- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 8/12/15 at 9:49 am to 68wDoc68w
See my last post.
This post was edited on 8/12/15 at 9:50 am
Posted on 8/12/15 at 9:50 am to 68wDoc68w
quote:
are you a complete idiot because this has literally been the only thing you have said
So you believe the assessment of the lawyer that is trying to make as much money as possible from this? And you're calling other people idiots?
Posted on 8/12/15 at 9:50 am to beejon
Ask Cecil the lion.
Posted on 8/12/15 at 9:51 am to LNCHBOX
quote:
I didn't basically say that at all.
quote:
quote: Still don't know why anyone takes the vet at face value when he wasn't in the room
Because 4 year olds do stupid shite like that with animals all the time.
Posted on 8/12/15 at 9:51 am to TheCaterpillar
quote:
The dog was antagonized at a vet, in the vets office, hiding under a desk. Just separate it from the customers. Why are people over reacting? He didn't kill the kid or attempt to kill the kid or anything. He snipped. Dogs do that when you pester and corner them.
Agree with all this.
quote:
ONLY reason this is a story is because the family hired a personal injury lawyer.
Well, I'm nbot sure if they had to do this in order to get hte vet to pay up for doctors bills or whatever. Vet is responsible since he allowed the situation to occur, IMHO.
Posted on 8/12/15 at 9:51 am to 68wDoc68w
quote:
are you a complete idiot because this has literally been the only thing you have said
No it isn't. Not even close.
Also, in addition to your stance on this topic you have shown to be the type of person to overuse the word "literally". Looks good on you man.
Posted on 8/12/15 at 9:51 am to Thib-a-doe Tiger
quote:
Still don't know why anyone takes the vet at face value when he wasn't in the room
I think what we're seeing here is people approaching this from an emotional standpoint and allowing emotion to cloud their judgement when it comes to the vet's story. People love dogs. I love my dogs. And for some people, their love of dogs prevents them from looking at this matter objectively.
Posted on 8/12/15 at 9:52 am to Thib-a-doe Tiger
That's not me basically saying what you said, but OK.
Posted on 8/12/15 at 9:52 am to Sid in Lakeshore
quote:
Well, I'm nbot sure if they had to do this in order to get hte vet to pay up for doctors bills or whatever. Vet is responsible since he allowed the situation to occur, IMHO.
I have said the vet should cover the kids med bills. This topic is about not putting the dog down.
If he isn't paying the med bills, he should. This has nothing to do with killing the dog.
Posted on 8/12/15 at 9:53 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
I think what we're seeing here is people approaching this from an emotional standpoint and allowing emotion to cloud their judgement when it comes to the vet's story.
Or we're skeptical of the claims of a personal injury attorney?
Posted on 8/12/15 at 9:53 am to ksayetiger
quote:
What if another animal bit the kid in his office? He allows other animals- knowingly- into his place of business. Is he responsible?
Red herring. We are talking about the Vets animal.
But yes, he might be and probably carries liability insurance just for the occasion. If not, he is stupid.
Posted on 8/12/15 at 9:54 am to Sid in Lakeshore
quote:
But yes, he might be and probably carries liability insurance just for the occasion. If not, he is stupid.
Which should cover the medical bills, right?
Why does the family want the dog to be put down? Will that get them more money somehow?
Posted on 8/12/15 at 9:55 am to LNCHBOX
I didn't say the vet's story isn't believeable, I just don't believe it should be scripture because it has been the case in other dog attacks.
You choose to believe someone who wasn't there because his story matches up with other instances of dog attacks. If you can't see how what I said is similar, I can't help you
You choose to believe someone who wasn't there because his story matches up with other instances of dog attacks. If you can't see how what I said is similar, I can't help you
Posted on 8/12/15 at 9:57 am to Rebelgator
quote:
no different than if you come to my house and you child is playing or beating my dog right next you and is bit, I as the home owner am responsible
You probably get this a lot, but you're a fricking moron.
Not sure why you're insulting him. It's a well established fact if you're a dog owner and it bites someone, even on your own property, you're probably going to be held responsible for that dog's actions. The laws vary from state to state, but in most instances, no matter what the circumstances are, the owner of a dog is held legally responsible if that dog bites someone.
Posted on 8/12/15 at 9:57 am to TheCaterpillar
quote:
Why does the family want the dog to be put down?
they don't..... FL state requires the dog be put down
Posted on 8/12/15 at 9:58 am to Thib-a-doe Tiger
quote:
I just don't believe it should be scripture because it has been the case in other dog attacks.
I didn't say it's scripture. Your posts insinuated it shouldn't be believed. What I said is that it is likely that the child did that because children do that a lot. Do you disagree?
Put differently, what do you think is more likely: a dog that has been around many different people for the last two years and has never done something like this (and isn't a pitbull) decided that day was the day to randomly attack an innocent boy doing nothing wrong, or the kid antagonized the dog somehow?
Posted on 8/12/15 at 9:58 am to Sid in Lakeshore
quote:
Red herring. We are talking about the Vets animal.
But yes, he might be and probably carries liability insurance just for the occasion. If not, he is stupid.
Yes, and the insurance company will try to wiggle out of not covering that dog. If it is true that the kid went into an office where the dog was (not the public) that's the issue. The scumbag personal injury attorney will argue that the door to the office not being locked or open will imply public access etc etc.
It's a shame the child is injured, every parent fears it. I still blame the baby sitter pending other information.
The vet is screwed and the dog is a gonner. The babysitter is a moron and the kid is scarred. No winner in this other than the attorney and maybe the plastic surgeon.
This post was edited on 8/12/15 at 10:01 am
Posted on 8/12/15 at 9:58 am to Darth_Vader
thanks darth
Posted on 8/12/15 at 9:59 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
Not sure why you're insulting him. It's a well established fact if you're a dog owner and it bites someone, even on your own property, you're probably going to be held responsible for that dog's actions. The laws vary from state to state, but in most instances, no matter what the circumstances are, the owner of a dog is held legally responsible if that dog bites someone.
If someone is on my property BEATING my dog, its my fault if my dog bites them?
Here's the quote again:
quote:
no different than if you come to my house and you child is playing or beating my dog right next you and is bit, I as the home owner am responsible
Page 6 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News