Boston EMS tweets the woman was taken to a local hospital this afternoon to be checked out after firefighters and police managed to get her out. The dog was also recovered alive, Alex Jones tweets.
I for one am shocked that there was an unleashed dog in Jamaica Plain
they said they rescued her ok.
Is the sound of that joke whizzing by overhead.
They all do. I've yet to heat an irresponsible dog owner just own up and say "the laws don't apply to my canine child."
90% of them are completely obnoxious.
Beecher Street Dog Park
Where one can let your dog run off-leash to its little heart's content.
Also, to brush up on the city's leash law:
It never ceases to amaze me how certain dog owner's just plain choose to ignore leash laws. Sad, really, as it sounds like this dog likes to chase things and really should be on a leash for its own safety (and, it appears, the safety of his owner!)
Never chase after your dog. If it won't come to you when called, don't let it off leash. If you lose control of it (collar comes off, it dashes away), run the opposite direction with treats in hand, and pray that it has second thoughts about dashing away.
that this idiot went into frozen water to rescue her dog, necessitating her own rescue - which by its very nature endangered the life of another human. What if after, as she said, she started to become numb, she had gone under? What if she had then pulled down her rescuer?
Problem with these dog owners, esp. in JP, is that their dogs become as important, if nor moreso, than humans.
I don't see what's wrong with placing a pet's well-being and safety over your own. If I were down to my last $10, and it was between feeding myself or my pets, it'd be the pets every time.
Caring for pets is not the problem. Refusing to train and losing control of pets is the problem.
Seems like the actual issue is to avoid becoming a victim oneself, regardless of who or what needs rescuing.
It means rescuers may now have to rescue you and the dog, which could put them in greater danger as well. Don't rescue workers say to call for help and not go in after the dog?
The instinct to go in is understandable.
This argument is centered around the notion that inconveniencing a rescue workers is somehow worse than trying to rescue a beloved pet.
I agree that this person was completely irresponsible (and as a dog owner myself, I can't tell you how much disgust I have for your average irresponsible dog walker), but when your pup is at risk, you don't go "well geez, this dog sure is a lot of trouble, so I'm going to let him go and get himself/herself killed." You do what you can to stop it, even if it's not entirely the smartest thing to do.
Well, unless you're an unfeeling monster :p
And that last part is not a thinly veiled slight. There's plenty of dog owners who view their dogs as nothing but animated objects to use and discard on a whim. This is why this is a poorly thought out argument, because it completely disregards the well being of a pet (albeit, a horribly trained one).
If you think suiting up for a cold water/ice rescue situation and the risks associated with that are an "inconvenience" to rescue personnel, you really don't know what you're talking about.
If you think diverting rescue personnel and equipment to rescue fur babies, possibly increasing the response time for real emergencies is an "inconvenience", then clearly you feel quite entitled and are probably not too sharp.
If you take your unleashed dog to a frozen pond with birds sitting on said frozen pond and are surprised to find your dog in the water, you are too stupid to own a dog.
No matter how much you love it or personify it, it's still a dog. You can choose to personally risk whatever you want for your dog. But to insist that it's the duty of rescue personnel to risk themselves to save a dog is really foolish and selfish.
Rescue personnel make it a policy to rescue dogs because they otherwise end up rescuing people.
And there is always a chance that the dog will find its way out on its own by the time they get there, and the person will stay on shore in the meantime if they know that help is coming.
Otherwise, if they refused to help dogs, then they have to drag both a human and a dog out as a consequence, and any other good Samaritans who get out of their depth, too.
I'm sorry that you are unable to think these things through to the point where you understand that policy, but it makes perfect sense from a prevention of mayhem perspective to give humans every reason to keep their fair selves on the shore.
I love it when Swirly "did you know I have a PhD" Girl gets in the game.
Of course they would rather pull out a live dog than a dead human. That doesn't mean its a taxpayer subsidy for idiot dog owners. Only a fool goes in a frozen pond after they lost control of their dog. But unfortunately JP is full of those kinds of fools and people like you that justify their actions.
Clearly, Anon, you don't understand the job of rescue personnel.
Whether it is a cat stuck up in a tree or a deer caught on ice or a person in distress, they will rescue.
Owners should really not try to rescue their dogs because they will also put themselves in danger but I understand the impetus to do so. For example:
Now, aside from that, one can argue that the owner's of these dogs should pay for the rescues because they were in clear violation of the leash law. I have no issue with that, by the way. And they also should be fined, a nice hefty fine, something that will hit their pockets hard enough to make them purchase a leash for Fido.
A dog that falls into a frozen pond is way more likely to survive with minimum intervention than a human.
Keeping your dog on a leash of some sort is for HIS/HER safety. It's not a punishment. It keeps Doggie out of traffic, away from aggressive dogs, and away from people likely to provoke it into biting (resulting in it being put down.)
It has nothing to do with dog owners in JP. I trust you are not a dog owner. If I were in this womans shoes, I am afraid I would've done the same thing and I am sure a majority of dog owners would too. Don't forget all this happens in seconds and we react accordingly.
You have no idea what my dog means to me. She is very important to my life, my well being. You may sit in judgement, but you have no idea.
That's because they know that their people, like bearwalker, will go in after them if they don't.
So do consider calling for help first. You aren't wasting resources by doing so, and it raises the chances that you and the dog will make it out alive.
Consider that your particular dog or dog breed may be okay as well - the ever popular Labrador retrievers were bred for swimming in icy water.
If your life means so little that you would risk it for an animal, that's certainly your choice to make. Just do everyone a favor and make sure you don't put other humans besides yourself at risk when you make that decision.
Loving your pet isn't the issue. The issue is being an idiot and not controlling your pet. As someone above said, it's for the safety of your pet as well as the consideration of those around you.
I like dogs, it's just that 90% of the dog owners in JP are inconsiderate of others.
... weigh a lot less than their human "friends", I would assume that a human going onto the ice after a runaway dog is more likely to endanger the dog than help it.