owner of killer pit bull gets one year..

[isabeau]

in Huntington , last year, a pit bull got loose and attacked a two year old girl and her mother. the mother tried everything she could to deter the pitbull, endangering her life in the process. however the pitbull succeeded in killing the little girl, and the mother ended up in the hospital with several serious wounds.. and this last week the owner was sentenced to one year in jail. seems like such a small price to pay for a little girl's innocent life. i mean the owner is responsible for his dog..

 

[tulipangel]

This is tricky! Yes the owner should have kept better care of the dog and all but we must not act like we never had our pets get away from us! I know a pug is a little different from a pit bull but my dog used to get away from me all the time! Im not in anyway letting this pet owner off the hook but animals do crazy things! just as humans do! I feel bad for all involved and that poor baby girl! This is such a rough situation! My heart goes out to ALL involved!

 

[Deadsea7777]

in Huntington , last year, a pit bull got loose and attacked a two year old girl and her mother. the mother tried everything she could to deter the pitbull, endangering her life in the process. however the pitbull succeeded in killing the little girl, and the mother ended up in the hospital with several serious wounds.. and this last week the owner was sentenced to one year in jail. seems like such a small price to pay for a little girl's innocent life. i mean the owner is responsible for his dog..

I think one year is enough, he did not intend to kill the girl. But I think he should be banned of having potentially dangerous breeds. Remember the old proberb...The bigger the dog..the smaller the dick.

 

[ShiningIce]

Dogs dont just attack for no reason. I bet money the owner abused that dog. Give him 50 years.

 

[luvgirlsfeet]

If a dog attacked someone in my family or if I saw it happening to a stranger I would do everything in my power to KILL that dog immediately no questions asked. Personally I dont care what would happen to me.. A pet can be replaced a human life can't

 

[TheFactor]

I agree three different ways.

One: The guy deserves a little more than one year.

Two: Dogs don't just go out and kill someone just because they have a chance to do so. That dog was probably abused and that little girl and her mother just got in it's way.

Three: Kill the damn animal! Human life is more important than an animals. I'd kill an attacking dog without hesitation if it meant saving a life.

 

[isabeau]

i believe the dog was put to sleep.. and i agree with you Shining Ice.

 

[Tamia78]

I agree with Tulip, it's a very tricky situation. Those who said dogs don't attack for no reason, are absolutely right. Most people who buy or raise pits abuse them, mostly for fighting purposes, although I have come in contact with many wonderful pitbull dogs. The owner never intended for his pet to get out, but he HAD to know the dog's potential behavior. I think he should get more than one year.

 

[Cold Steel]

I'm not sure it was abused...some dogs in the bully breeds just have nasty temperaments. Most of them are very good with people/children, but they retain gameness and dog aggression. The dog aggression can be corrected with some of them, but they need to be carefully supervised. Anyway, some people breed them for aggression, and these are probably the dogs that are hitting the news. There is almost always the risk of one of these dogs attacking a dog, a cat, or some other small animal, but it is very unusual for them to attack people for no reason. That was bred out of them over 100 years ago. Dogs that bit or attacked handlers were culled, so even when abused, these dogs wouldn't attack people. Gameness also gives them ridiculously high pain tolerance (One of the reasons they are good with children), so I'm not sure physical abuse would lead to behavior like that, but it's possible. It's also possible that the dog was sick, I suppose.

American Staffordshire Terriers, Staffordshire Bull Terriers, and some of the American Pit Bull Terriers are really gorgeous animals, but they are not for everyone. They can not be left outside unattended...they will escape....and they will scare the hell out of everyone while they are out. The breeds take obedience training well, but if you don't train them, that doesn't help. They need to be trained to the same extent as police bite dogs in obedience.

If you are going to get one of these dogs, you need to be prepared. Don't buy it from a pet store...and I hate to say this because there are a lot of them in there, but don't rescue one from the shelter (unless you are really experienced)...you have no idea what kind of temperament you are getting from there. You need to spend time with the dog's sire and dam and get a feel for their temperaments. You want to see how the breeder keeps his dogs. The puppies stay with the litter for a bit longer than some other breeds. This helps to correct the inherent dog aggression. You should socialize the puppy while it's maturing, but once it's mature, it's probably better to avoid other dogs...especially avoid dog parks.

Anyway, I can't believe I wrote this much. My point was that there are other things besides abuse that cause this behavior. I would probably lean more towards labeling it neglect...or even ignorance. They aren't for everyone. If you aren't prepared to own one and care for one, don't get one. Besides the liability issues, you endanger the right for responsible people to own them, and possibly even endanger the survival of the breed.

(Edited for typos, etc.)

 

[ViperGTS]

If a dog attacked someone in my family or if I saw it happening to a stranger I would do everything in my power to KILL that dog immediately no questions asked. Personally I dont care what would happen to me.. A pet can be replaced a human life can't

I'm in 100% agreement. Any animal that attacks me, a family member, or even anyone else for that matter, is going to get the full force of my best defense (which everyone knows is a good offense). If the animal submits or runs away, fine, but if the aggression continues, either myself or the animal is going to be killed, and I have a few pounds on most breeds.

The animal lover I am, I would hate to be put in a situation as such, but if actions like this are needed, then so be it.

 

[isabeau]

i keep thinking about dogs attacking for no reason, and i recall the dog mauling case in san franciso, where that poor woman was basically torn apart by two presacanarian dogs..(spelling?) and i don't think there was any reason for that attack, other than the fact the owner couldn't control her dogs.

 

[drew70]

Pit Bulls and similar breeds can be aggressive and dangerous without having been abused. As has been said, it all depends on the temperament. The man did not do the killing. The dog did. A longer jail sentence will not bring back the little girl that was killed.

 

[MrPartickler]

This is a frustrating issue

There's always a reason animals attack. We just don't understand those reasons. We don't need to understand them, however; we just need to be able to control the animal(s). And the bigger or fiercer or stronger the animal, the harder it's going to be to control.

Let's face it, some people would raise pet grizzly bears and Bengal Tigers in their own backyards while living in a densely populated area if there weren't laws to prevent it. The only reason the laws are there is because we openly acknowledge that if/when such animals have a bad day, it's likely going to result in someone being maimed or killed.

To me, if you're going to claim an animal that is known to be more than capable of "getting away from you" and causing this level of harm to people, then you should have to own up to it--up front. It's all about personal responsibility, IMO. You should have to sign something once you adopt some kinds of pets saying you'll take full responsibility for its actions in such an event.

Then there'd be no cause for debate: If your tiger/rattlesnake/pit bull/etc kills someone, you go to prison for involuntary manslaughter. No muss, no fuss.

 

[BLUE_THUNDER]

dont punish the breed

while what happened was most unfortunate, i think pit pulls have a bad rap. my brother has a big one, 95lbs., that he raised from 8 weeks, he is 2 years now. he is the kindest, gentlest dog ive ever met. i have a 10 month old alaskan malamute, already 80lbs. , ( aka the " 8 below " dog now), they play all the time with no problems. my brother has 2 other friends with pit bulls, ive seen all 3, and they were all very nice, well adjusted animals. i think it depends mostly on how the animal was raised. just my 2 cents...........BLUE_THUNDER




" may i respectfully remind you there is still a crazy man up there with six 20mm cannon ?! "

 

[maniactickler]

Yes, dogs do attack for reasons we might not understand. i still think pitbulls should be outlawed. they are just agressive by nature. not every single dog is a vicious killer, but a majority of them are definately dangerous. its just the breed of some dogs. nothing you can do about it. cant fight nature. whens the last time you heard about a golden retriever mauling a child? 😕

 

[lk70]

Yes, dogs do attack for reasons we might not understand. i still think pitbulls should be outlawed. they are just agressive by nature. not every single dog is a vicious killer, but a majority of them are definately dangerous. its just the breed of some dogs. nothing you can do about it. cant fight nature. whens the last time you heard about a golden retriever mauling a child? 😕

Actually, you'd be surprised. Pitbulls aren't even in the Top 5 for dog bites. Mixed breeds account for 1/3. After that, here's who is: Chow Chow, Jack Russell Terrier, Labrador Retriever, Dachshund, and Rottweiler. (The 'pit bull' is number 22 on that list, by the way, after - in order of percentage of biting incidents - Scottish Terrier 3.8%, Springer Spaniel 3.5%, Beagle 3.2%, Doberman 2.6%, Lhasa Apso 1.6%, Collie 1.6%, German Shepherd, St. Bernard, Cairn Terrier, and Bernese Mountain Dog all with 1.3%.)

So let's not make assumptions about pits based on the press. I think Fox News makes it obvious that the press can color the world any way they want to.

 

[lk70]

If you are going to get one of these dogs, you need to be prepared. Don't buy it from a pet store...and I hate to say this because there are a lot of them in there, but don't rescue one from the shelter (unless you are really experienced)...you have no idea what kind of temperament you are getting from there.

Largely I agree with this, but you can find some great pits in shelters. Just ask the shelter about their temperament evaluation procedures. Some have them and some don't. But better yet, if you want a pit, adopt from a reputable pit rescue such as Bad Rap. http://www.badrap.org/rescue/ Most excellent pit rescues will only accept true ambassadors of the breed into their programs and are very experienced in evaluating temperament.

Let's remember the heroic history of the pitbull in the American military and entertainment industry and recognize what a magificent animal it once was and can be again.

 

[Mimi]

Amen, lk. You just said everything I've wanted to but didn't know how to word or where to begin. Thanks for being such a great voice for wonderful, yet unfortunately misrepresented pitbulls.

AFA the case in question....I don't know that I believe it's fair to punish the owners for what the dog did, unless the people played a role in that dogs temperment. If they raised it to be a guard dog or attack dog, or mishandled it in any way, causing it to be aggressive, then yes...they should be responsible and should carry the weight of whatever that animal did. However, if the dog has never acted aggressively toward anyone before, and had previous to such incidence been a gentle and mild mannered animal, then I don't think the owner can be expected to be held accountable. A large fine, perhaps, for not keeping the animal securely contained in their own yard, but I don't think manslaughter is a fair call in a case like that.

With this case we don't know, though. HAD the owners raised it in an aggressive manner? HAD it been mistreated? If so, then the punishment fits. If the not, and the dog had never hurt anyone before, then I think a large fine would have been suitable.

Mimi

 

[Icycle]

A few months ago I read an excellent article in New Yorker magazine on this very topic. It's a long but excellent read:

http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/060206fa_fact

Some of the posters in this thread such as Cold Steel and lk70 have already hit some of the important points from this article, but I'd like to add a few more.

It turns out, as a general rule, pit bull type dogs have excellent temperment. The American Temperment Test Society has tested 25,000 dogs for stability, shyness, agressiveness, and friendliness in the company of people, and 84% of pit bulls tested have passed, which puts them ahead of beagles, Airedales, bearded collies, and most varieties of dachsunds.

The mean dogs are the ones that have been cross-bred with larger, human-aggressive breeds like German sheperds, and then trained or reinforced to be aggressive towards humans by their trainers and owners.

And the "mean dogs" change over time - not because the breeds themselves have changed, but because different breeds become popular among people who want to own an aggressive dog. Back in the 1970s, it was German shephards, St. Bernards (rememer Cujo?), and Dobermans. Now it's pit bulls. What we're seeing now is not the "natural aggressiveness" of pit bulls - it's the result of people who want an aggressive dog choosing pit bulls, and then making them aggressive.

There are a lot of factors that go into a fatal dog attack. Often, the dogs are sick or hungry. The dogs frequently have a history of aggressive behavior. The victims are usually children who are physically more vulnerable and may have unintentionally provoked the animal. But the most important factor is that there are certain kinds of dog owners who want a vicious dog. In about a quarter of fatal dog bites, the owner was previously involved in dog fighting. The junkyard German shepard that would tear your throat out as soon as look at you, and the gentle, obedient German shepard seeing eye dog are the same breed. But they are not the same dog, because their owners have different intentions.

It is not right to condemn all pit-bulls because they appeal to a few owners who want to make them into aggressive dogs. I don't know the facts of this specific case, but the owner almost certainly bore a lot of responsibility for making his dog into one that would attack a human, and he should be punished for it.

 

[MrPartickler]

all bites aren't created equal

Sorry folks, but there's a big difference between a breed most prone to bite and a breed most prone to kill. After all, which would you rather be attacked/bitten by: the Chow Chow or the Pit Bull? how about a Chihuahua vs. a Rottweiler? Hell, as a kid my pet gerbil bit me more than any dog ever did. lol

Don't take my word for it. It's all <a href="http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html#Thedogsmostlikelytobite">here</a>.

There are plenty of statistic and references there, but here's a good quote:

A clear distinction needs to be made between canine homicides (i.e., incidents in which dogs kill people) and the dog bite epidemic. The attention given to the homicides has put the spotlight on pit bulls and Rottweilers. Without a doubt, these two dogs are usually the number one and number two canine killers of humans. (See below, The dogs most likely to kill.) It therefore is correct to single out those two breeds when talking about canine homicides, because those two breeds cause half or more of the deaths.

Two other key findings include:
1) Children are the most frequent victims (7 of 10)
2) Face is the most frequent target (77% of the injuries)

Again, to me, this doesn't mean we should ban the breed. It just means more owners should be made to take responsiblity for the potential actions of certain animals without playing the "I never thought it could happen" card. We already know the risks of severe injury are higher with some animals than others. We also know some animals, because of their size and strength, are more difficult to control than others. So there's really no reason to pretend we don't.

 

[tulipangel]

When I have kids I'll buy them a wrottie faster then let them play baseball/softball!!!

Cause of injury Emergency room incidents annually
Baseball/softball 404,364
Dog bites 333,687

 

[lk70]

Sorry folks, but there's a big difference between a breed most prone to bite and a breed most prone to kill. After all, which would you rather be attacked/bitten by: the Chow Chow or the Pit Bull?

It's true that bigger, more powerful dogs are more likely to do serious damage or kill. But don't think for a minute that a Chow is any less powerful than a pitbull! In fact, Chows are also a dog of choice for dog fighters in the southwest. Texas shelters are FULL of them.

And just because a pit is more likely to be a part of a fatal attack than a cocker spaniel, you still need to remember that a cocker spaniel can take off a kid's nose in the blink of an eye- and he's more likely to try.

No matter what dog you're considering adding to your family, a close look at temperament is in order.

 

[MrPartickler]

It's true that bigger, more powerful dogs are more likely to do serious damage or kill. But don't think for a minute that a Chow is any less powerful than a pitbull! In fact, Chows are also a dog of choice for dog fighters in the southwest. Texas shelters are FULL of them.

And just because a pit is more likely to be a part of a fatal attack than a cocker spaniel, you still need to remember that a cocker spaniel can take off a kid's nose in the blink of an eye- and he's more likely to try.

No matter what dog you're considering adding to your family, a close look at temperament is in order.

Hey, sounds good to me. Put them all on the elevated-risk list. (Although the statistics don't support this extreme.) I certainly don't claim to know much about dog/cat/pet varieties or breeds or training etc. Maybe some variability is in order. (I think it's Ohio that has a "Vicious Dog" law that requires $100k insurance for certain dogs?)

However, for most people pet ownership/adoption is a luxury. That luxury is accompanied by some level of risk that, historically at least, is somewhat determined by the kind of pet that is adopted. IMO, it's one thing to take a substantial risk that only affects yourself and your family; it's quite another to do the same for a risk that affects the welfare of your neighbors.

 

[BLUE_THUNDER]

mean dogs

i hate to repeat myself, and i agree 1 million percent with what mimi said, but i still say it is mostly the training, not the breed. i used to work at the humane society in ann arbor michigan , we had a quarentine area for "bite cases" , dogs that had bitten someone, and the MEANEST dog ive ever seen in my life was a chow chow that was owned by a korean couple that fed it RAW MEAT. the bite cases were in cages with plexiglass in front of them, and EVERYTIME i went to feed the other dogs that thing would jump at the glass and clearly wanted to kill me. not too many things scare me as im a pretty big guy, but this chow was aggressive like nothing ive ever seen. again, just me 2 cents. peace.....BLUE_THUNDER