Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
pantherclub

Yet another Pitt Bull attack

Recommended Posts

I was thinking exactly that, but trying to be nice to the dog owners here. You're exactly right though in that the dog would kill for no reason with no action by the child whereas with the gun the child has to actually get to it (but I don't see how you fault a young child here which is why I think for the most part it is analogous as both deadly weapons can kill the child through no fault of the child but through the reckless behavior of keeping a deadly weapon so easily accessible to a child).

Clearly the answer is to just eliminate this breed.

People will also shoot kids for no reason, apparently. Although I'm not sure if the answer is to eliminate guns or eliminate people.
The death penalty does exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking exactly that, but trying to be nice to the dog owners here. You're exactly right though in that the dog would kill for no reason with no action by the child whereas with the gun the child has to actually get to it (but I don't see how you fault a young child here which is why I think for the most part it is analogous as both deadly weapons can kill the child through no fault of the child but through the reckless behavior of keeping a deadly weapon so easily accessible to a child). Clearly the answer is to just eliminate this breed.

People will also shoot kids for no reason, apparently. Although I'm not sure if the answer is to eliminate guns or eliminate people.
I was thinking something similar regarding the statistics of violent crimes committed by certain races of the population.
racist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of being flippant, why don't you give the question some serious thought. Say your child is in his jumper watching Baby Einstein and you have to go to the bathroom. Do you take the child with you to go pee? Do you bring the dog into the bathroom with you while you pee? Or your child is playing in his playpen and the doorbell rings. Do you go find your dog who is napping in the bedroom and secure it before you go answer the door? I'd be willing to bet you that 100% of people who have a baby and own a dog have been in another room at some point when the dog was free in the house. I think it's a tragic situation. But I don't see enough facts here to lead me to the conclusion that the cause of the tragedy was because the owner was dumb. I think it's impractical to have both a baby (or a small child) and a dog living in a house and believe that the child and the dog will never have the opportunity to be in a room alone together.

:unsure: Directly analogous to having a small child and an unlocked gun cabinet in your house. Both parents are at best negligent if not reckless.
Not even, because a gun won't one day decide on its own to get up and shoot your child. I don't even agree with regular folks owning guns, but I think owning a pit bull is far more stupid/irresponsible.
I was thinking exactly that, but trying to be nice to the dog owners here. You're exactly right though in that the dog would kill for no reason with no action by the child whereas with the gun the child has to actually get to it (but I don't see how you fault a young child here which is why I think for the most part it is analogous as both deadly weapons can kill the child through no fault of the child but through the reckless behavior of keeping a deadly weapon so easily accessible to a child). Clearly the answer is to just eliminate this breed.
If you eliminated the breed, a new breed would pop up and you'd see similiar statistics and then people would be calling for the elimination of that breed.
Just ignore him. He's been fishing this thread for pages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you eliminated the breed, a new breed would pop up and you'd see similiar statistics and then people would be calling for the elimination of that breed.

First they came for the pit bulls but I wasn't a pit bull so I didn't say anything......
:unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking exactly that, but trying to be nice to the dog owners here. You're exactly right though in that the dog would kill for no reason with no action by the child whereas with the gun the child has to actually get to it (but I don't see how you fault a young child here which is why I think for the most part it is analogous as both deadly weapons can kill the child through no fault of the child but through the reckless behavior of keeping a deadly weapon so easily accessible to a child). Clearly the answer is to just eliminate this breed.

People will also shoot kids for no reason, apparently. Although I'm not sure if the answer is to eliminate guns or eliminate people.
I was thinking something similar regarding the statistics of violent crimes committed by certain races of the population.
racist
That's my point....you're a dog racist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People will also shoot kids for no reason, apparently. Although I'm not sure if the answer is to eliminate guns or eliminate people.

The death penalty does exist.
Then we should give it to everyone preemptively. Never know who's going to snap and kill someone for no reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People will also shoot kids for no reason, apparently. Although I'm not sure if the answer is to eliminate guns or eliminate people.

The death penalty does exist.
Then we should give it to everyone preemptively. Never know who's going to snap and kill someone for no reason.
That would eliminate random deaths. :lmao:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking exactly that, but trying to be nice to the dog owners here. You're exactly right though in that the dog would kill for no reason with no action by the child whereas with the gun the child has to actually get to it (but I don't see how you fault a young child here which is why I think for the most part it is analogous as both deadly weapons can kill the child through no fault of the child but through the reckless behavior of keeping a deadly weapon so easily accessible to a child). Clearly the answer is to just eliminate this breed.

People will also shoot kids for no reason, apparently. Although I'm not sure if the answer is to eliminate guns or eliminate people.
I was thinking something similar regarding the statistics of violent crimes committed by certain races of the population.
racist
That's my point....you're a dog racist.
No, I pretty much dislike all dogs the same. Except yorkies of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I pretty much dislike all dogs the same. Except yorkies of course.

Apparently you dislike pitbulls more, for they seem to be the only breed you are advocating for elimination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I pretty much dislike all dogs the same. Except yorkies of course.

Apparently you dislike pitbulls more, for they seem to be the only breed you are advocating for elimination.
Maybe it's the eating babies thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I pretty much dislike all dogs the same. Except yorkies of course.

Apparently you dislike pitbulls more, for they seem to be the only breed you are advocating for elimination.
Since they are far and away the most dangerous and are rsponsible for the most attacks/deaths, they are an obvious choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I pretty much dislike all dogs the same. Except yorkies of course.

Apparently you dislike pitbulls more, for they seem to be the only breed you are advocating for elimination.
Since they are far and away the most dangerous and are rsponsible for the most attacks/deaths, they are an obvious choice regardless of the fact the data from several other countries in the world that have passed breed specific legislation demonstrates pretty clearly that it doesn't work. I'm fine with it not working here, too, so long as pit bulls are targeted.
Fixed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I pretty much dislike all dogs the same. Except yorkies of course.

Apparently you dislike pitbulls more, for they seem to be the only breed you are advocating for elimination.
Since they are far and away the most dangerous and are rsponsible for the most attacks/deaths, they are an obvious choice.
So woz is a liar. Cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I pretty much dislike all dogs the same. Except yorkies of course.

Apparently you dislike pitbulls more, for they seem to be the only breed you are advocating for elimination.
Since they are far and away the most dangerous and are rsponsible for the most attacks/deaths, they are an obvious choice.
So woz is a liar. Cool.
Saying we should eliminate one breed does not exclude the argument we should eliminate others. I don't know how saying anything above makes me a liar. I prefer the term "satirist"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw two dogs-at-large this morning. Not surprisingly both were pit bulls. One running the middle of the street on the way to work which lunged at my car. Awesome.

Dude, you have NO luck with dogs. Do you bathe in gravy train?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of being flippant, why don't you give the question some serious thought. Say your child is in his jumper watching Baby Einstein and you have to go to the bathroom. Do you take the child with you to go pee? Do you bring the dog into the bathroom with you while you pee? Or your child is playing in his playpen and the doorbell rings. Do you go find your dog who is napping in the bedroom and secure it before you go answer the door? I'd be willing to bet you that 100% of people who have a baby and own a dog have been in another room at some point when the dog was free in the house. I think it's a tragic situation. But I don't see enough facts here (from the article posted) to lead me to the conclusion that the cause of the tragedy was solely because the owner was dumb. I think it's impractical to have both a baby (or a small child) and a dog living in a house and believe that the child and the dog will never have the opportunity to be in a room alone together.

I can tell you with certainty the above can be done. I owned a Doberman who was 12 YO when my twin boys were born. I knew that my dog was not good with children and made it very clear to my wife that under no circumstances does she leave the dog unattended with the newborns (FYI, I tell this to any owner of any large breed with small children). From the moment the kids came home from the hospital, the dog and the kids were NEVER alone together. It is quite easy to do this with the use of a crate. Additionally, I would not even allow the dog to get close enough to even touch the kids at first.

So in your example:

Doorbell: either A) bring babies with or B) put dog in crate.

Dog napping: dog is already in its crate, close door

I can do this with a number of examples. The point is the owner f'd up big time. Anybody who owns a large breed dominant dog, MUST always be prepared for the worst case scenario, especially with a newborn. There is no such thing as a truly child safe pet however, it does not take much to ensure both children and pet are safe and happy. The problem is there are owners who believe that their dogs are the exception and do not take all necessary precautions to ensure this type of situation never happens. In most cases the owners simply get lucky that nothing like the above ever happens to them.

If you want to own a large breed, you need to fully understand what the animal is capable of, especially when it feels threatened, confused, scared, etc. When I say capable, I mean potentially injuring or killing another dog or human being. It takes a very vigilant owner to do the above. I would never recommend as I said in an earlier post to bring a large breed dog into your home with children under 5, but in some cases like mine, it is not that easy to give away a 12 yo dog.

FYI, I am not a breeder, trainer etc. I happen to be an experienced owner of a large dominant breed and understand what that means. I can also say in my dogs 13 years she bit one person. This individual was an unknown, uninvited drunk male who crashed a get together at a beach house which I shared with my future wife and and her friends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Siberian Husky kills newborn.

"Husky" kills newborn.

Mixed breed "Indian Dog" drags child from family home.

Rottweiler kills newborn.

Pet snake kills 2 year old.

Chow kills 2 week old.

Rottweiler-Shephard mix kills child.

Doberman kills 8 month old.

Pomeranian kills newborn.

No adult attacks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking exactly that, but trying to be nice to the dog owners here. You're exactly right though in that the dog would kill for no reason with no action by the child whereas with the gun the child has to actually get to it (but I don't see how you fault a young child here which is why I think for the most part it is analogous as both deadly weapons can kill the child through no fault of the child but through the reckless behavior of keeping a deadly weapon so easily accessible to a child). Clearly the answer is to just eliminate this breed.

People will also shoot kids for no reason, apparently. Although I'm not sure if the answer is to eliminate guns or eliminate people.
I was thinking something similar regarding the statistics of violent crimes committed by certain races of the population.
racist
That's my point....you're a dog racist.
This can't be for real. :blackdot:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, the AJC has now updated today's story to indicate that it was not a malicious attack. The dog was apparently responding to the baby's crying, and crushed her skull when it put it in his mouth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of being flippant, why don't you give the question some serious thought. Say your child is in his jumper watching Baby Einstein and you have to go to the bathroom. Do you take the child with you to go pee? Do you bring the dog into the bathroom with you while you pee? Or your child is playing in his playpen and the doorbell rings. Do you go find your dog who is napping in the bedroom and secure it before you go answer the door? I'd be willing to bet you that 100% of people who have a baby and own a dog have been in another room at some point when the dog was free in the house. I think it's a tragic situation. But I don't see enough facts here (from the article posted) to lead me to the conclusion that the cause of the tragedy was solely because the owner was dumb. I think it's impractical to have both a baby (or a small child) and a dog living in a house and believe that the child and the dog will never have the opportunity to be in a room alone together.

I can tell you with certainty the above can be done. I owned a Doberman who was 12 YO when my twin boys were born. I knew that my dog was not good with children and made it very clear to my wife that under no circumstances does she leave the dog unattended with the newborns (FYI, I tell this to any owner of any large breed with small children). From the moment the kids came home from the hospital, the dog and the kids were NEVER alone together. It is quite easy to do this with the use of a crate. Additionally, I would not even allow the dog to get close enough to even touch the kids at first.So in your example:Doorbell: either A) bring babies with or B) put dog in crate.Dog napping: dog is already in its crate, close doorI can do this with a number of examples. The point is the owner f'd up big time. Anybody who owns a large breed dominant dog, MUST always be prepared for the worst case scenario, especially with a newborn. There is no such thing as a truly child safe pet however, it does not take much to ensure both children and pet are safe and happy.
So when your wife went to the bathroom, she took the dog with her? I'm sorry, but I have a difficult time believing that there was never once a time when one or both of your twins were in a room alone, even for a moment, when the dog wasn't crated up. Sorry, but I just don't buy it.

The problem is there are owners who believe that their dogs are the exception and do not take all necessary precautions to ensure this type of situation never happens. In most cases the owners simply get lucky that nothing like the above ever happens to them.If you want to own a large breed, you need to fully understand what the animal is capable of, especially when it feels threatened, confused, scared, etc. When I say capable, I mean potentially injuring or killing another dog or human being. It takes a very vigilant owner to do the above. I would never recommend as I said in an earlier post to bring a large breed dog into your home with children under 5, but in some cases like mine, it is not that easy to give away a 12 yo dog. FYI, I am not a breeder, trainer etc. I happen to be an experienced owner of a large dominant breed and understand what that means. I can also say in my dogs 13 years she bit one person. This individual was an unknown, uninvited drunk male who crashed a get together at a beach house which I shared with my future wife and and her friends.

Was that incident before or after you had your twins?Edit: I see that the incident happened before you were married. I would have had a really hard time having a dog who was not good with children AND had a dog bite history in the same house with my two newborn children. I'm glad things worked out okay for you. Edited by bigbottom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/homepage...?cmpid=15585797

Perfectly normal.

It was the third vicious pit-bull attack in Philadelphia in three days.

A few things to consider:

1. Keep in mind this was the first incident like this in 25 years. That may not be accurate because you are relying on the media to report, but it is the first reported incident like this.

2. Also, keep in mind the amount of pitbulls per area. I do not know the breakdown of breed of dog in Philly, but i know if you go to any of the local shelters they are approx. 90% pitbulls. Thus the argument that was used in the article, with more of any type of dog the more likely an incident could occur.

3. and you guys are goofballs with your ignorant, elitist attacks on the pitbull owners. God forbid someone is socially responsible and rescues a dog/saves a dog's life from a shelter instead of buying from a breeder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of being flippant, why don't you give the question some serious thought. Say your child is in his jumper watching Baby Einstein and you have to go to the bathroom. Do you take the child with you to go pee? Do you bring the dog into the bathroom with you while you pee? Or your child is playing in his playpen and the doorbell rings. Do you go find your dog who is napping in the bedroom and secure it before you go answer the door? I'd be willing to bet you that 100% of people who have a baby and own a dog have been in another room at some point when the dog was free in the house. I think it's a tragic situation. But I don't see enough facts here (from the article posted) to lead me to the conclusion that the cause of the tragedy was solely because the owner was dumb. I think it's impractical to have both a baby (or a small child) and a dog living in a house and believe that the child and the dog will never have the opportunity to be in a room alone together.

I can tell you with certainty the above can be done. I owned a Doberman who was 12 YO when my twin boys were born. I knew that my dog was not good with children and made it very clear to my wife that under no circumstances does she leave the dog unattended with the newborns (FYI, I tell this to any owner of any large breed with small children). From the moment the kids came home from the hospital, the dog and the kids were NEVER alone together. It is quite easy to do this with the use of a crate. Additionally, I would not even allow the dog to get close enough to even touch the kids at first.So in your example:Doorbell: either A) bring babies with or B) put dog in crate.Dog napping: dog is already in its crate, close doorI can do this with a number of examples. The point is the owner f'd up big time. Anybody who owns a large breed dominant dog, MUST always be prepared for the worst case scenario, especially with a newborn. There is no such thing as a truly child safe pet however, it does not take much to ensure both children and pet are safe and happy.
So when your wife went to the bathroom, she took the dog with her? I'm sorry, but I have a difficult time believing that there was never once a time when one or both of your twins were in a room alone, even for a moment, when the dog wasn't crated up. Sorry, but I just don't buy it.

The problem is there are owners who believe that their dogs are the exception and do not take all necessary precautions to ensure this type of situation never happens. In most cases the owners simply get lucky that nothing like the above ever happens to them.If you want to own a large breed, you need to fully understand what the animal is capable of, especially when it feels threatened, confused, scared, etc. When I say capable, I mean potentially injuring or killing another dog or human being. It takes a very vigilant owner to do the above. I would never recommend as I said in an earlier post to bring a large breed dog into your home with children under 5, but in some cases like mine, it is not that easy to give away a 12 yo dog. FYI, I am not a breeder, trainer etc. I happen to be an experienced owner of a large dominant breed and understand what that means. I can also say in my dogs 13 years she bit one person. This individual was an unknown, uninvited drunk male who crashed a get together at a beach house which I shared with my future wife and and her friends.

Was that incident before or after you had your twins?
Incident was a few years prior but I would never consider her to be a viscous dog. She was an extremely sweet and loyal dog, but she had a high prey drive which always concerned me when she was around the kids especially when they became more mobile. If they were not with me or my wife or another adult for that matter, they were in their room behind a closed door, in their cribs with the baby monitor on. My children were always supervised and I would not consider myself an overprotective parent. I think most parents of newborns without dogs aren't that much different.ETA, with regard to her biting someone, it was a quick nip at the leg. In that example and only time she ever bit someone, she did her job, so I was not uber concerned for my children, just vigilant. Edited by Ralph Furley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3. and you guys are goofballs with your ignorant, elitist attacks on the pitbull owners. God forbid someone is socially responsible and rescues a dog/saves a dog's life from a shelter instead of buying from a breeder.

I'm not an advocate of eliminating the breed. What I can say, however, is that I'd never in a million years own a pit bull if I had a newborn or young child in the house, particularly if the pit was rescued from a shelter. And yes, I'd feel the same about really any large breed of dog.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3. and you guys are goofballs with your ignorant, elitist attacks on the pitbull owners. God forbid someone is socially responsible and rescues a dog/saves a dog's life from a shelter instead of buying from a breeder.

I'm not an advocate of eliminating the breed. What I can say, however, is that I'd never in a million years own a pit bull if I had a newborn or young child in the house, particularly if the pit was rescued from a shelter. And yes, I'd feel the same about really any large breed of dog.
That is a legit point, but one thing i think that should be added here is that many of the dogs at the shelter are prepared better then those bought from someone selling puppies, even if they are labeled a "breeder". I know the shelters do temperment tests with all of their dogs (it assists with letting them if a dog is adoptable or not), and they also have some programs that begin training with dogs in the shelter to make adopting them easier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of being flippant, why don't you give the question some serious thought. Say your child is in his jumper watching Baby Einstein and you have to go to the bathroom. Do you take the child with you to go pee? Do you bring the dog into the bathroom with you while you pee? Or your child is playing in his playpen and the doorbell rings. Do you go find your dog who is napping in the bedroom and secure it before you go answer the door? I'd be willing to bet you that 100% of people who have a baby and own a dog have been in another room at some point when the dog was free in the house. I think it's a tragic situation. But I don't see enough facts here to lead me to the conclusion that the cause of the tragedy was because the owner was dumb. I think it's impractical to have both a baby (or a small child) and a dog living in a house and believe that the child and the dog will never have the opportunity to be in a room alone together.

:goodposting: Directly analogous to having a small child and an unlocked gun cabinet in your house. Both parents are at best negligent if not reckless.
Not even, because a gun won't one day decide on its own to get up and shoot your child. I don't even agree with regular folks owning guns, but I think owning a pit bull is far more stupid/irresponsible.
I was thinking exactly that, but trying to be nice to the dog owners here. You're exactly right though in that the dog would kill for no reason with no action by the child whereas with the gun the child has to actually get to it (but I don't see how you fault a young child here which is why I think for the most part it is analogous as both deadly weapons can kill the child through no fault of the child but through the reckless behavior of keeping a deadly weapon so easily accessible to a child). Clearly the answer is to just eliminate this breed.
If you eliminated the breed, a new breed would pop up and you'd see similiar statistics and then people would be calling for the elimination of that breed.
So....does that mean we should eliminate the people who would own this breed instead?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/homepage...?cmpid=15585797

Perfectly normal.

It was the third vicious pit-bull attack in Philadelphia in three days.

A few things to consider:

1. Keep in mind this was the first incident like this in 25 years. That may not be accurate because you are relying on the media to report, but it is the first reported incident like this.

2. Also, keep in mind the amount of pitbulls per area. I do not know the breakdown of breed of dog in Philly, but i know if you go to any of the local shelters they are approx. 90% pitbulls. Thus the argument that was used in the article, with more of any type of dog the more likely an incident could occur.

3. and you guys are goofballs with your ignorant, elitist attacks on the pitbull owners. God forbid someone is socially responsible and rescues a dog/saves a dog's life from a shelter instead of buying from a breeder.

:goodposting: Right, your only two choices are 1) buy from a breeder, or 2) get a pitbull.

Priceless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, the AJC has now updated today's story to indicate that it was not a malicious attack. The dog was apparently responding to the baby's crying, and crushed her skull when it put it in his mouth.

Oh jesus....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3. and you guys are goofballs with your ignorant, elitist attacks on the pitbull owners. God forbid someone is socially responsible and rescues a dog/saves a dog's life from a shelter instead of buying from a breeder.

I'm not an advocate of eliminating the breed. What I can say, however, is that I'd never in a million years own a pit bull if I had a newborn or young child in the house, particularly if the pit was rescued from a shelter. And yes, I'd feel the same about really any large breed of dog.
That is a legit point, but one thing i think that should be added here is that many of the dogs at the shelter are prepared better then those bought from someone selling puppies, even if they are labeled a "breeder". I know the shelters do temperment tests with all of their dogs (it assists with letting them if a dog is adoptable or not), and they also have some programs that begin training with dogs in the shelter to make adopting them easier.
I'm a big shelter rescue believer. I've been sufficiently indoctrinated by a friend who is on the board of a Houston rescue organization. I agree that they do a great job on the temperament testing before they give the all clear on an adoption. Still, you just can't know what the dog experienced before being abandoned or otherwise ending up at the shelter. Shelter pits are often survivors of abuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God forbid someone is socially responsible and rescues a dog/saves a dog's life from a shelter instead of buying from a breeder.

For every pit bull that is "rescued" from a shelter, a non-pit bull is needlessly killed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/homepage...?cmpid=15585797

Perfectly normal.

It was the third vicious pit-bull attack in Philadelphia in three days.

A few things to consider:

1. Keep in mind this was the first incident like this in 25 years. That may not be accurate because you are relying on the media to report, but it is the first reported incident like this.

2. Also, keep in mind the amount of pitbulls per area. I do not know the breakdown of breed of dog in Philly, but i know if you go to any of the local shelters they are approx. 90% pitbulls. Thus the argument that was used in the article, with more of any type of dog the more likely an incident could occur.

3. and you guys are goofballs with your ignorant, elitist attacks on the pitbull owners. God forbid someone is socially responsible and rescues a dog/saves a dog's life from a shelter instead of buying from a breeder.

:sadbanana: Right, your only two choices are 1) buy from a breeder, or 2) get a pitbull.

Priceless.

You should read better before you post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, the AJC has now updated today's story to indicate that it was not a malicious attack. The dog was apparently responding to the baby's crying, and crushed her skull when it put it in his mouth.

Wow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Idiot people...it was irresponsible to let the dog be alone with baby...period. Sorry, that's just dumb. Tragic, but dumb. That's what crates are for, separate rooms, outside...any number of things the owners could have done to prevent this from happening.

And no, I don't think it would ever be right or responsible for a parent to leave a dog alone with a baby...really with any young child who can't control the dog themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Siberian Husky kills newborn.

"Husky" kills newborn.

Mixed breed "Indian Dog" drags child from family home.

Rottweiler kills newborn.

Pet snake kills 2 year old.

Chow kills 2 week old.

Rottweiler-Shephard mix kills child.

Doberman kills 8 month old.

Pomeranian kills newborn.

Surgeon: No place for pit bulls, rottweilers around children

ShareThis PrintE-mail

By Alexis Stevens

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

One little girl's scalp and ears were gone. Other children have suffered head injuries, damage to their tracheas, and critical face wounds. And there are the children who don't survive.

In 2009, 29 children were admitted to Children's Healthcare of Atlanta for treatment of serious injuries due to dog attacks, according to a pediatric surgeon. Those children represent the most severely injured. Dozens of others arrive at hospital emergency rooms for treatment for dog bites.

"Unfortunately, a lot of times, it's the family dog or the neighbors' dog," Dr. Mark Wulkan told the AJC. "People get this false sense of security."

The death of a 5-day-old Rockdale newborn by the family's pit bull heightens the need for people to use extreme caution with having certain dog breeds near children.

"There's no place for pit bulls or rottweilers around children," said Wulkan, Children's Healthcare surgeon in chief and an associate professor at Emory.

Every year, 4.5 million Americans are bitten by dogs, and about 20 percent of the victims require medical care, according to the Centers for Disease Control. On average, 16 people die every year in the United States following dog attacks, according to CDC data. That number is on the rise in recent years.

Atlanta-area dogs have made the news several times in recent weeks following attacks.

Earlier this month, a Cobb County 7-year-old girl suffered a severe leg injury when she was attacked by a mixed-breed bulldog on her way home from school. A 26-year-old man came to her aid and fought the dog off of the child, according to police. The dog's owner was later cited, and the dog was put down.

Tuesday morning, two pit bulls chased an elderly Marietta woman in an apartment complex. The woman sustained minor injuries. The dogs were later caught and the owner was cited.

As far as children are concerned, Wulkan said pit bulls and rottweilers in particular are responsible for the most severe injuries.

"With German shepherds, they bite you and then that's it," he said. "Pit bulls and rottweilers, once they go, they're going for the kill."

Merritt Clifton, editor of Animal People, did an in-depth analysis of dog injuries by breed based on 24 years of data.

According to the Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes are responsible for 74 percent of attacks and 68 percent of the attacks upon children. In more than two-thirds of the cases included in the study, the life-threatening or fatal attack was apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal in question.

http://www.ajc.com/news/surgeon-no-place-for-329973.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Siberian Husky kills newborn.

"Husky" kills newborn.

Mixed breed "Indian Dog" drags child from family home.

Rottweiler kills newborn.

Pet snake kills 2 year old.

Chow kills 2 week old.

Rottweiler-Shephard mix kills child.

Doberman kills 8 month old.

Pomeranian kills newborn.

Surgeon: No place for pit bulls, rottweilers around children

ShareThis PrintE-mail

By Alexis Stevens

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

One little girl's scalp and ears were gone. Other children have suffered head injuries, damage to their tracheas, and critical face wounds. And there are the children who don't survive.

In 2009, 29 children were admitted to Children's Healthcare of Atlanta for treatment of serious injuries due to dog attacks, according to a pediatric surgeon. Those children represent the most severely injured. Dozens of others arrive at hospital emergency rooms for treatment for dog bites.

"Unfortunately, a lot of times, it's the family dog or the neighbors' dog," Dr. Mark Wulkan told the AJC. "People get this false sense of security."

The death of a 5-day-old Rockdale newborn by the family's pit bull heightens the need for people to use extreme caution with having certain dog breeds near children.

"There's no place for pit bulls or rottweilers around children," said Wulkan, Children's Healthcare surgeon in chief and an associate professor at Emory.

Every year, 4.5 million Americans are bitten by dogs, and about 20 percent of the victims require medical care, according to the Centers for Disease Control. On average, 16 people die every year in the United States following dog attacks, according to CDC data. That number is on the rise in recent years.

Atlanta-area dogs have made the news several times in recent weeks following attacks.

Earlier this month, a Cobb County 7-year-old girl suffered a severe leg injury when she was attacked by a mixed-breed bulldog on her way home from school. A 26-year-old man came to her aid and fought the dog off of the child, according to police. The dog's owner was later cited, and the dog was put down.

Tuesday morning, two pit bulls chased an elderly Marietta woman in an apartment complex. The woman sustained minor injuries. The dogs were later caught and the owner was cited.

As far as children are concerned, Wulkan said pit bulls and rottweilers in particular are responsible for the most severe injuries.

"With German shepherds, they bite you and then that's it," he said. "Pit bulls and rottweilers, once they go, they're going for the kill."

Merritt Clifton, editor of Animal People, did an in-depth analysis of dog injuries by breed based on 24 years of data.

According to the Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes are responsible for 74 percent of attacks and 68 percent of the attacks upon children. In more than two-thirds of the cases included in the study, the life-threatening or fatal attack was apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal in question.

http://www.ajc.com/news/surgeon-no-place-for-329973.html
:goodposting:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Siberian Husky kills newborn.

"Husky" kills newborn.

Mixed breed "Indian Dog" drags child from family home.

Rottweiler kills newborn.

Pet snake kills 2 year old.

Chow kills 2 week old.

Rottweiler-Shephard mix kills child.

Doberman kills 8 month old.

Pomeranian kills newborn.

Surgeon: No place for pit bulls, rottweilers around children

ShareThis PrintE-mail

By Alexis Stevens

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

One little girl's scalp and ears were gone. Other children have suffered head injuries, damage to their tracheas, and critical face wounds. And there are the children who don't survive.

In 2009, 29 children were admitted to Children's Healthcare of Atlanta for treatment of serious injuries due to dog attacks, according to a pediatric surgeon. Those children represent the most severely injured. Dozens of others arrive at hospital emergency rooms for treatment for dog bites.

"Unfortunately, a lot of times, it's the family dog or the neighbors' dog," Dr. Mark Wulkan told the AJC. "People get this false sense of security."

The death of a 5-day-old Rockdale newborn by the family's pit bull heightens the need for people to use extreme caution with having certain dog breeds near children.

"There's no place for pit bulls or rottweilers around children," said Wulkan, Children's Healthcare surgeon in chief and an associate professor at Emory.

Every year, 4.5 million Americans are bitten by dogs, and about 20 percent of the victims require medical care, according to the Centers for Disease Control. On average, 16 people die every year in the United States following dog attacks, according to CDC data. That number is on the rise in recent years.

Atlanta-area dogs have made the news several times in recent weeks following attacks.

Earlier this month, a Cobb County 7-year-old girl suffered a severe leg injury when she was attacked by a mixed-breed bulldog on her way home from school. A 26-year-old man came to her aid and fought the dog off of the child, according to police. The dog's owner was later cited, and the dog was put down.

Tuesday morning, two pit bulls chased an elderly Marietta woman in an apartment complex. The woman sustained minor injuries. The dogs were later caught and the owner was cited.

As far as children are concerned, Wulkan said pit bulls and rottweilers in particular are responsible for the most severe injuries.

"With German shepherds, they bite you and then that's it," he said. "Pit bulls and rottweilers, once they go, they're going for the kill."

Merritt Clifton, editor of Animal People, did an in-depth analysis of dog injuries by breed based on 24 years of data.

According to the Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes are responsible for 74 percent of attacks and 68 percent of the attacks upon children. In more than two-thirds of the cases included in the study, the life-threatening or fatal attack was apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal in question.

http://www.ajc.com/news/surgeon-no-place-for-329973.html
Breed-Specific Legislation in the United States by Linda S. Weiss, Michigan State University College of Law (2001)

Conclusions: Breed-specific legislation is not an effective approach for regulating dogs' behavior in communities. Although such bans might comfort individuals who have had unpleasant experiences with particular breeds or have heard of attacks by specific dog breeds in the media, the bans do not act to effectively regulate the behavior of any breed or of dogs and their owners collectively.

Practicality Of Breed Specific Legislation In Reducing Or Eliminating Dog Attacks On Humans And Dogs.

Conclusions: Breed specific legislation is not a practicable approach to regulation of dogs...A more direct approach is to regulate the behavior.

ATTACKING THE DOG-BITE EPIDEMIC: WHY BREED-SPECIFIC LEGISLATION WON'T SOLVE THE DANGEROUS-DOG DILEMMA

Conclusions: Aided by strict enforcement and breed-neutral supplemental legislation, dangerous-dog laws can effectively and efficiently provide a solution to the dog-bite epidemic.

The Cost to People, Pets and Veterinarians, and the Damage to the Human-Animal Bond

There is so much behavioral variability within each breed, and even more within breed mixes, that we cannot reliably predict a dog's behavior or suitability based on breed alone.

Why Breed-Specific Legislation Doesn't Work by Jennifer Clark, AKC Government Relations Administrator

If a community truly wants to fix the problem of dangerous dogs, then it needs to abandon the idea of breed-specific legislation.

Position Statement on Breed-Specific Legislation by the ASPCA

Following enactment of a 1990 Pit Bull ban in Winnipeg, Canada, Rottweiler bites increased dramatically (Winnipeg reported bite statistics, 1984-2003). By contrast, following Winnipeg's enactment of a breed-neutral dangerous dog law in 2000, Pit Bull bites remained low and both Rottweiler and total dog bites decreased significantly (Winnipeg reported bite statistics, 1984-2003).

Breed-specific legislation and the pit bull terrier: Are the laws justified? by Stephen Collier, PhD, Journal of Veterinary Behavior (2006) 1, 17-22

The evidence does not sustain the view that the pit bull terrier is a uniquely dangerous breed, and breed-specific laws aimed to control it have not been demonstrated. Legislation directed against the group of breeds with the worst bite records would be unlikely to affect bite frequencies for long, as even with rigorous and effective enforcement, there are many other breeds’ individuals of which irresponsible owners could render dangerous.

Report to the NSW Department of Local Government on breed specific legislation issues relating to control of dangerous dogs

The UK has data on dog attacks and dog bites pre and post implementation of breed specific legislation. There was no difference in the incidence of dog bites with 73% of all bites requiring medical attention being due to dogs both before and after implementation of the legislation.

Those are reports from the UK, Canada, Australia...all reporting the same things. There is no basis in fact, data, or logic for enacting breed specific legislation, and everywhere such legislation has been enacted, it's failed. I'm not nearly as pro-pit bull as I am anti-stupid. And suggesting legislation that hasn't worked anywhere else it's been enacted is flatly stupid. Let's pass some laws, some breed neutral laws like the ones in Winnipeg, that have actually been demonstrated to work at reducing dog bites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/homepage...?cmpid=15585797

Perfectly normal.

It was the third vicious pit-bull attack in Philadelphia in three days.

A few things to consider:

1. Keep in mind this was the first incident like this in 25 years. That may not be accurate because you are relying on the media to report, but it is the first reported incident like this.

2. Also, keep in mind the amount of pitbulls per area. I do not know the breakdown of breed of dog in Philly, but i know if you go to any of the local shelters they are approx. 90% pitbulls. Thus the argument that was used in the article, with more of any type of dog the more likely an incident could occur.

3. and you guys are goofballs with your ignorant, elitist attacks on the pitbull owners. God forbid someone is socially responsible and rescues a dog/saves a dog's life from a shelter instead of buying from a breeder.

:goodposting: Right, your only two choices are 1) buy from a breeder, or 2) get a pitbull.

Priceless.

You should read better before you post.
:goodposting: Right....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Breeds are bred for a reason and Pit Bulls were first bred to take down wild game and hunt then later specifically to fight. The breed of a dog often has a powerful impact on their personality. Not all dogs of a breed will have the same personality but they certainly often do have common traits. Having situations were a dog bred to attack 'meat', then you should not be surprised that a dog attacks people at times.

People that get Pit Bulls often seem to get them because they are 'tough' and 'look cool'. It seems common that people do not seem to train them very well and encourage them to be semi-aggressive. They get choke chains for them and play rough with them and so forth. How a dog is trained will either place emphasis on a dogs breed traits or help restrain them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That dog needs to be put down.
He would be if it's true. Just read the comments. Some he said/she said kind of stuff.
I'd like to say I don't believe it and that the breed of dog is usually very docile, because that's all true. But I had one. Got it from the home of a lady that took in troubled youths. Sweetest dog in the world, but it had obviously been abused by several of these young kids and so it absolutely despised small children. It would bite at them if one got anywhere near it's face. So they can be mean under the right (wrong?) circumstances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That dog needs to be put down.
He would be if it's true. Just read the comments. Some he said/she said kind of stuff.
I'd like to say I don't believe it and that the breed of dog is usually very docile, because that's all true. But I had one. Got it from the home of a lady that took in troubled youths. Sweetest dog in the world, but it had obviously been abused by several of these young kids and so it absolutely despised small children. It would bite at them if one got anywhere near it's face. So they can be mean under the right (wrong?) circumstances.
I have a retriever mix. Shelter dog. She has a mean streak. Sweet as can be when she knows you. Work in progress to get her there all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another one....with a 7 day old baby as the victim

Pitbull kills 7 day infant

Let me get this straight, a teenage girl was sleeping next to her new born, who was grabbed and mauled, and the teenager did not realize the baby was attacked until she was awoke at noon by a neighbor knocking? I'm guessing the dog, pitbull or not, probably had extensive training and regular exercise on a constant basis :confused:. Maybe the dog was training to be a ninja?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local/phila...l#axzz0nqMLK1sX

Bulldog attacks boy in Port Richmond

By Sam Wood

Inquirer Staff Writer

Every morning before school, Shane Bucher, 11, would go to his next-door neighbor's house in Port Richmond to meet with friends before walking to Bridesburg School together.

He would often play with Zeus, the neighbor's 3-year-old American bulldog, said his 13-year-old brother, Brad.

But on Wednesday, Zeus mauled Shane, and would not unclench his jaws until a neighbor shot the dog twice, killing it.

Shane was reported in stable condition at St. Christopher's Hospital for Children after five hours of surgery, said his father, Paul.

"If my neighbor hadn't come out and shot the dog, my brother would have died," said Brad.

Melissa Pomroy, the fiancée of Bill Reynolds, 46, who shot the dog, said that he was too shaken by the incident to talk.

"He loved that dog," she said. He was upset that he had to shoot the dog, she said, "but it was either do that or Shane would be dead."

Rhiannon Kelly, the owner of the dog, could not be reached for comment.

Police said the attack started inside Kelly's house in the 3500 block of Mercer Street about 7:25 a.m.

Shane was sitting on a couch when the dog jumped up with him, police said. A baby-sitter ordered Zeus to get down, but instead the dog attacked Shane and dragged him outside.

Brad Bucher was in his house when a girl ran up and screamed, "Hurry up! Come out! Your brother's being attacked!" he recalled Wednesday evening.

He went out his front door and saw the dog biting his brother in the neck on the sidewalk. He tried to pull the dog away, but it wouldn't let go, he said. So he called 911. Others tried to beat the dog off but couldn't.

Reynolds then came out with a 9mm handgun and fired once in the air, but that failed to scare off Zeus, Brad Bucher said. Reynolds then shot the dog once and it let go, but then attacked again, he said. Reynolds shot again and the dog relented.

A bloodied Shane staggered into the kitchen of his house and collapsed, Brad Bucher said.

Zeus was "like the family dog," he said. "He was a friendly dog. Shane was over there 1,001 times. We've known him since he was a puppy."

Shane had a torn ear, bites to his arms and a leg, and a severe wound to the side of his abdomen, police said. His father said the boy was alert and should recover.

"All he wants is his Tech Decks [miniature skateboards] and his cell phone," he said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.