Dogs may lose right to bite

Dogs may lose right to bite

There are 192 comments on the Newsday story from Feb 19, 2008, titled Dogs may lose right to bite. In it, Newsday reports that:

Dog owner Juan Abel Mendez, said he was "beside himself" when his pet bit an 8-year-old girl's face in 2003.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Newsday.

First Prev
of 10
Next Last
Quinn

United States

#197 Feb 21, 2008
More dogs less illegals and incompetent politicians.
MICHAEL VICK

Hialeah, FL

#198 Feb 21, 2008
Pitbulls are okay. They can get you in trouble though.
Pit Bull owner

Caldwell, NJ

#199 Feb 22, 2008
Jackie Chiles wrote:
<quoted text>
No the world is full of "retards" who let their pitbulls and other potentially lethal dogs run around loose.
Except in the case of an intruder or someone deliberately provoking a dog, or that sort of thing it is the DOG OWNER's responsibility to make sure their dog is not put in a position where a person (especially a child) might get injured.
If you really are a responsible owner who has had no biting incidents for 25 years, then I applaud you.
But I also say that people like you don't need "one free bite" to protect yourselves from liability, you have responsibility and common sense.
One free bite only protects reckless, irresponsible dog owners, not good ones like you.
nobody should let their dog's run around loose
I can't tell you how many times I have to pick up my dog, because some idiot is jogging with their Lab off leash and the suicidal creature runs into my dog's my face

BUT
dog's bite to defend themselves
I taught my dogs biting people is unacceptable
I also have seen my own nephew do something to my dog that absolutely warranted him defending himself, and he did not
my nephew picked up a basketball and slammed the dog in the ribs with the basketball
the dog stood there crying, looking at me like "why is he doing this to me"
and when I asked my nephew why he did that....
his response
"I don't know"
If the dog bit him
I doubt he would have told my "why" the dog bit him
Pit Bull owner

Caldwell, NJ

#200 Feb 22, 2008
I doubt he would have told me "why" the dog bit him
the keyboard does not always type the keys I want it to LOL ...fire the proof reader

AND my sister took exception to the fact that I yelled at her son
LI Dog Lover

Elmont, NY

#201 Feb 27, 2008
I'm a lifetime dog owner and I've been bitten several times (never sued). I'm also an attorney who has seen first hand some of the horror and pain people have suffered as a result of dog attacks. It may come as a surprise to some of you tort deforming cool aid drinkers but most attorneys will not take dog bite cases for many reasons. Chief among them is that our outdated NY law (the so called one free bite) that requires a victim of a dog attack to prove the prior vicious nature of the dog. It is an extremely difficult standard to meet as there is no data bank for this info. Hence most dog bite victims go uncompensated as the gatekeeper of this damaging info is the dog owner and everybody including that pit bull owner thinks there dog is safe, won't bite etc... When was the last time you heard a dog owner say... he bites? LOL.

This case is about responsibility and not shifting the burden of medical expenses etc... to the victim. Why should the victim, whether you consider her to be innocent or not, be further victimized? A proper result will bring our state in line with the majority of other states and offer the opportunity for a jury to decide whether the victim should be compensated. The claimant must still prove her case to a jury and if the jurors were the ones on this blog ... IMHO the claimant would lose anyway. But at least she had the chance to prove her claim.

If we continue to allow the so called one free bite why don't we extend it to other areas... how about giving a child molestor or rapist one free pass? Or the driver with an impeccable driving record that blows a stop sign and kills your kid in the crosswalk? Does he get a pass?

Come on people this is about personal responsibility. We may differ on whether having a dog in a candy store designed to attract kids is reasonsible behavior... but having a judge decide this as a matter of law and not allowing a jury to decide this issue is what this case is about. As I said before a jury could still throw them out but this is a decision you readers as jurors and as victims are entitled to have.

Before any of you "I would never sue and neither should you further buy the insurance lobby BS..... educate yourselves. Google and read about other rights and issues that may affect you and loved ones... i.e our Date of Discovery Rule in medical malpractice, our Wrongful Death Statute etc... Someday you may find yourself a victim and when you finally do make the call (and you all do) you may find out you have been denied the right to make a recover for damages sustained by somebody else's carelessness, negligence or intentional behavior. And if you can't understand it now wait til you're an innocent victim out of work, with medical bills mounting and in pain etc... and then being told you're SOL.

“The more things change...”

Since: Feb 08

The more they stay the same!!!

#202 Feb 27, 2008
LI Dog Lover wrote:
I'm a lifetime dog owner and I've been bitten several times (never sued). I'm also an attorney who has seen first hand some of the horror and pain people have suffered as a result of dog attacks. It may come as a surprise to some of you tort deforming cool aid drinkers but most attorneys will not take dog bite cases for many reasons. Chief among them is that our outdated NY law (the so called one free bite) that requires a victim of a dog attack to prove the prior vicious nature of the dog. It is an extremely difficult standard to meet as there is no data bank for this info. Hence most dog bite victims go uncompensated as the gatekeeper of this damaging info is the dog owner and everybody including that pit bull owner thinks there dog is safe, won't bite etc... When was the last time you heard a dog owner say... he bites? LOL.
This case is about responsibility and not shifting the burden of medical expenses etc... to the victim. Why should the victim, whether you consider her to be innocent or not, be further victimized? A proper result will bring our state in line with the majority of other states and offer the opportunity for a jury to decide whether the victim should be compensated. The claimant must still prove her case to a jury and if the jurors were the ones on this blog ... IMHO the claimant would lose anyway. But at least she had the chance to prove her claim.
If we continue to allow the so called one free bite why don't we extend it to other areas... how about giving a child molestor or rapist one free pass? Or the driver with an impeccable driving record that blows a stop sign and kills your kid in the crosswalk? Does he get a pass?
Come on people this is about personal responsibility. We may differ on whether having a dog in a candy store designed to attract kids is reasonsible behavior... but having a judge decide this as a matter of law and not allowing a jury to decide this issue is what this case is about. As I said before a jury could still throw them out but this is a decision you readers as jurors and as victims are entitled to have.
Before any of you "I would never sue and neither should you further buy the insurance lobby BS..... educate yourselves. Google and read about other rights and issues that may affect you and loved ones... i.e our Date of Discovery Rule in medical malpractice, our Wrongful Death Statute etc... Someday you may find yourself a victim and when you finally do make the call (and you all do) you may find out you have been denied the right to make a recover for damages sustained by somebody else's carelessness, negligence or intentional behavior. And if you can't understand it now wait til you're an innocent victim out of work, with medical bills mounting and in pain etc... and then being told you're SOL.
I have a novel idea. How about making it easier to go after aggressive lawyers. I mean it's all about personal responsibility right counselor. If you knowingly bring a frivolous lawsuit against me, say because your client decided to break into my house and my dog proceeded to remove the skin from his face, maybe you should be held responsible for my legal bills as well as the pain and suffering you put me through. Of course we all now that will never happen because the guy under that black robe is a lawyer and the fellas that make the laws are lawyers. Seems to me that might be a conflict of interest no?
bewitched

Brooklyn, NY

#203 Feb 28, 2008
If we continue to allow the so called one free bite why don't we extend it to other areas... how about giving a child molestor or rapist one free pass? Or the driver with an impeccable driving record that blows a stop sign and kills your kid in the crosswalk? Does he get a pass?
Counselor, don't compare a dog to a child molester,rapist or errant driver. They are incapable of those actions. You also stated as a lifetime dog owner you were bitten several times..care to elaborate? The only reasons domesticated dogs will bite is from fear, injury, illness or if they were trained to attack.
April

AOL

#204 Mar 2, 2008
Owners do need to be held responsible for the actions of their pets. Only the owners know the animals temperment. My watch dog, did bite a thief that was in my yard, but my yard is fenced & he was on a chain, and several signs on my fence stating security dog, & beware signs.I called the police & reported it, but my dog was not at fault, he was doing his job. When it is posted, this is a way of letting everyone know, there is no excuse. My son was mauled, & bitten several times in the face by my neighbors pitbull, after he had gone over there to play with the little girl he was friends with. They had to put their dog at the pound for 10 days, & because they were renters, and owned nothing, & had nothing in thier name, they wern't even made to pay the hospital bills. Pet owners do need to be responsible for their animals, no matter what.
miffed

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#205 Mar 5, 2008
LI Dog Lover wrote:
I'm a lifetime dog owner and I've been bitten several times (never sued). I'm also an attorney who has seen first hand some of the horror and pain people have suffered as a result of dog attacks. It may come as a surprise to some of you tort deforming cool aid drinkers but most attorneys will not take dog bite cases for many reasons. Chief among them is that our outdated NY law (the so called one free bite) that requires a victim of a dog attack to prove the prior vicious nature of the dog. It is an extremely difficult standard to meet as there is no data bank for this info. Hence most dog bite victims go uncompensated as the gatekeeper of this damaging info is the dog owner and everybody including that pit bull owner thinks there dog is safe, won't bite etc... When was the last time you heard a dog owner say... he bites? LOL.
This case is about responsibility and not shifting the burden of medical expenses etc... to the victim. Why should the victim, whether you consider her to be innocent or not, be further victimized? A proper result will bring our state in line with the majority of other states and offer the opportunity for a jury to decide whether the victim should be compensated. The claimant must still prove her case to a jury and if the jurors were the ones on this blog ... IMHO the claimant would lose anyway. But at least she had the chance to prove her claim.
If we continue to allow the so called one free bite why don't we extend it to other areas... how about giving a child molestor or rapist one free pass? Or the driver with an impeccable driving record that blows a stop sign and kills your kid in the crosswalk? Does he get a pass?
Come on people this is about personal responsibility. We may differ on whether having a dog in a candy store designed to attract kids is reasonsible behavior... but having a judge decide this as a matter of law and not allowing a jury to decide this issue is what this case is about. As I said before a jury could still throw them out but this is a decision you readers as jurors and as victims are entitled to have.
Before any of you "I would never sue and neither should you further buy the insurance lobby BS..... educate yourselves. Google and read about other rights and issues that may affect you and loved ones... i.e our Date of Discovery Rule in medical malpractice, our Wrongful Death Statute etc... Someday you may find yourself a victim and when you finally do make the call (and you all do) you may find out you have been denied the right to make a recover for damages sustained by somebody else's carelessness, negligence or intentional behavior. And if you can't understand it now wait til you're an innocent victim out of work, with medical bills mounting and in pain etc... and then being told you're SOL.
that is why all insurance should be no-fault, that way if your kid gets bit your covered, and leave it to the insurance company to recover from the dogs owner.

There is also a big difference between a dog bite and an attack. Most dogs will bite to defend themselves or even accidentally while playing. Some dogs will attack and try to kill. The former should be treated legally like an accident the latter should be treated as a violent crime.
ChristmasTree

United States

#206 Apr 30, 2009
What BS! Your dog attacks a human, have a hearing, then euthanize the mutt! Animals ARE NOT PEOPLE, and the jerks who 'own' them will always defend them, just like the sociopathic kids they have. Then, sue the owners, period. Any person killing an aggresive dog should get a medal.
Spam

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#207 Apr 30, 2009
ban pets period wrote:
When we let our brother starve, but feed Fido, something is wrong with the world. People should have plants and that's it. I have yet to have one of my precious ferns attack anyone.
Wait till one of your neighbors sues you for causing them an acute allergy attack.
But hey, that why this world has more than its share of atrocities, thanks to people like who think everyone is free as long as they do what you do.
Of course, you gonna call me stupid and claim I shouldn't be allowed to vote, but that will only prove my point.
Spam

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#208 Apr 30, 2009
LI Dog Lover wrote:
I'm a lifetime dog owner and I've been bitten several times (never sued). I'm also an attorney who has seen first hand some of the horror and pain people have suffered as a result of dog attacks. It may come as a surprise to some of you tort deforming cool aid drinkers but most attorneys will not take dog bite cases for many reasons. Chief among them is that our outdated NY law (the so called one free bite) that requires a victim of a dog attack to prove the prior vicious nature of the dog. It is an extremely difficult standard to meet as there
is no data bank for this info.
And you can prove, HOW?, that you never sued?
And actually you just explained, us stupid uneducated people, why lawyers want that law to be done away with: it's very difficult to make money off dog bites so with a new law you can make money there too. Is there ONE little thing that might just happened where you lawyers don't want to make money off of?
And PLEASE, spare me the suffering and blah blah of the victims, you care as much about the victims as Al Gore cares about the enviroment.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 10
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Bridgehampton Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Albany Police investigate shooting (Mar '14) Aug 2 yami200 14
News Billy Joel's daughter, Alexa Ray Joel, hospital... (Dec '09) Jun '17 Demon hugger 34
Security and Loss Prevention in the Hamptons May '17 Eastern Security 1
News MS-13 Gang "Entrenched" On Long Island (Aug '07) Apr '17 LibHater 111
Boycott Palm Beach County Mar '17 The War on Speech 1
News James Bissett, Long Island Aquarium Owner, Foun... (Dec '11) Feb '17 Peter Cheeks 2,914
News Christie Brinkley - Brinkley's Ex in Sex Tape S... (Oct '08) Feb '17 sysfruddin ketua 3

Bridgehampton Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Bridgehampton Mortgages