“As I was walking past it looked at me and then jumped,” he said. “It wiggled me about and threw me on the road.”What happened to ‘Just the facts, ma’am’..? Oh. Right. That was so long ago, and in another country…
… Norfolk police confirmed they were investigating the attack.
The owner apologised but Anita, 28, believes the dog should now be muzzled to stop any further attacks on children in the area.
The mother-of-four said: “The dog just went for him. When I told the police they said, ‘what did he do to provoke it?’ “My son was just walking back to his mate’s house. He has got three puncture wounds and a massive chunk of skin missing and massive bruising. It was completely unprovoked. He is in a lot of shock.”
I wonder if anyone's asked the five police officers serving that warrant on Thursday if they 'provoked' the beast? I bet they wouldn't be all that chuffed to be asked that, as they lay in their hospital beds.
I bet, as a result of that, they'll be a lot less prone to brush aside reports of dog attacks (like the one described in comments) on civilians in future, or to fail to act on reports of serious injuries, especially at addresses they may one day have to visit.
As the comments point out, they've been well and truly hoist on their own petard in this incident, and there's not a great deal of sympathy:
And there's more:
Now, while no-one should want to see anyone hurt, the dangerous dog phenomenon is the inverse of the serial killer phenomenon.
When a serial killer is discovered, the neighbours are all 'Oh, really? Gosh! Dave, you say? Well, he was such a nice, quiet guy! Grew lovely daffodils...'.
When one of these weapon dogs - because that's what they are, despite the 'Mirror' referring to it as a 'pet' yesterday, it's no more a 'pet' than its owner is a 'musician' (cellist? the triangle? place your bets..) - goes berserk, the paper is usually full of neighbours pointing out how it has attacked before, it was clearly dangerous, everyone was afraid of it and nothing was done.
Perhaps now, something will be done. And not the usual blanket something, sweeping up family pets and weapon dogs alike, but targeted action focusing on just these sorts of areas, just these sorts of owners, and just these sorts of dogs.
The police know. They have the information, even if they haven't always shared it with their own people. Up till now, they've lacked the impetus.
I'm hoping they now have the impetus. But it seems it's only to protect themselves and other state employees:
The Association of Chief Police Officers has renewed a call to strengthen the terms of the Dangerous Dogs Act after an attack in east London hospitalised five officers.Why not 'people'? Don't we count?
Acpo's lead officer on the issue, North Wales assistant chief constable Gareth Pritchard, said he wanted dog owners to be prosecuted if their animal attacked police when they were making an arrest in a suspect's home. Currently owners can only be prosecuted if a dog attack occurs on public land as opposed to private property. Pritchard added that any new legislation should cover nurses, social workers and postal workers, who were lawfully entitled to be on private property.