Me too! Loved it!
Read “Animals in Translation” by Temple Grandin - it is an excellent book that details when and why dogs (and other animals) do what they do…
But it’s ridiculous in a good way. Hyperbole makes the internet - and all of human existence - more fun.
I love both cats and dogs. But there are things about this video I do not understand at all. Why is it so well edited? I mean there is scene 1, cut to dog lurking, scene 2, dog attacks, etc. Who has this many surveillence cameras around their house, and then edits such nearly catostrophic scenes so professionally? (Oh… is this Hollywood or Beverly Hills or something)?
And mostly… Why does the mother run away from the kid after he has been attacked? The whole thing seems fishy to me.
PS. I’m not doubting the heroism of the cat. Cats are cool in my book.
They ‘spliced’ together images, from different times, from several cameras and different angles. Maybe they told someone about the attack and they helped edit?
Crime:
For more details on this topic, see Bakersfield Police Department.
The number of violent crimes recorded by the Bakersfield Police Department in its 2008 Crime Reports was 5,961.[99] 27 of those were murders and homicides.[100]
Data collected by Bakersfield Police Department, an anti-gang program
under the City of Bakersfield, shows that the city of Bakersfield has
experienced an increase in gang membership and gang activity since the early 2000s. Bakersfield is a 10% safe city.
I really don’t think it’s fishy.
But why did “they” splice together images from multiple cameras to create such a commercial looking video of “their” son almost getting killed? (And I really have no idea who “they” are).
As a parent, if something like this happened to my kid, I would be way too freaked out to package it up in such neat little youtube video.
Oh. And thanks for all the info about Bakersfield an crime reports 5,961[99]27 whatever.
That has got to be the stupidest comment ever made. EVER.
Nazi.
2 Likes
As to the mother running away, I wondered, too. All I can come up with is (1) she sees the child’s wound, and instead of moving them, decides to run and get her cell phone so she can call emergency medical help, or (2) perhaps she knows the dog’s owner is right next door and she’s going over to extract a swift, immediate, and above all terrifying vengeance. Much like Grendel’s mother.
Er, probably not the latter scenario.
2 Likes
A lot of surveillance systems come with a minimum of 8 cameras and record to a DVR which you can connect to your computer. We’ve been looking into getting a system because weird/criminal shit happens in our neighborhood in the summer.
I can easily imagine a scenario where the neighbors insisted their precious, sweet doggy couldn’t possibly have carried out that unprovoked attack. Editing the video into a timeline of events may have been necessary to prove that it happened as the mother claimed. Also, if that was my cat, I’d want to share with the world how awesome she is.
3 Likes
whatever.
Christ, what an asshole.
4 Likes
Everything @IronEdithKidd said, no further elaboration needed.
1 Like
My big tom is a lovable guy but he will go after any person or animal that acts aggressively towards another person or animal. Once the situation is calm, he will show affection to the aggressor and the victim. He is a natural peacekeeper.
The man who posted it ultimately responded to the idiotic speculations/comments on the YouTube video, most of which were excoriating his wife for running away. It looks like the original video has been made private, possibly due to the aforementioned idiot commenters, but the long and short of it is that the wife ran to the other side of the SUV to make sure the dog wasn’t coming around the other side for another attack.
7 Likes
When you see the full video, including the other angles, it looks like she is chasing the dog/perhaps getting the owner to lock it up.
2 Likes
I’m sorry, I’m not seeing a malicious animal or a brutal attack.
Is the dog a danger to the child? Yes, clearly, pound for pound that dog could do damage to such a small child, even without intending to do so. But the camera clearly exhibits the dog’s behaviors, and it is not behaving maliciously.
There are none of the classic signs of aggression that dogs display. There are no bared teeth, no slanted ears, no lowered tail, no protection of the vitals - this animal is not attacking, at least in terms of intending harm to another creature.
No, the visible body language of the animal clearly spells out that it is excited and interested - tail held high but loose, carefree trot, relaxed musculature, et cetera. This is a dog who wants to “play” in the manner of countless dogs throughout all time - via rough wrestling.
To a dog, being grabbed by the leg and dragged about is a bit of competitive fun akin to children rough-housing, as harmless as playing football. If the animal wanted to inflict real damage, it would - they have perfectly intact hunting and fighting instincts, and when a dog intents to wound or kill, it does the natural thing and goes for the throat.
It also doesn’t pull its punches, or rather, pull its bites - a dog that is “playing” certainly doesn’t use all of the force its jaws possess. They have to bite with “some” force, because they lack hands and therefor their mouths are how they grip things, but there is a world of difference between a firm holding bite and an attacking bite - just as there’s a difference between a human firmly grabbing someone, and violently choking someone.
The video clearly shows a dog that tried to play with a human child, not attack it.
That said, yes, as I stated, the dog was an unwitting danger to the child - what the animal thinks is harmless rough-housing (because it’s basis for comparison is other dogs) could actually quickly become real damage for a small and frail child.
I’ve personally witnessed various dogs from retriever breeds inflict actual harm on animals they didn’t intend to hurt - their instincts told them to go retrieve the “downed game”, but being untrained pets not used for hunting they lacked the restraint or caution necessary for such large animals to not harm such frail creatures as birds. Those dogs never once displayed any aggression - in their minds they clearly were just doing something harmless and natural.
Yet the consequences of those actions are very real. Hence why people are supposed to train their dogs. The dog in this video is clearly not trained. Yet even an untrained animal can still be restrained. Just like you don’t leave a young child unsupervised, you also do not leave an untrained animal unsupervised. The owner clearly did not properly fence, leash, or otherwise control their animal.
The dog did nothing wrong. It was not a vicious beast, and it did not attack. It simply made the mistake of acting on an instinct to play in a situation where that action could produce unintended harm.
The fault lies entirely with the owner - they’ve clearly not taken the time to properly train or control the poor dog. For that, the animal is being put to death. That alone is a goddamn travesty.
But to then have people villify the poor creature and its entire kind as some sort of slavering beasts? To have people foster fear of dogs purely out of their own ignorance and inability to tell the difference between a violent attack and overly rough “play” that’s gotten out of hand? That’s inexcuseable and irresponsible.
1 Like
While on that note I have a hunch the cat talked the dog into it in the first place.
“Hey Buster, you should come check out this boy I have, he loves playing! And he loves roughhousing the best!”
To be fair, the cat clearly was being protective of the child. 
That dog should not have lived out the next five minutes.
I’ve never seen a dog play and cause a severe bite wound.
I certainly didn’t see a severe bite wound in that video.
