You are not logged in. (Log in • Create account)
See complete forecast
I have made my point.
Nothing else needs to be said.
April 19, 2011
dog mauls baby at Baldwin Public LIbrary
Uncalled for newsie. That was classless. How would you like it if someone you loved got mauled by a dog? Granted that didn't happen in this case, but it is no laughing matter.
Some time ago I was there with my son and was a bit surprised to see a dog in the library. Appropriate? I don"t think so given the library is a place for the public, my impression was dogs / animals were not allowed in places such as a library, post office, court house...
Side note. Newsie you are totally classless. Next time you have something to contribute don't, you will look much smarter.
What did the dog look like. Just wondering who the person was.
Dogs are outlawed at parades and other such events, but they are okay in confined public buildings? Sounds like this lady needs ticketed, fo sho.
Maybe instead of addressing the problem in a blown-out-of-proportion post in the paper, you should address the problem of the dog with the proper library staff personnel. If you don't get satisfaction there attend a board meeting. I see you are quoting what the lady said about the dog, but you were not there.
Formerfarmer- Your presumptions mean nothing to me, but perhaps you should re-read my comments. I called her directly, and explained that her dog had no place in a public library. My reason for posting here was twofold.
1. To inform the public that there is the possibility of encountering potentially aggressive, and dangerous dog INSIDE the public library!
2. To make sure that the lady that promised to never again bring her dog to the library follows through with her promise!
This isn’t about anything more than placing the safety and wellbeing of our children over that of an animal!
And as such, you're actions and dishonesty here are a "gross" violation of the United States Marines Code of Ethics and Conduct, which covers current, former and retired Marine personnel for life.
The fact that you begin your diatribe with "I will preface my post by saying that my comments are fact and not opinion.' is a flat out lie in itself.
In a matter of less than 3 minutes, I could compel your wife, under oath, to confirm the facts herewith and show you to be a dishonest instigator.
And should you try to pawn off your tall tale as fact under oath, you could go to jail for perjury. In the court of public opinion, I would suggest you've already shamed and embarrassed yourself and your family.
The library hosts all kind of animals for children throughout the year. Different rural families have brought in alpacas, goats, rabbits, etc. The children love these exhibits. They ask for them.
The dog mention by Former Marine was a puppy, not an adult dog. I was present at the time. I observed everything.
I have observed all these events with families and children.
It's a sad state of affairs when one nutty complainer (in my opinion) can disrupt and de-harmonize what is a very successful and appreciated library environment.
And it should make all patrons as angry and it does me.
HA HA HA, you make me laugh Mr. Lawyer-man! While quoting the Marines Code of Ethics and Conduct, you forgot “Marines take care of their own”!
In today’s litigious society do you REALLY want to threaten me in a public forum with a lawsuit? I called the library on my office phone (recorded line) and spoke with the owner of the dog. In HER WORDS she said (and I am quoting) “I was surprised my dog snapped and your baby, and I have been sick about it ever since”!
At the end of the day the dog is not supposed to be in the public library, PERIOD!
But then again I think we all know what they say about arguing on the internet!
I have seen this type of over reaction many times with people who are afraid of dogs. It might be due to a bad childhood experience with a dog, or just their upbringing that gives that mind set about dogs. I have seen these people react with real fear when a dog is simply running to greet that person. Some make no attempt to get over this fear which is sad. This dog clearly wasn’t that big that the lady could ‘pick it up’ in your own words.
I am inclined to believe Attorney for several reasons. If your wife was the one that experienced this why is it you that is posting with no word from her. The other is that if your account of the events was accurate a person would not start with posting on this forum nor would they confront the dog owner, but would instead complain to the Board Members themselves. That along with your colorful words such as lunged and snapped are written in what appears to be entice emotion from others whereas a simple explanation of events had they happened this way would be enough for people to side with you.
Regardless of what happen the Library is no place for a dog or pet. We all have pets and they stay at home while we work. We cannot predict how a animal will react. This situation sounds like a non-issue but it still needs to be dealt with and a policy put in place no animals except in a special situation. The City cannot handle a lawsuit, we have enough problems. The Schools also need to do the same, we have a school which will also have animals at the school while kids are present. I love animals this is just not the time or place.
Exactly my point, thank you.
So much drama! I was not going to reply and get involved, but I am the mom who was at the library with my daughters. Mr. Attorney man, you say you were there, yet there were no men there at the time I was there. Unless you are really a woman? If so, I encourage you to describe me to prove your point. This dog was not a puppy. In fact, it was an old dog.
"Lunged and snapped" accurately described what this dog did to my baby. My husband was simply on here trying to prevent this to happening to other people. There is SO Much drama on this thread and all of the other posts in this Baldwin forum. It gives me a headache just trying to read some of the posts!
There is no fear of dogs in our family...we just get tired of irresponsible pet owners. Our older daughter has been bit twice on 2 different occasions. Once in the face and once on the hand. Both times, the owners said "oh, our dog is nice and never bites anyone". No one likes to think that their dogs will bite, and rarely do people spend the time necessary training their dogs.
Dogs do not belong in the library - especially if their owners can not control them or when they are as unpredictable as this dog is.
Why do you assume that 1776attorney is a man? Is is because of the Attorney in the name? only men are attorneys? Really you are just assuming that they are an Attorney at all. Or is that they imply they are a Marine. Those are only men right? I guess it was your husband that assumed it was man by his post. You keep digging a bigger hole and showing your ignorance with your spouting off.
It is up to the Library Board to set rules about what is and is not allowed in the Library. As said before if you were that concerned with others well being you would have addressed it with the board. Addressing it directly with the party involved or on this fourm is only showing your desire for confrontation.
If you don't know who the board is you can find there names here http://baldwin.mykansaslibrary.org/?page_id=16
Oh c’mon, REALLY!? What relevance does the gender of the antagonist play in this conversation? You are simply arguing for the sake of arguing! Male, female or hermaphrodite, it makes no difference to me.
You are drawing all sorts of assumptions that have no bearing on this conversation! Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy it when people make asses of themselves in print! It makes my point for me!
Your post is comical, and I have said it before, your uneducated, misspelled, presumptive post means nothing to me! I don’t care if Ronald McF@cking Donald is on the God-D@mned board… dogs do not belong n the library! If you feel differently then I will bring my two 80+ pitbulls into the building for a little “play-date” and see how that turns out!
*Happy zombie Jesus day!
I stopped in to the library this morning and noticed the dog is no longer around.
Thank you Goldie, I appreciate your feedback!
I am sure you are startled over what happened, as any father wanting to protect his child should be. But I am not sure I understand why posting this story on a public forum was necessary? I might understand if the woman promised to remove the dog and then failed to hold true to that. But it sounds like she felt horrible about a mistake she made and agreed to never let it happen again. Why go to the newspaper and tell the town how you "told her off?" Sounds like the problem was taken care of, man (I assume you are a man). The library has only a few women working there so it doesn't take too long to figure out which particular woman you are carrying on about. Why go the extra mile to humiliate the woman who you admitted felt horrible about what had happened and agreed to get the dog out of the library?
I totally get where you are coming from because that could have ended up being a pretty bad situation had your daughter been bit. I just think you could have handled it with more class.
Glad your daughter is safe. Happy holiday.
Thanks you, Jenks, for handling this so well and sharing your opinion about how you feel that it should have been handled! You made some good points. We appreciate your feedback and hope you had a good holiday as well.
I am not going to contribute to this nuttiness beyond one final comment. This doesn't deserve my attention or anyone else's wasted efforts.
I think from the above comments by the complainee(s) it is more than obvious that there is some screwballitus involved here. We are now subjected to flippant, sarcastic and insulting comments.
It is also becoming obvious from some of the added comments that new contributors are NOT reading all the comments and making judgments based on the facts versus the fictions presented here. New contributors are commenting on events that never even happened.
Additionally, it is irrelevant whether I am a man or a woman. I am not on trial here. The complainant and his wife have the burden of proof. The rest of use bear no other responsibility or obligation to prove anything. My recollection of what transpired here can be backed up by no less than 5 other people who were present. Something "former_marine" cannot claim for himself.
As I stated before, I was at the library at the time of this non-event. The description presented by "former_marine" is complete bunk. Not only that, but he is presenting inflammatory "hearsay" as repeated by his wife. He wasn't even present himself. Hearsay is notorious for falsehood, exaggeration and bias and that's why it is "banned from a court trial".
Regardless, his wife's account of events is slanted to the point of dishonesty. I might add that not only did the puppy not "lunge and snarl" but the older daughter eventually went and played with the puppy briefly while the wife and baby walked around the library for over 1 hour looking at books.
Contrary to the wife's statement here, the dog was a puppy. It is not an "old dog" as she claims. So even her recollection is wrong or worse, dishonest.
I will do something I usually refrain from doing out of respect and good manners towards all people. I feel compelled to stand up for what is "right and just"...as such, I would ask each and every commentor and reader to ask yourself if "former_marines" ramblings and blabberings on this site sound realistic and presented by someone of sound mind and judgement.
That said, I think each of us will come to a similar conclusion.
This was the wrong forum for this to be presented in. Fault the newspaper for even allowing someone to post false and misleading information and creating a whole incident out of thin air based on phony and fabricated events that never happened.
The wife complains justifiably about how this has developed into such drama and yet her husband continues to add inflammatory and insulting comments.
This has been blown way out of proportion to what actually happened. It's becoming a tall tale. In time, the puppy will actually be described as a 10 foot tall monster who eats children for lunch at the library.
People, please, move on to real issues and problems, instead of creating one out of thin air with fabricated fictions.
Be careful, or the big, tough "former marine" will sic his "2 80+" pitbulls on you (roll of eyes)--not to mention, cuss you out, fart, and stomp his combat boots in your general direction.
Yes, your comments carry a much stronger ring of truth to this unbiased reader.
Wonder what the law says about someone openly threatening someone with pitbulls (even imaginary penis-compensatory ones).
I said from the beginning that I wasn't present at the time the event occurred, however you weren't there either, and we both know it!
My wife and I are both anxiously awaiting a physical description of of her.
It seems to me that you like to stick your nose where it doesn't belong. It's also apparent that hiding behind the moniker "attorney" and using legal-speak has intimidated people on this forum in the past. It's easy for you to come on here and publicly lambaste me, call me a liar, and threaten me with litigation, but I don't buy your shtick for a second! As for "tracking my ip address straight to my front door" ... C'mon on over and knock on that door my friend!
As for the sane individuals:
I have taken the level headed comments to heart and will admit that I shouldn't have publicly come down so hard on the lady. I edited my original post, and appreciate the constructive comments that were made.
I agree that nothing else needs to be said on this matter (unless 1776attorney shows up on my doorstep) HA HA HA HA!
1776 Attorney, I have a few last comments...you were NOT present at the library. Unless you are a female teenager that was babysitting two kids because she was the only other person in the library, other than the ladies behind the desk. So you and your "five witnesses" must have been somewhere else. You have yet to describe me, or the dog for that matter. Other than saying it was a puppy, which it is not. You give my husband a hard time for not being at the library when this happened, well neither were you! You say I let my older daughter play with the puppy while i looked around for an hour??? Are you kidding me? I wasn't even there for an hour, nor would I EVER let my daughter play with a puppy without me being by her side.
All of your comments lead me to believe that you are full of lies, or you were at the library when some other lady was there with her two children. Because I can assure you that you were NOT there when I was there. That could be confirmed by my older daughter AND all of the ladies that work there, I am sure. It's not like the library is this huge place and i just didn't see you and your five friends.
pets should not be allowed in places where food or beverages are sold. or in facilities where sterility is an issue.
I do not think this is an issue of irresponsible pet ownership but irresponsible parenting....
Fact: Dog's have teeth.... Whether they have ever bitten before is moot. They are capable of biting.
If you do not want to take the chance, instruct your children to steer clear of unfamiliar dogs.
If you allowed your child close enough to be snapped at or bitten, that falls onto to the shoulders of the parent. Dogs are Dogs. They may or may not bite, pee on the shelves or defecate in the isles. I feel that as long as the owner has a firm control on the dog and cleans up any messes it may or may not make.... Keep your kids away from the animal and there will be no issue.
Commenting has been disabled for this item.
or see results
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2013 The BaldwinCity.com. All rights reserved.