And to those who've suggested that a dog has acted without provocation I suggest they just simply didn't know what the provocation was. To those who've suggested animals attack without warning I submit that they don't understand body language. Nothing responds without warning and provocation including the human being...It's against nature. Those that state it's happened prove by saying such they simply don't know what the reason was.
So what is your point? Do you really think that, after a dog has torn some child's face off, explaining to his parents that he must have done something to provoke it, helps?
Not knowing what set a dog off doesn't change the fact that it was set off, and its anger was totally unanticipated by its owners and handlers, and carnage resulted.