Marauding pit bulls attack six - 10 year old boy, Critical

[janeb]

i will calm down when i stop listening to people talk about a breed as a WHOLE. they can show me the door but atleast i will say my peace before they do. if you think this breed is so terrible why have they been given metal of honors?? how about the pit bull puppy who was used as bait for the adult pit bulls by a bunch of ex cons? when the police came, they heard a noise coming from the frig? the puppy was in a trash bag near death. the police saved its life and realize it has a gift. later this dog who was ALMOST dead busted the largest drug bust by his very nose. people don't read the facts, they listen to the media. why can't america punish people who use this breed as a dangerous weapon, same people who shouldn't be allowed to own guns?? why is it the breed's fault?? perhaps they really do want to blame a lower being! it sucks! and i'm tired of it! i'm tire of listening to people tell me my breed should be exstint. NO WAY! it just takes a responsible dog owner and you will have a beautiful dog! they love humans, dogs is another story. people think dog aggression is the same as human aggression but its not. a dog can be dog aggressive and have zero human aggression. that's the disconnect between people who are NOT educated. i feel sorry for the family and the little girl but the owner's need to be charged for involuntary manslaughter. they knew the dog was a danger to society and yet they still kept him alive. it is NOT right. that's ALL i'm trying to say.

 

[Casshew]

i people don't read the facts, they listen to the media.

Now that I have a problem with. If a child or adult is savaged by a pitbull and the story is reported - it is not sensationalism - it is just reporting something that happened.

The media is reporting true cases of Pitbull and pitbull cross attacks. They also broadcast other stories of dogs killing humans, like rotties or akitas for instance. They are not discriminating - they are just saying what happend. Pitbull enthusists complain that there are no Lab stories etc... well maybe thats because the lab stories are bites not killings?

The story you mentioned about the puppy is so tragic, these drug lord guys with their tough dogs are a real problem, they are WAY more of a problem to the Pitbull reputation that I am.

Summer before last I was walking through the park with my daughter and my English Setter when I saw a guy throwing a frisbee to a pitbull who was happily running and catching it and bringing it back... I was about 30 feet away and heading his direction and I shouted out "Can you please put your dog on a leash"

he looked at me and my english setter and 10year old and said "Oh don't worry about him - he won't hurt you" and I am like "Please, I insist you put him on a leash" so he shrugged and complied and we passed him and all was well until he took a lunge at Ambush (my dog) and then the guy is tugging him back trying to keep control - if I hadn't insisted he leash his dog, I don't know what would have happened. Dangerous situation for children in parks - no place for these aggressive animals with irresponsible owners.

 

[concernedperson]

Oh, jeez any dog that attacks a human being is just not worth the discussion.We can love our pets but if destruction is involved then we have to look at this as responsible human beings.

 

[janeb]

now i will agree to your last post. and i like you asked him to put his dog on a leash. i don't let my dogs near other astrange dogs and i certainly don't let them roam. they are always on a leash. this breed can be dog aggressive and you were right to tell the guy to put his dog on a leash. if people don't have control of their dogs, they shouldn't own a dog at all. dismissing an entire breed isn't the answer. thank you. whenever you own this breed, it does mean no doggie parks but the sacrafice is rewarding because when they are well breed, not bred by criminals, they are very good & beautiful dogs. once again, i am sorry about what happened to the little girl, it shouldn't have happened. it tears me apart to hear it even if it was some mutt. human bites or attacks are a terrible tradegy that can all be prevented if the government would just put the blame on the owner.

 

[aussiegran]

well, other than juan, isn't this whole thread about people who agree with each other. now, i'm here and whether you like it or not, i'm giving PURE FACTS, instead of following the leader. if everyone jumped off a bridge, bet you'd be right behind them

Humanity & Truth Against Media
[url="http://www.pitbullproblem.tk/"]http://www.pitbullproblem.tk/[/url]

QUOTE janeb
a dog can be dog aggressive and have zero human aggression. that's the disconnect between people who are NOT educated.
...............
A PURE FACT is my small fox terrier was torn to bits by a pit bull that jumped my 6 ft fence to get him .I realise an attack on a human is far worse than a dog but I sure adored my dog .and will greive for him and the way he died forever.If you go to the other thread on pitbulls you will see I have researched FACTS and posted what I found .

 

[Casshew]

now i will agree to your last post. and i like you asked him to put his dog on a leash. i don't let my dogs near other astrange dogs and i certainly don't let them roam. they are always on a leash. this breed can be dog aggressive and you were right to tell the guy to put his dog on a leash. if people don't have control of their dogs, they shouldn't own a dog at all. dismissing an entire breed isn't the answer. thank you. whenever you own this breed, it does mean no doggie parks but the sacrafice is rewarding because when they are well breed, not bred by criminals, they are very good & beautiful dogs. once again, i am sorry about what happened to the little girl, it shouldn't have happened. it tears me apart to hear it even if it was some mutt. human bites or attacks are a terrible tradegy that can all be prevented if the government would just put the blame on the owner.

but JaneB, how do we educate dog owners?... it's impossible- they think their dog is 'fine' or 'wouldn't hurt a fly' they don't have them spayed and neutered, they don't keep them leashed, they are so strong and in aussigran's post - see how it escaped to kill?

They don't need special training or a license to get one. It's russian roulette - the dog could be wonderful for years and then snap.

 

[curlytone]

Bandaids? Banning the breed is the solution not the bandaid. Since this came into affect there have been no dog attacks or fatalities and beleive me, I follow the news.

No vicious dogs = no dead kids

Is the news just your pied piper? Saying that there have been no dog attacks since the ban is 100% false. Didn't you also say that they have to wait for the "pit bulls to die off". They are still there, right? It is a bandaid, wait a while. I think that you forget that you and I have the same goal ultimately: reducing dog attacks and deaths. The difference is that you have taken a reactionary approach that I (and most experts) do not think will work. Just don't assume that the problem is gone. Also, you might want to extend you seach parameters past "pit bull" and "attack" you even said in another thread that "I follow cases of pit bull attacks or pit bull mix, attacks". And you tell me that I only see what I want.

Also, it sounds as though the problem up there wasn't as horrible as you make it out to be:
"There is, on average, about one dog bite related fatality per year, in Canada. (There are approximately 5,000,000 dogs in Canada.)"


Some info:
The Canadian Kennel Club:

· The Canadian Kennel Club supports dangerous and vicious dog legislation in order to provide the most appropriate protection for the general public and the innocent dog owner. We are opposed to breed-specific legislation in any form, anywhere in this country or internationally. It is both short-sighted and unacceptable, anywhere.

The Canada Safety Council:

· The Canada Safety Council does not recommend breed bans.

Canadian Veterinary Medical Association:

· The Canadian Veterinary Medical Association (CVMA) supports dangerous dog legislation provided that it does not refer to specific breeds.

The Centers for Disease Control:

· Breed-specific approaches to the control of dog bites do not address the issue that many breeds are involved in the problem and that most of the factors contributing to dog bites are related to the level of responsibility exercised by dog owners.

· Tethered dogs are more likely to bite than untethered dogs.

JAVMA (Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association):

· Because of difficulties inherent in determining a dog’s breed with certainty, enforcement of breed-specific ordinances raises constitutional and practical issues.

· Many practical alternatives to breed-specific ordinances exist and hold promise for prevention of dog bites.

The American Kennel Club:

· The American Kennel Club strongly opposes any legislation that determines a dog to be "dangerous" based on specific breeds or phenotypic classes of dogs.

 

[janeb]

that's why this country needs to adopt dangerous dog laws and need to really punish the owner. heck, i'm all for murder charges if a dog they own attacks and kills a human. right now, the best i've seen is involuntary manslaughter and i wish it was more. i would never keep a dog who is human aggressive and the first sign is a one way trip to the vet. the owner really needs to take the punishment. as for a pure fact, i'm sorry your dog is lost and your neighbors dog jumped a 6ft fence to get to your dog but once again it does not mean the dog is human aggressive. they can be just one and not the other. dog aggression is acceptable in this breed but not human aggression. this breed can be dog aggressive but it is never suppose to be human aggressive. even the rottie breed standard at www.akc.org states some level of dog aggression is acceptable. some breeds were bred to NOT be pack dogs, unlike the beagles. you should be chewing your neighbors out for being so darn irresponsible and not security their property to withhold a strong breed, not telling me i don't deserve to own this breed.

 

[Details]

As I posted before - the number of fatalities aren't the only thing - the number of horrible injuries is where the problem is. Is 44 thousand mostly children mauled enough reason to be concerned about dog bites? :banghead: And about the dogs that inflict most of them?

If all pit bull (and other aggressive large dog) owners were responsible like kgeaux, this probably wouldn't be a problem. But most owners don't take their dogs to have an agression test (and I bet most of them (Curly, have you done this?) wouldn't give up their dog if it failed the test), most owners don't muzzle their dogs, most owners don't spend much time understanding dog training and psychology.

I'll take a compromise where only owners who go through and do exactly what kgeaux did, only the dogs who pass agressiveness training are allowed - and any bite from that dog where it is off of it's own property not wearing a muzzle results in strong criminal charges against the owner. Anyone owning a dog who can and frequently does cause that kind of damage should have to go through owner licensing.

And this should apply to all dog breeds with a high statistically significant number of attacks - serious bites as well as fatalities. I refer mostly to pit bulls because they are most of the problem. Rotwiellers are nearly as bad. Those two breeds cause a horroriffic number of serious injuries and deaths.

Hey Curly - you missed reading all of this post apparently - your questions are answered here - and there is a question for you.

 

[Details]

Again, you are missing the point. It is not airline travel. I used that because we all know that it is a safe way to travel, but if you only read newspaper headline stories you wouldn't think that it is safe because they only report crashes.

You are missing the point - there is no analogy that mimics pit bulls to make your point, because most anything that is that uncontrollable and may harm people is not in common use and is generally licensed and restricted - more so if it is not a necessity. Airline travel is a necessity, and it is also strictly licensed and restricted - something pit bulls are not ... yet.

 

[Details]

The same experts who talk about some breeds being dog agressive also talk about how a dog will often see a small child as another dog, not as a human. That's why most of the attacks are on children.

 

[Just Jules]

that's why this country needs to adopt dangerous dog laws and need to really punish the owner. heck, i'm all for murder charges if a dog they own attacks and kills a human. right now, the best i've seen is involuntary manslaughter and i wish it was more. i would never keep a dog who is human aggressive and the first sign is a one way trip to the vet. the owner really needs to take the punishment. as for a pure fact, i'm sorry your dog is lost and your neighbors dog jumped a 6ft fence to get to your dog but once again it does not mean the dog is human aggressive. they can be just one and not the other. dog aggression is acceptable in this breed but not human aggression. this breed can be dog aggressive but it is never suppose to be human aggressive. even the rottie breed standard at www.akc.org states some level of dog aggression is acceptable. some breeds were bred to NOT be pack dogs, unlike the beagles. you should be chewing your neighbors out for being so darn irresponsible and not security their property to withhold a strong breed, not telling me i don't deserve to own this breed.

I cannot believe what I am reading, I am shaking as I am trying to type this!

Oh I do not even know where to start with this post. I have refrained from getting involved in these threads but I just have to respond to this.

Are you actually saying that it is OK to have a DOG THAT IS AGGRESSIVE TOWARD OTHER DOGS. That is deplorable! Why would anyone want to have a dog that they know is aggresive to other dogs.

When my daughters were little, I was taking them & our German Shepherd for a walk. A dog came out of nowhere (not a pitbull) & tried to attack my dog, trouble was she went straight between my legs, she was a big sook. So my daughters were screaming & a young guy on a pushbike came along & kicked the dog to get him away. It was so frightening, I would only walk my dog after that carrying a bamboo stick.

BTW I loved my Shepherd with all my heart but if she had ever shown any aggression toward another dog I would have had her put down. I would have lost all my trust in her & been worried that it might be my daughters or some other child that were next.

 

[LinasK]

However, if you look at the dog populations in that community and learn that there are 50 golden retrievers present and 500 pit bulls, then the pit bulls are actually the safer breed statistically."

Sorry, I'm not buying this... if so Goldens would be the dog of choice for drug dealers.:snooty:

 

[Jeana (DP)]

It is reason enough, and I am concerned about dog bites. But we need to come up with an effective solution. If you ban breeds, but it doesn't solve the problem, what have you accomplished? Look at the example above about England.

What would it accomplish?? Well, if the above statistics are correct, it would have accomplished preventing a LARGE majority of 44,000 dog bites. That works for me.

 

[curlytone]

What would it accomplish?? Well, if the above statistics are correct, it would have accomplished preventing a LARGE majority of 44,000 dog bites. That works for me.

The statistics do not indicate what percentage of 44,000 come from pit bulls so you are making a huge assumption based on the over representation of pit bulls in the media. (and 44,000 is the number of facial dog bites, 4.5 million is the number of dog bites anually) You can't base laws on assumptions. Real studies infact find that pit bulls attack less than other dogs. Furthermore, people have made the following assertions on this site:
1. Pit Bulls attack more often than other dogs,
2. When they attack it is worse than other dogs.
4. They are the most efficient killer dogs, and go for the kill.
3. Once they attack, they do not let go without extreme force, up to an including 4 gun shots.

If these are all true, how do they only cause 2.5 deaths per year nation wide? It just doesn't add up.

From Boulder, Co:
"Boulder, CO, proposed a ban on ‘pit bulls’, despite evidence this ‘breed’ isn’t the biggest problem. As proof, Evans writes:

“According to statistics kept by city of Boulder Animal Care and Control, “labs” — as they are so innocently called — were responsible for an astonishing 18.9 percent of the 748 dog bites in the city from 1997 to 2003, more than twice as many as the next highest breed (German shepherds, at 8.5 percent).”"

 

[curlytone]

Hey Curly - you missed reading all of this post apparently - your questions are answered here - and there is a question for you.

I responded to the first half of this in another post a while back, also in the last one to Jeana. But let me try again. The statistics that you are using do not support any of your points. 44,000 is the number of facial (meaning in the face) bites. The statistic does not say anything about pit bulls. To assume that it does is completely false, misleading, and irresponisble.

How many news stories do you read per year about pit bulls? Honestly, give me a number. How many do you read about other breeds? THERE ARE 4.5 MILLON DOG BITES REPORTED EVERY YEAR. EVEN IF YOU READ A STORY EVERY DAY ABOUT PIT BULLS, WHICH YOU DON'T, HOW DOES THAT COMPARE TO 4,500,000 bites per year?

I don't think that your comprimise is all that bad as long as you are not singling out any breed.

I have not put my dog through temperment testing, but would not oppose it.

 

[curlytone]

Sorry, I'm not buying this... if so Goldens would be the dog of choice for drug dealers.:snooty:

This is an example, from the Humane Society of the United States, that explains why look at raw numbers can be deceiving. If you bother to read it, the sentances start with "IF". "IF" all of the above are true then I don't care if you buy it, it is the way it is. You just assume that it isn't true because you, like many of the people on here, are a slave to the media.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

The statistics do not indicate what percentage of 44,000 come from pit bulls so you are making a huge assumption based on the over representation of pit bulls in the media. (and 44,000 is the number of facial dog bites, 4.5 million is the number of dog bites anually) You can't base laws on assumptions. Real studies infact find that pit bulls attack less than other dogs. Furthermore, people have made the following assertions on this site:
1. Pit Bulls attack more often than other dogs,
2. When they attack it is worse than other dogs.
4. They are the most efficient killer dogs, and go for the kill.
3. Once they attack, they do not let go without extreme force, up to an including 4 gun shots.

If these are all true, how do they only cause 2.5 deaths per year nation wide? It just doesn't add up.

Darlin, you just don't want to get it, do you? A bite by a pit bull does NOT always = death. They ripped a little girl's scalp off of her head, but she didn't die. Does that make the dog any less dangerous? Hell no.

 

[curlytone]

Darlin, you just don't want to get it, do you? A bite by a pit bull does NOT always = death. They ripped a little girl's scalp off of her head, but she didn't die. Does that make the dog any less dangerous? Hell no.

YOU don't get it. If they attack all the time, they are the best at killing, they always go for the kill, and they can't be stopped. How do they only kill 2.5 people?

2.5 deaths per year come from pit bulls. 14.5 come from other breeds. Do you honestly think that the other 14.5 were the result of the people being licked to death? NO, they were greusome also, but you wouldn't know that because you have never read about them. Do you think that only 14.5 other breeds bit, but every time it was fatal? No, other breeds bite all the time.

Obviously not every bite is fatal. There are 17 deaths per year, 4,500,000 bites reported every year. If dogs kill in proportion to how often they bite, then you could use the death statistics to extrapolate the number of bites per breed. However, you and many others say that pit bulls are more likely to kill you. If that is true, then they would actually have to attack less than other dogs to get 2.5 deaths per year.

Can you understand why reading 10 or even 100 stories about pit bulls does not give you the right to generalize about millions fo dogs? If you read about 100 murders, can you generalize about a race of people?

 

[Jeana (DP)]

YOU don't get it. If they attack all the time, they are the best at killing, they always go for the kill, and they can't be stopped. How do they only kill 2.5 people?

2.5 deaths per year come from pit bulls. 14.5 come from other breeds. Do you honestly think that the other 14.5 were the result of the people being licked to death? NO, they were greusome also, but you wouldn't know that because you have never read about them. Do you think that only 14.5 other breeds bit, but every time it was fatal? No, other breeds bite all the time.

Obviously not every bite is fatal. There are 17 deaths per year, 4,500,000 bites reported every year. If dogs kill in proportion to how often they bite, then you could use the death statistics to extrapolate the number of bites per breed. However, you and many others say that pit bulls are more likely to kill you. If that is true, then they would actually have to attack less than other dogs to get 2.5 deaths per year.

Can you understand why reading 10 or even 100 stories about pit bulls does not give you the right to generalize about millions fo dogs? If you read about 100 murders, can you generalize about a race of people?

The right? Who the hell are you? I've got the right to say whatever the hell I want about pit bulls or anything else. I think you better back the hell up.