, "Good News," story RadishRose, the sad
question has to be, how did she get out and be missed
for so long, 3 miles would take me ages to walk!

Thank you for a happy post.

Mike.

 

[Sippican]

Ever notice in the newspapers when they report on a dog that tore apart a small child, the owners and neighbors say, "It was such a nice dog"....ya, until they are not.

Who would gamble with their children's lives like that? Why take that risk of death or permanent disfigurement of their children?
Many of you will say, its not the breed. Well, yes, it is.....especially when its the same breed over and over again.
Sorry, I wold never allow my children to be around those dogs.

 

[MarkD]

Another testimonial to the wonderfulness of dogs. Still I’d have been freaked out as the parent.

 

[Aunt Mavis]

A guy could get choked-up hearing this, yup.

 

[Muskrat]

What struck me about this story was how far the child was able to get. An interesting note for those involved in search and rescue. Kids move fast

 

[Rose65]

I just wonder why people trust large powerful dogs with their children? It fills me with dread and not without grounds. Every so often a family dog kills a baby.
I would never own such a dog if I had small kids.

 

[Rose65]

Ever notice in the newspapers when they report on a dog that tore apart a small child, the owners and neighbors say, "It was such a nice dog"....ya, until they are not.

Who would gamble with their children's lives like that? Why take that risk of death or permanent disfigurement of their children?
Many of you will say, its not the breed. Well, yes, it is.....especially when its the same breed over and over again.
Sorry, I wold never allow my children to be around those dogs.

Couldn't agree more. It's lunacy!

 

[Lilac]

Just because an animal is large & powerful doesn't mean it's going to be dangerous. Usually it has taken human intervention to turn an animal that way. Making a blanket statement about a breed or size of a dog being ready to maul & kill a kid isn't fair or right.

 

[Rose65]

Just because an animal is large & powerful doesn't mean it's going to be dangerous. Usually it has taken human intervention to turn an animal that way. Making a blanket statement about a breed or size of a dog being ready to maul & kill a kid isn't fair or right.

Well I wouldn't wish to be near a Bully XL dog, I don't want to give it a chance.
I think we've heard quite enough to form an accurate opinion of this breed.

Other large breeds do need looking at too. Dogs with significant weight, jaws and power are a loaded gun. Dog licencing needs bringing back and muzzles too. Owners need to be scrutinised too - where and how are they keeping these beasts and why? Terrorising neighbourhoods with vicious animals is utterly unacceptable.

 

[Sippican]

Just because an animal is large & powerful doesn't mean it's going to be dangerous. Usually it has taken human intervention to turn an animal that way. Making a blanket statement about a breed or size of a dog being ready to maul & kill a kid isn't fair or right.

You can say its not right, but try and get homeowners insurance here in the US with certain breeds.
There is a reason insurance companies won't insure homes with dangerous breeds.

So, with your thinking, a criminal with a gun should be ok as long as he doesn't shoot it? A person that has had too much to drink should still be able to drive as long as they won't hurt someone....your logic doesn't add up.

 

[Lilac]

Well I wouldn't wish to be near a Bully XL dog, I don't want to give it a chance.
I think we've heard quite enough to form an accurate opinion of this breed.

Other large breeds do need looking at too. Dogs with significant weight, jaws and power are a loaded gun. Dog licencing needs bringing back and muzzles too. Owners need to be scrutinised too - where and how are they keeping these beasts and why? Terrorising neighbourhoods with vicious animals is utterly unacceptable.

I don't tolerate ill-mannered bad-tempered dogs or people ... never have & never will. I also believe the owner of a dog should be held responsible if that dog has done something. I also believe a dog that has been found to be vicious be put down. With that being said ...

I am not going to make a gratuitous assumption that one of anything represent the whole. Hearing about something from others & having an actual interaction are two different things on a variety of things. There will be good experiences & bad, but I wager more positive than negative will happen in anything. CASE IN POINT, that lost little girl had her life saved because that dog (vicious according to you because of his breed) saved her life by not leaving her side until they were found.

Now you want other large breeds looked at because you considered them a loaded gun? Why are they a loaded gun? Please explain. Is this strictly large or should you include small dogs in this? Are you familiar with those breeds, what they are about & what they were bred for? Again, it takes human intervention to create ill-bred & ill-mannered dogs around along with vicious dogs.

Not sure what you mean by bring back licensing. In the States, depending on where you live, dogs must have licenses; usually by 6-months of age. As far as forcing owners to muzzle dogs that have done no wrong, pretty sad idea IMO.

In regards to the owners, hold the INDIVIDUAL who is causing the problem responsible. Again they are usually are the root cause of the dog problems.

I don't believe in punishing the innocent for what someone else has done, be they an animal or person. I can't understand the mindset of people who do.

There are a lot of good owners who have good dogs of all sizes & breeds. There's no logical reason to punish the good for what others have done.

 

[Lilac]

You can say its not right, but try and get homeowners insurance here in the US with certain breeds.
There is a reason insurance companies won't insure homes with dangerous breeds.

So, with your thinking, a criminal with a gun should be ok as long as he doesn't shoot it? A person that has had too much to drink should still be able to drive as long as they won't hurt someone....your logic doesn't add up.

In Ohio, only if your dog has been adjudicated in court as a dangerous dog, then you have to have liability insurance. At that point, the animal should be put down. See full section of the ORC at: Section 955.22 - Ohio Revised Code | Ohio Laws

You are not forced in Ohio to have insurance on an animal just because he is of a certain breed & has not done anything wrong that warrants insurance. Are you saying in Massachusetts it's different & you do?

Your logic doesn't add up & you have made a gratuitous assumption yourself about something that isn't related to the discussion on dogs who kept a little girl safe. A convicted felon has no right possess any type of weapon, period. If he is caught with one, he can be prosecuted for possession. No one under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs has any right to drive a vehicle at any time. Get caught behind the wheel & you will be prosecuted for OVI.

Explain to me how a dog that has not done any harm & hasn't ever shown any aggression to any one is automatically dangerous. In your logic, is it just because of the breed of that animal?

This thread was about a beautiful story of a little girl with her two dogs who was kept safe by them until she was found. Guess some people don't like happy stories with dogs in them.

 

[Muskrat]

I am going to try to interject a little reason here. Rottweilers are some of the oldest breeds. They were bred for herding and protection. They are not a “pit” breed. And…when my son was two he was almost killed…by a Australian shepherd. Just sayin…

 

[Teacher Terry]

Why all the negativity when it’s a happy story of a dog taking care of his little girl? So happy she was found safe.

 

[Mike]

This thread was started by RadisRose, as a happy story, not one
to be taken over by your comments about other breeds of bad
dogs, if you want to discuss those creatures, I suggest that you
start another thread, about bad dogs!

Mike.

 

[Sippican]

In Ohio, only if your dog has been adjudicated in court as a dangerous dog, then you have to have liability insurance. At that point, the animal should be put down. See full section of the ORC at: Section 955.22 - Ohio Revised Code | Ohio Laws

You are not forced in Ohio to have insurance on an animal just because he is of a certain breed & has not done anything wrong that warrants insurance. Are you saying in Massachusetts it's different & you do?

Your logic doesn't add up & you have made a gratuitous assumption yourself about something that isn't related to the discussion on dogs who kept a little girl safe. A convicted felon has no right possess any type of weapon, period. If he is caught with one, he can be prosecuted for possession. No one under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs has any right to drive a vehicle at any time. Get caught behind the wheel & you will be prosecuted for OVI.

Explain to me how a dog that has not done any harm & hasn't ever shown any aggression to any one is automatically dangerous. In your logic, is it just because of the breed of that animal?

This thread was about a beautiful story of a little girl with her two dogs who was kept safe by them until she was found. Guess some people don't like happy stories with dogs in them

In Ohio, only if your dog has been adjudicated in court as a dangerous dog, then you have to have liability insurance. At that point, the animal should be put down. See full section of the ORC at: Section 955.22 - Ohio Revised Code | Ohio Laws

You are not forced in Ohio to have insurance on an animal just because he is of a certain breed & has not done anything wrong that warrants insurance. Are you saying in Massachusetts it's different & you do?

Your logic doesn't add up & you have made a gratuitous assumption yourself about something that isn't related to the discussion on dogs who kept a little girl safe. A convicted felon has no right possess any type of weapon, period. If he is caught with one, he can be prosecuted for possession. No one under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs has any right to drive a vehicle at any time. Get caught behind the wheel & you will be prosecuted for OVI.

Explain to me how a dog that has not done any harm & hasn't ever shown any aggression to any one is automatically dangerous. In your logic, is it just because of the breed of that animal?

This thread was about a beautiful story of a little girl with her two dogs who was kept safe by them until she was found. Guess some

In Ohio, only if your dog has been adjudicated in court as a dangerous dog, then you have to have liability insurance. At that point, the animal should be put down. See full section of the ORC at: Section 955.22 - Ohio Revised Code | Ohio Laws

You are not forced in Ohio to have insurance on an animal just because he is of a certain breed & has not done anything wrong that warrants insurance. Are you saying in Massachusetts it's different & you do?

Your logic doesn't add up & you have made a gratuitous assumption yourself about something that isn't related to the discussion on dogs who kept a little girl safe. A convicted felon has no right possess any type of weapon, period. If he is caught with one, he can be prosecuted for possession. No one under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs has any right to drive a vehicle at any time. Get caught behind the wheel & you will be prosecuted for OVI.

Explain to me how a dog that has not done any harm & hasn't ever shown any aggression to any one is automatically dangerous. In your logic, is it just because of the breed of that animal?

This thread was about a beautiful story of a little girl with her two dogs who was kept safe by them until she was found. Guess some people don't like happy stories with dogs in them.

I never said an animal needs to have insurance. Please re-read my posting. If still confused, I can clarify for you.
I said homeowners insurance, not animal insurance....big difference.
Actually, the logic does add up, its just you decided to take the side of potential danger over safety, for the sake of having a pet.
You see more horrific mutilation done to children by dangerous dogs rather than Golden Retrievers. There are dogs that are more prone to attacking than others, its been proven over and over again.
Interesting how Ohio is 2nd in dog bites in the US.

If you need more information see below:
How Does My Dog’s Breed Affect My Homeowner’s Insurance? - Ohio Valley Insurance
Do you have a dog that insurers may shun? (photos)