Vicious dog? I don't think so.. Controversial

Horrendously trained dog with monumentally incompetent owner? YES, VERY MUCH SO!

The small child was not injured and the older child only received minor scratches from the dogs jumping the article said. What do you think? Is the German Shepherd vicious? Or is he just overstimulated and poorly trained? He didn't look vicious to me, but I'd certainly not want to be around him.

PS - It did look as if the child was antagonizing the dog at the beginning. She picked up something and then ran and that's when the dog went after her. Kinda odd to try and figure out why the dog reacted that way.

Well I don't know what you are looking at, but my reaction to this is OMG , that dog would not get the chance to be near any of my children, did you not see it go for the men trying to get the child away, it was attacking !!!

How can you say the child was not injured , did you not see the dog dragging her round like a rag doll !!!!

Totally out of control dog, plainly obvious the dog was after the baby (toddler) in my view the dog would of killed the baby if the boys/men didn't get the dog off the baby.

Horrifying. I'm sure that child must have suffered severe mental trauma, even if she was not severely injured. She seemed to offer the dog an opportunity to play, and his reaction was way out of proportion. Dopey, dopey adults, but how brave her brother was.

This is an old article from 2014, I remember the hullabaloo it caused then.

Anyone who knows Gsd’s will know they play rough and leap about, mine sound like lions roaring at times.
I honestly believe this young dog is not vicious,but got carried away with the situation, and to him it was just one big game and the more they ran the more excited he got. According to the article there were no bite marks to either child, believe me if a Gsd is serious there would have been bite marks.

There is no excuse for his owners who obviously had given him no training or boundaries.

I agree with GSDslave. Kill the child? He didn't even bite the child. Like I said, I'd not want to be around the dog, but I don't think he was vicious. The dog wasn't "attacking" as nobody was bitten. This is a large German Shepherd. If you have seen one "attack" you'd know that this was NO attack. This is an out of control dog that absolutely doesn't need to be around kids or really other people, but I truly don't see a vicious dog.

I think people get overly dramatic when there's a child involved and it looks bad like this. A German Shepherd that didn't bite anybody at the scene can't really be said to have attacked. The dog is clearly out of that lady's control, but he honestly looked to be playing more than being mean. If he had wanted to hurt that'd child, there would have been nobody that could have stopped him. Yes the child was dragged along the grass, but she was reported to be unharmed.

Puppies grab pant legs and tug like this dog did, but the key is to training that away, which it doesn't seem like the owners did. A running person can be a target for a poorly trained dog, but that doesn't mean that the dog in pursuit is "attacking". Looked like an AWFUL game of tug of war between the dog and her brother. The reaction to the bystanders was mild. He didn't BITE anybody when he had many opportunities to do so.

Looking a the dog's body language, I see an overexcited, untrained young dog who thought he was playing a wonderful game of chase, especially as the boy holding the child was running all over the place.

I can assure you having encountered my neighbour's HA German Shepherd a couple of times, the body language of a GSD who is intent on attacking is totally different to the one in the video. It's one of the few times I've actually been afraid of a dog!

I completely disagree , yes I see an overexcited dog that has not been taught any restraints, but the wAy it was dragging the child around was not simply overstimulation, the child may not have been covered in bites, but can you honestly sY if you saw a dog dragging a child down the road like this, you would just say.......oh it's only playing !!!!!

I can distinguish between rough play and out of control, this dog was way out of control did no one see it turn its attention onto the men who tried to get it off the child.

It really does not matter if this was an attack or overstimulated play, I can't believe some think because no one got seriously bitten it's ok , that child could have been killed by the way it was being dragged around, the dog turned its attention onto they boy......so what he was running around ...then it turned its attention to the men.


I'm gobshacked people are justifying its behaviour and blaming the humans !!!!

Jackie can you show me where ANYBODY is justifying this dogs behavior? I certainly don't see anybody doing so. I agree that seeing a dog drag a child doesn't look like playing if you're just walking, but by examining the video, I can't see a vicious dog. I see a horribly behaved dog, but not a vicious one. He had the kid by her pants. And it's not that the child wasn't covered in bites, its that NOBODY was bitten even once. Yes once the dog got rushed and surrounded, he was startled... But again, he did NOT attack anybody.

He's an overstimulated dog that needs a LOT of training, but I just can't see a vicious dog. I've seen this breed truly attack many, many times... And I mean you've got to realize that a German Shepherd intent on hurting someone or something WILL NOT fail at doing so. He wasn't trying to hurt the child, he just thought the game of tug of war was way too fun. Also, did you see how incompetent the Lady who owned the dog was? Testament to the dogs poor behavior so I have to say this is at least somewhat her fault. She claimed to have "forgotten" the dogs leash. Really?

I have owned several GSD's over the years & I am telling you now that dog wanted that baby, he would of killed that baby if the boy & men didn't get him away from the baby.

I disagree. The dog didn't harm the child because he didn't want to. Him being allowed to drag the child as long as he wanted could have resulted in injury sure, but he had no intentions of biting the child and he wouldn't have. My Jade is a German Shepherd (mutt) and much like any dog that has a mean streak, I guarantee that if she went for a child, there's NO CHANCE the child would come out unharmed. Dogs that aren't playing don't go for the bottom of a pant leg. They also don't let go with a few smacks to the head. We will just have to disagree because I absolutely disagree despite you "telling" me.

True that had the dog been allowed to drag the child as long as he wanted to, the child likely would have been hurt, but for me to call a dog vicious, I have to see malice in the dog, which I don't. It doesn't look like this dog wanted to hurt anybody, and he didn't. He was out of the lady's control and his actions could have caused injury to a small child, but he wasn't truly TRYING to hurt the child, otherwise the child would have been hurt already. Nigredo knocked over several kids by jumping up when he was young, they could have been injured by hitting their heads on the concrete or something. I've heard of huge dogs smothering or crushing kids by accident. Just because a tiny child is injured by a dog, doesn't mean the dog attacked the child. But here, if nobody is bitten, the law does nothing. It absolutely doesn't count as an attack. So maybe I'm looking at it from that point.

I gave my opinion on what I saw, doesn’t mean that I justify it.
Yes I do blame the owner, this incident would never have happened had they been more observant and had the dog under control.
As for turning its attention to the boy and the men I don’t recall reading of any being bitten, as a vicious wound up dog would do.
Considering the vicious attack, he had plenty opportunity to seriously injure or ‘kill’ the child.
Can anyone explain to me why there was no bite marks or blood on the child

So you think a dog with the intention of killing would just hang onto clothing?

No Vee once the dog had pulled the baby from the grip of the boy & continued dragging the baby across the grass, was the point it stopped being a "game" that is when the dog's saw the baby as prey & would of killed the baby by shaking & tossing in air like a rag doll.

.........................................................................................................................................

Am wondering if the dog had been a Pit Bull, Staffy, Mastiff or any other muscle type dog it would still be class as a "game" or would the dog be Put To Sleep for dragging the baby across the grass by the baby's clothes.

........................................................................................................................................

There was no bite marks on the child because the dog luckily had hold of clothing not skin. The justification ( from some) for the dogs behaviour is because of the excuses made for the dog, it was only playing...it's the owners fault, the boy was playing tug with the dog ( with a child) !! The point is, the dog overstimulated or not, was dragging a baby round by its clothing, we all know what happens when dogs play tuggi, when they win the toy the tend to shake it...if that dog had managed to get the baby away from the brother and shook her, she would have been dead.

There was absolutely no reason in the first place for the dog to lunge and grab the child, if you look closely the dog was eating something, the child was playing nearby, and then the dog decided to go at the child.

Can you imagine walking your dog, then a child walks by with its parents and suddenly your dog decides to "play " with the child, it jumps up grabs its cloths and runs off down the street with the child bouncing on the pavement......can you imagine then trying to explain to parents and police.....my dog was only playing Because the child has bo bite marks .....good luck with that one.

Why act like the child got lucky that the dog only had her pants? The dog only had her pants because the dog only WANTED her pants. A dog intent on harming a child DOES NOT get only pants. Believe that... I mean or don't believe it. Its true either way. As I said, young puppies tug on pant legs, it isn't viciousness, it's unacceptable play. Its the same with this dog. I can explain why there are no bite marks. There are no bite marks on the child because the dog had NO INTENTION of biting the child. Or anybody else present for that matter. We can agree that left to his devices, the child would have likely been severely hurt, but that doesn't mean he meant to hurt her. And if he didn't mean to hurt her, I refuse to say he's a vicious dog.

I think we may all be watching different videos, or perhaps we are seeing what we want to see!

The dog did NOT ONLY want her pants, when the dog first jumped up at the child he jumped to her chest , it was only as the brother had her shielded from the dog that the dog took hold of what he could get............her pants, did you miss that bit , did you miss the bit the dog tried to get hold of her bottom, it was luck and nothing more that the only part of the child the dog could take a hold on was her pants, hence it pulled them down and was able to drag her round by the pants......... if it had managed to get hold of her arm, or sleeve , or jumper/chest, it would probably have inflicted more damage. to say this dog was only playing is beyond me, and please don`t come back at me with ........... you don`t understand GSD or a big dog playing, can you imagine your own dog doing this , and trying to explain it off as playing........ I`m sure you would have a hard time with that one!