Just recently, a dog attack in Chongqing brought the topic to the forefront of public opinion. While walking the dog, the victim, Mr. Liu, was attacked by two untied dogs, who eventually received medical attention for his injuries. Even more outrageous is the fact that the dog owners of the incident not only did not give any care and apology to the victims, but instead used violence against them, resulting in injuries to their faces.
Such bad behaviour has generated a strong reaction from society, where it has been stated that dog walk without strings is not only illegal but may also have serious harmful consequences, and that the owner of the dog is more responsible for his pet dog and for ensuring the safety of others and society. And in this case, what is the social phenomenon that lies behind the act of the dog owner, who was able to use violence against the victim without guilt or even escape justice?
I. Overview of the events
1. History of events
Mr. Liu is walking his pet dog in a small district of Chongqing. In walking the dog, he suddenly met two untied dogs, who were fierce, and immediately washed up and bit Mr. Liu ' s pet dog.
Mr. Liu saw him and stopped immediately, but did not expect the dogs to follow orders and instead surrounded him and started attacking him. Mr. Liu was bitten by the dogs, seriously injured and eventually taken to hospital for treatment.
2. Attitude of dog owners
During Mr. Liu ' s bite, the owner of the dog, Wang Tsing, passed by and saw her dog in such a situation, which should be stopped immediately and the victim cared for and apologized.
It is alarming, however, that instead of stopping it, Wang Tsing has resorted to violence against Mr. Liu by beating him directly to the ground and even scolding him without any responsibility or responsibility as the dog owner.
Such an act naturally aroused a strong feeling of resentment on the part of the people around it, who went ahead and discouraged them, but instead threatened the crowd, claiming that they were connected and that they could easily resolve the matter.
II. Legal treatment
1. Police intervention
Immediately after Mr. Liu was bitten, he called the police, who promptly arrived at the scene to investigate the incident.
As a result of the investigation, the police found that Mr. Liu was indeed innocent and that he had been bitten by the dog of Wang Zing, the owner of the dog, during the attack on his pet dog. The attitude of Wang Tsing was also very harsh, and instead of giving any attention or apology to the victims, she had committed violence against them, which was already against the law.
2. Criminalization
Under the relevant legal provisions, the owner of the dog is liable for the injury caused by the dog. In this incident, Mr. Liu ' s injuries were found to be very serious and minor, constituting a criminal case.
The police opened the case for investigation and summoned Wang Qing to the case. After interrogation, the police found that Wang Qing had committed intentional acts against others, but it was surprising that she had been able to meet the conditions of bail pending trial and was eventually not detained by the police.
The consequences of such a treatment, which naturally aroused a strong sense of disaffection in society, and the fact that Wang Qing ' s actions were already in violation of the law and that she should be punished by the law instead of being released easily, were undoubtedly a condoning and a very bad model effect on society.