I am appalled that this dog was not destroyed at the first attack on the young Aaron, How the owner of the dog, especially who has children herself, can allow the dog to be around children! That it'self is should carry a harder punishment for the owner.

It has taken just less than 10 weeks for this dog to attack again, whilst all the while Aaron has been having to look in the mirror at his scars everyday and was even subjected at one point to name calling because of it. The dog should have been taken away immediatly after this first occurance. For the family of Aaron to have to pursue a dog being put down is wrong, the law should have protected them, not the dog. Even the police where unable to enforce its desctruction without a court hearing which was due next week. It is obvious that once a dog of this breed has attacked once, it will do so again, we all said it would and it did. God bless that second child, it could have very easily been avoided. 2 points, the dog should have been put down immediatly after Aaron was mauled, 2nd point, the owners should have not resisted giving up the dog and should have seen the damage it had done and shown humane responsibilty. Any dog of any breed can turn, some are more succeptable to do it than others. I suggest angryman9 that you look up Japenese akita and you will find that they have a tendancy to attack "smaller" people, this dog is not a family pet and the owners should have known this. We live in a society were dogs are now seen as tropheys to SOME owners, we all hear the horror stories of the pitbulls, staffs etc and the Japenese Akita, even though not on the dangerous dogs act is bred the same, origionally for bear hunting in the US. If you live in the area angryman9, you will know an adult Japenese Akita attacked a 40 year old man when he tried to stop it attacking its owners child. (yes, the dogs owners child) This dog lived in a pub and was reguarly around people and one day turned. The owners had it shot straight away, without question. The 40 year old quite well built man was unable to fight the dog off,,and underwent a list of surgeries. The dog that attacked these two boys was just 20 months old, any older into dog adulthood and I am afraid they would

not of been able to fight it off, why is the law different for a dog? If I attack someone on my property, I would be charged and prosecuted so why is it different for a dog !

This sort of situation really P****S me off, People with no knowledge of the Akita breed have no buissiness owning them!! Anyone in possesion of 1/2 a brain would have steps in place to make sure this NEVER happened. As a mother I do feel for the children in question, as the very proud owner of Akita's I would like to know what the children were doing at the time? All dogs need to be socialised and recieve proper training I'm sorry to say but this person should not have the priviledge of having such a fantastic dog. BAN STUPID PEOPLE, NOT DOGS!!!!

to sterling 1973, the children were playing outside & not even knowing the dog was there, Then the dog was let out!

I Lived Very close to both this incidents, and am very releved me my brother and my mum moved shortly before the dog attacks happened, such an upsetting attack would make my brother ( a former freind of the injured second victim) very upset. this dog was rightfully destroyed, but 3 MONTHS 2 LATE!

I am affraid outraged brigger is correct! Did you also know that they are still the owners of another dog of some sort of bull terrier breed currently pregnant with the destroyed Akita's pup's.