Yet another Pitt Bull attack (2 Viewers)

[doowain]

http://truthaboutpitbulls.blogspot.com/2011/11/licked-to-death-by-pit-bull.html

Yeah, you both totally missed the point.

What point did I miss? I was just thumbsup'ing that story. I'm sorry you didn't find it touching.

 

[FattyVM]

https://www.google.com/search?q=golden+retriever+attack&aq=f&oq=golden+retriever+attack&aqs=chrome.0.57j0l3j62.5745j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

[DrJ]

About 19 people a year are killed by alleged pit bull attacks.

About 800 people are accidentally killed by guns (and thousands more due to gun violence) every year.

I point this out because I want to know from the "kill all pit bulls" crowd if their stance is on preventing potentially avoidable deaths and making society safer or merely based upon their own personal fears?

There are currently restrictions on the type of guns that you can own because of the amount of damage they do when someone does choose to use them and many people are looking for more of them. Those guns cause/caused a very small percentage of gun deaths that wasn't necessarily disproportional to their representation among the population of guns.

Pitbulls, on the other hand, are responsible for a much larger percentage of dog attacks and deaths in comparison to the percentage of the population they represent. Their attacks also tend to cause more damage than the average dog attack. Having your face torn off and living wouldn't land you amongst your statistics here, but pitbulls do this sort of thing at a greater rate than other dogs in comparison to their representation among the dog population.

Banning Pitbulls or requiring the owners to submit to some sort of background check to own them isn't necessarily that much different than banning people owning military grade, fully automatic assault rifles. It's likely that it's more statistically sound than any argument being made against certain types of weapons.

 

[Chaka]

About 19 people a year are killed by alleged pit bull attacks.

About 800 people are accidentally killed by guns (and thousands more due to gun violence) every year.

I point this out because I want to know from the "kill all pit bulls" crowd if their stance is on preventing potentially avoidable deaths and making society safer or merely based upon their own personal fears?

What do you think the benefit is of comparing an inanimate object to a being/creature? Where are they even close to similar enough to be brought up in this discussion?

Guns don't go off by themselves.

I am just curious if people who are concerned about pit bulls are concerned genuinely for public safety or if their stance is based more upon their own fear of dogs.

 

[Chaka]

About 19 people a year are killed by alleged pit bull attacks.

About 800 people are accidentally killed by guns (and thousands more due to gun violence) every year.

I point this out because I want to know from the "kill all pit bulls" crowd if their stance is on preventing potentially avoidable deaths and making society safer or merely based upon their own personal fears?

There are currently restrictions on the type of guns that you can own because of the amount of damage they do when someone does choose to use them and many people are looking for more of them. Those guns cause/caused a very small percentage of gun deaths that wasn't necessarily disproportional to their representation among the population of guns.

Pitbulls, on the other hand, are responsible for a much larger percentage of dog attacks and deaths in comparison to the percentage of the population they represent. Their attacks also tend to cause more damage than the average dog attack. Having your face torn off and living wouldn't land you amongst your statistics here, but pitbulls do this sort of thing at a greater rate than other dogs in comparison to their representation among the dog population.

Banning Pitbulls or requiring the owners to submit to some sort of background check to own them isn't necessarily that much different than banning people owning military grade, fully automatic assault rifles. It's likely that it's more statistically sound than any argument being made against certain types of weapons.

That is almost a compelling argument, it is the most common guns that cause the most accidental and intentional deaths not the ones that are considered the most dangerous (however you want to define assault weapons that is). So couldn't you define the most dangerous guns the ones that actually cause the most harm? I am also not certain that pit bulls are responsible for the most attacks, the most deaths absolutely, but the most attacks? I am not so sure. Perhaps they do, I am too tired to do a search right now.

In fact I am not even arguing against pit bulls being more potentially dangerous than many dog breeds. But you are not addressing my question about whether people are basing their stance against pit bulls upon a rational concern for public safety or a concern for their own fear of dogs?

 

[eoMMan]

Yeah, oh, yeah.....como ha ludo....DON'T STOP THE PARTY!!!!

Dame.

 

[DrJ]

About 19 people a year are killed by alleged pit bull attacks.

About 800 people are accidentally killed by guns (and thousands more due to gun violence) every year.

I point this out because I want to know from the "kill all pit bulls" crowd if their stance is on preventing potentially avoidable deaths and making society safer or merely based upon their own personal fears?

There are currently restrictions on the type of guns that you can own because of the amount of damage they do when someone does choose to use them and many people are looking for more of them. Those guns cause/caused a very small percentage of gun deaths that wasn't necessarily disproportional to their representation among the population of guns.

Pitbulls, on the other hand, are responsible for a much larger percentage of dog attacks and deaths in comparison to the percentage of the population they represent. Their attacks also tend to cause more damage than the average dog attack. Having your face torn off and living wouldn't land you amongst your statistics here, but pitbulls do this sort of thing at a greater rate than other dogs in comparison to their representation among the dog population.

Banning Pitbulls or requiring the owners to submit to some sort of background check to own them isn't necessarily that much different than banning people owning military grade, fully automatic assault rifles. It's likely that it's more statistically sound than any argument being made against certain types of weapons.

That is almost a compelling argument, it is the most common guns that cause the most accidental and intentional deaths not the ones that are considered the most dangerous (however you want to define assault weapons that is). So couldn't you define the most dangerous guns the ones that actually cause the most harm? I am also not certain that pit bulls are responsible for the most attacks, the most deaths absolutely, but the most attacks? I am not so sure. Perhaps they do, I am too tired to do a search right now. In fact I am not even arguing against pit bulls being more potentially dangerous than many dog breeds. But you are not addressing my question about whether people are basing their stance against pit bulls upon a rational concern for public safety or a concern for their own fear of dogs?

A site I pulled up earlier today said they make up about 30% of attacks and only make up about 5% of the dog population. I don't know how reputable this particular site was but these statistics are available and last time I really looked at this pits definitely didn't look too great in them. Here's the wiki page on fatalities for instance, pits don't look good here and make up a very disproportionate number based on their percentage of the dog population: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_States Are the statistics out there entirely accurate? I'm not sure - plenty of people that endorse pits suggest that they many of these attacks attributed to pits are dogs that aren't really pits but just look like them. There is also precedent for regulating animals - I can't own a tiger for instance. I suspect this is because of the danger they pose, but I'm not all that familiar with the history of these sorts of regulations.

As to your original question, I'm sure there's some of both in a lot of this stuff. I'll admit that my discomfort around these dogs isn't entirely rational - if I see one at the dog park I really don't want me or my children to be around them despite the odds of us actually being attacked being relatively slim. If I know a person owns one I view them differently. We bought a lab a year ago and the guy selling it was telling me about his new pit puppy and in the back of my head I'm thinking this guy has a screw loose. But I do think there is some statistical evidence to support the discomfort as well, so it's a combination of the two. Plenty of people are afraid whenever they see a firearm despite the fact that the odds of them suffering harm is terribly remote. But there is statistical evidence to suggest that there is more danger just being around a weapon in that case as well, no matter how remote.

 

[cstu]

About 19 people a year are killed by alleged pit bull attacks.

About 800 people are accidentally killed by guns (and thousands more due to gun violence) every year.

I point this out because I want to know from the "kill all pit bulls" crowd if their stance is on preventing potentially avoidable deaths and making society safer or merely based upon their own personal fears?

What do you think the benefit is of comparing an inanimate object to a being/creature? Where are they even close to similar enough to be brought up in this discussion?

Guns don't go off by themselves.

I am just curious if people who are concerned about pit bulls are concerned genuinely for public safety or if their stance is based more upon their own fear of dogs.

I am just curious if people who are concerned about tigers are concerned genuinely for public safety or if their stance is based more upon their own fear of cats.

 

[The Commish]

About 19 people a year are killed by alleged pit bull attacks.

About 800 people are accidentally killed by guns (and thousands more due to gun violence) every year.

I point this out because I want to know from the "kill all pit bulls" crowd if their stance is on preventing potentially avoidable deaths and making society safer or merely based upon their own personal fears?

What do you think the benefit is of comparing an inanimate object to a being/creature? Where are they even close to similar enough to be brought up in this discussion?

Guns don't go off by themselves.

I am just curious if people who are concerned about pit bulls are concerned genuinely for public safety or if their stance is based more upon their own fear of dogs.

Then your question should be about people willing to go around and shoot other people, not the gun itself and I have to think the "fear" would be very similar

 

[Chaka]

About 19 people a year are killed by alleged pit bull attacks.

About 800 people are accidentally killed by guns (and thousands more due to gun violence) every year.

I point this out because I want to know from the "kill all pit bulls" crowd if their stance is on preventing potentially avoidable deaths and making society safer or merely based upon their own personal fears?

There are currently restrictions on the type of guns that you can own because of the amount of damage they do when someone does choose to use them and many people are looking for more of them. Those guns cause/caused a very small percentage of gun deaths that wasn't necessarily disproportional to their representation among the population of guns.

Pitbulls, on the other hand, are responsible for a much larger percentage of dog attacks and deaths in comparison to the percentage of the population they represent. Their attacks also tend to cause more damage than the average dog attack. Having your face torn off and living wouldn't land you amongst your statistics here, but pitbulls do this sort of thing at a greater rate than other dogs in comparison to their representation among the dog population.

Banning Pitbulls or requiring the owners to submit to some sort of background check to own them isn't necessarily that much different than banning people owning military grade, fully automatic assault rifles. It's likely that it's more statistically sound than any argument being made against certain types of weapons.

That is almost a compelling argument, it is the most common guns that cause the most accidental and intentional deaths not the ones that are considered the most dangerous (however you want to define assault weapons that is). So couldn't you define the most dangerous guns the ones that actually cause the most harm? I am also not certain that pit bulls are responsible for the most attacks, the most deaths absolutely, but the most attacks? I am not so sure. Perhaps they do, I am too tired to do a search right now. In fact I am not even arguing against pit bulls being more potentially dangerous than many dog breeds. But you are not addressing my question about whether people are basing their stance against pit bulls upon a rational concern for public safety or a concern for their own fear of dogs?

A site I pulled up earlier today said they make up about 30% of attacks and only make up about 5% of the dog population. I don't know how reputable this particular site was but these statistics are available and last time I really looked at this pits definitely didn't look too great in them. Here's the wiki page on fatalities for instance, pits don't look good here and make up a very disproportionate number based on their percentage of the dog population: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_States Are the statistics out there entirely accurate? I'm not sure - plenty of people that endorse pits suggest that they many of these attacks attributed to pits are dogs that aren't really pits but just look like them. There is also precedent for regulating animals - I can't own a tiger for instance. I suspect this is because of the danger they pose, but I'm not all that familiar with the history of these sorts of regulations.

As to your original question, I'm sure there's some of both in a lot of this stuff. I'll admit that my discomfort around these dogs isn't entirely rational - if I see one at the dog park I really don't want me or my children to be around them despite the odds of us actually being attacked being relatively slim. If I know a person owns one I view them differently. We bought a lab a year ago and the guy selling it was telling me about his new pit puppy and in the back of my head I'm thinking this guy has a screw loose. But I do think there is some statistical evidence to support the discomfort as well, so it's a combination of the two. Plenty of people are afraid whenever they see a firearm despite the fact that the odds of them suffering harm is terribly remote. But there is statistical evidence to suggest that there is more danger just being around a weapon in that case as well, no matter how remote.

That is where I got the number for 19 deaths/year. I too have a healthy respect for pit bulls, then again I have a healthy respect for most large dogs because, well, it's smart.

 

[Chaka]

About 19 people a year are killed by alleged pit bull attacks.

About 800 people are accidentally killed by guns (and thousands more due to gun violence) every year.

I point this out because I want to know from the "kill all pit bulls" crowd if their stance is on preventing potentially avoidable deaths and making society safer or merely based upon their own personal fears?

What do you think the benefit is of comparing an inanimate object to a being/creature? Where are they even close to similar enough to be brought up in this discussion?

Guns don't go off by themselves.

I am just curious if people who are concerned about pit bulls are concerned genuinely for public safety or if their stance is based more upon their own fear of dogs.

Then your question should be about people willing to go around and shoot other people, not the gun itself and I have to think the "fear" would be very similar

I have no problem with that. Of course I would be less worried about them if they didn't have such easy access to guns (legally or illegally). So what do the people in here think we should do about these individuals? Because it does not seem like we, as a society, are willing to do anything about their access to guns.

 

[DrJ]

About 19 people a year are killed by alleged pit bull attacks.

About 800 people are accidentally killed by guns (and thousands more due to gun violence) every year.

I point this out because I want to know from the "kill all pit bulls" crowd if their stance is on preventing potentially avoidable deaths and making society safer or merely based upon their own personal fears?

There are currently restrictions on the type of guns that you can own because of the amount of damage they do when someone does choose to use them and many people are looking for more of them. Those guns cause/caused a very small percentage of gun deaths that wasn't necessarily disproportional to their representation among the population of guns.

Pitbulls, on the other hand, are responsible for a much larger percentage of dog attacks and deaths in comparison to the percentage of the population they represent. Their attacks also tend to cause more damage than the average dog attack. Having your face torn off and living wouldn't land you amongst your statistics here, but pitbulls do this sort of thing at a greater rate than other dogs in comparison to their representation among the dog population.

Banning Pitbulls or requiring the owners to submit to some sort of background check to own them isn't necessarily that much different than banning people owning military grade, fully automatic assault rifles. It's likely that it's more statistically sound than any argument being made against certain types of weapons.

That is almost a compelling argument, it is the most common guns that cause the most accidental and intentional deaths not the ones that are considered the most dangerous (however you want to define assault weapons that is). So couldn't you define the most dangerous guns the ones that actually cause the most harm? I am also not certain that pit bulls are responsible for the most attacks, the most deaths absolutely, but the most attacks? I am not so sure. Perhaps they do, I am too tired to do a search right now. In fact I am not even arguing against pit bulls being more potentially dangerous than many dog breeds. But you are not addressing my question about whether people are basing their stance against pit bulls upon a rational concern for public safety or a concern for their own fear of dogs?

A site I pulled up earlier today said they make up about 30% of attacks and only make up about 5% of the dog population. I don't know how reputable this particular site was but these statistics are available and last time I really looked at this pits definitely didn't look too great in them. Here's the wiki page on fatalities for instance, pits don't look good here and make up a very disproportionate number based on their percentage of the dog population: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_States Are the statistics out there entirely accurate? I'm not sure - plenty of people that endorse pits suggest that they many of these attacks attributed to pits are dogs that aren't really pits but just look like them. There is also precedent for regulating animals - I can't own a tiger for instance. I suspect this is because of the danger they pose, but I'm not all that familiar with the history of these sorts of regulations.

As to your original question, I'm sure there's some of both in a lot of this stuff. I'll admit that my discomfort around these dogs isn't entirely rational - if I see one at the dog park I really don't want me or my children to be around them despite the odds of us actually being attacked being relatively slim. If I know a person owns one I view them differently. We bought a lab a year ago and the guy selling it was telling me about his new pit puppy and in the back of my head I'm thinking this guy has a screw loose. But I do think there is some statistical evidence to support the discomfort as well, so it's a combination of the two. Plenty of people are afraid whenever they see a firearm despite the fact that the odds of them suffering harm is terribly remote. But there is statistical evidence to suggest that there is more danger just being around a weapon in that case as well, no matter how remote.

That is where I got the number for 19 deaths/year. I too have a healthy respect for pit bulls, then again I have a healthy respect for most large dogs because, well, it's smart.

It does look like they don't show up in attacks quite as much as fatalities - like I said one site I saw had them at 30% despite being about 5% of the dog population. It appears they're logging percentage in fatalities in the 60's consistently though. This definitely seems to lend support to them doing more damage when they do attack on top of being far more likely to attack than other dogs. I do understand that it tends to be nut jobs that own these dogs, but there's nut jobs that own every type of dog and they don't show up in the statistics like this. I think it's probably because this breed is particularly dangerous if owned by a nut job.

 

[The Commish]

About 19 people a year are killed by alleged pit bull attacks.

About 800 people are accidentally killed by guns (and thousands more due to gun violence) every year.

I point this out because I want to know from the "kill all pit bulls" crowd if their stance is on preventing potentially avoidable deaths and making society safer or merely based upon their own personal fears?

What do you think the benefit is of comparing an inanimate object to a being/creature? Where are they even close to similar enough to be brought up in this discussion?

Guns don't go off by themselves.

I am just curious if people who are concerned about pit bulls are concerned genuinely for public safety or if their stance is based more upon their own fear of dogs.

Then your question should be about people willing to go around and shoot other people, not the gun itself and I have to think the "fear" would be very similar

I have no problem with that. Of course I would be less worried about them if they didn't have such easy access to guns (legally or illegally). So what do the people in here think we should do about these individuals? Because it does not seem like we, as a society, are willing to do anything about their access to guns.

Why do you say this? Because from where I stand the only reason we don't have stricter gun laws is because of the NRA. Right or wrong, I think the general public is fine with making things stricter

 

[Ketamine Dreams]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/04/25/toddler-dies-in-south-metro-atlanta-dog-attack/?test=latestnews

 

[beavers]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/04/25/toddler-dies-in-south-metro-atlanta-dog-attack/?test=latestnews

So sad for this family. I couldn't imagine.

 

[ntz08]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/man-15-years-beastiality-charge-article-1.1325909

 

[Jobber]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/04/25/toddler-dies-in-south-metro-atlanta-dog-attack/?test=latestnews

So sad for this family. I couldn't imagine.

I can. That's why we don't have any large agressive dogs in our home around our three kids.

 

[SHIZNITTTT]

35 pages and people still defending this dog. I would love to have one, but as long as I have kids I don't see it happening.

 

[glock]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/man-15-years-beastiality-charge-article-1.1325909

The dog put up with that??

 

[ntz08]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/man-15-years-beastiality-charge-article-1.1325909

The dog put up with that??

Clearly these dogs just need some love.

http://lasvegas.cbslocal.com/2013/02/20/woman-arrested-for-sex-with-pit-bull/

 

[FattyVM]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/man-15-years-beastiality-charge-article-1.1325909

The dog put up with that??

Clearly these dogs just need some love.

http://lasvegas.cbslocal.com/2013/02/20/woman-arrested-for-sex-with-pit-bull/

Well, they are definitely getting some lovin'.

 

[Charlie Frown]

https://www.google.com/search?q=golden+retriever+attack&aq=f&oq=golden+retriever+attack&aqs=chrome.0.57j0l3j62.5745j0&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

But how many fatalities? Compare them to pit/pit-like breeds.

 

[beavers]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/04/25/toddler-dies-in-south-metro-atlanta-dog-attack/?test=latestnews

So sad for this family. I couldn't imagine.

I can. That's why we don't have any large agressive dogs in our home around our three kids.

Neither do I and I would never own a pit. This family most likely bought into some of the propaganda type that is spewed in this thread - you know, those loving pictures of the dogs, how pits are only aggressive when raised by a thuggish owner etc. Buying into that propaganda cost them their child.

 

[jomar]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/04/25/toddler-dies-in-south-metro-atlanta-dog-attack/?test=latestnews

So sad for this family. I couldn't imagine.

I can. That's why we don't have any large agressive dogs in our home around our three kids.

Neither do I and I would never own a pit. This family most likely bought into some of the propaganda type that is spewed in this thread - you know, those loving pictures of the dogs, how pits are only aggressive when raised by a thuggish owner etc. Buying into that propaganda cost them their child.

there's no pic of the dog in that link and no one even saying it was a pitbull except for the reporter. I'm sure it drew more attention to the headline but that doesn't make it true.

and do you know how this dog was raised? your answer implies that you do, but the story gives no insight whatsoever into that either. was he trained and socialized? get any exercise?

I realize it makes the story a little more juicier but can we at least get a pic of the dog? a comment from a family member?

lastly, never, ever, leave a dog, any dog, of any size, alone in a room with a 2 year old toddler.

 

[glock]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/04/25/toddler-dies-in-south-metro-atlanta-dog-attack/?test=latestnews

So sad for this family. I couldn't imagine.

I can. That's why we don't have any large agressive dogs in our home around our three kids.

Neither do I and I would never own a pit. This family most likely bought into some of the propaganda type that is spewed in this thread - you know, those loving pictures of the dogs, how pits are only aggressive when raised by a thuggish owner etc. Buying into that propaganda cost them their child.

there's no pic of the dog in that link and no one even saying it was a pitbull except for the reporter. I'm sure it drew more attention to the headline but that doesn't make it true. and do you know how this dog was raised? your answer implies that you do, but the story gives no insight whatsoever into that either. was he trained and socialized? get any exercise?

I realize it makes the story a little more juicier but can we at least get a pic of the dog? a comment from a family member?

lastly, never, ever, leave a dog, any dog, of any size, alone in a room with a 2 year old toddler.

It doesn't matter how these dogs are raised. Well, at least to me it doesn't matter. You never know with any dog. They all can snap. However, if one did leave the room and their shih tzu decided to get a wild hair, it wouldn't result in quite the same degree of carnage that we see with pits. You do get that, yes?

 

[eoMMan]

PItbull saves woman from burning home....

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/04/18055161-pit-bull-saves-new-york-woman-from-burning-home?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=8

 

[pantherclub]

PItbull saves woman from burning home....

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/04/18055161-pit-bull-saves-new-york-woman-from-burning-home?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=8

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57579427/california-mother-mauled-to-death-by-pit-bull/

 

[beavers]

PItbull saves woman from burning home....

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/04/18055161-pit-bull-saves-new-york-woman-from-burning-home?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=8

How do we know this dog is a pit?

 

[StrikeS2k]

PItbull saves woman from burning home....

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/04/18055161-pit-bull-saves-new-york-woman-from-burning-home?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=8

Dog barked at fire.

 

[Pantherz]

My brother and I both have golf carts we use at a campground on weekends. Last week my brother went to see our "golf cart guy" to get some work done on his. He said he noticed when he got there that the guy had terrible scars all over his face and arms, but avoided saying anything at first. After a few minutes he had to ask.

Brother: Dude, what happened? Were you in a car wreck or something?

GCG: Naw, my dog(pit bull) got into it with the neighbors dogs(Weimariners). He was killing one of them, and I managed to get him off and was trying to get him back to the house when he went after me. When he got me on the ground, I knew I was in trouble if I couldn't get him off his feet. He got ahold of my face a couple of times and ripped it mostly off. Had one eye out of the socket. I thought I was dead, but I managed to sweep his legs out from under him and get on top and was trying to choke him out. Wasn't working but I noticed as I was over top of him that the blood running from my head was pouring onto his face and getiing in his nostrils. I let the blood go right in his nostrils for a minute and he finally passed out.

Brother: Did you kill him?

GCG: Naw, he's out back. He's a sweet dog.

 

[Mister CIA]

My brother and I both have golf carts we use at a campground on weekends. Last week my brother went to see our "golf cart guy" to get some work done on his. He said he noticed when he got there that the guy had terrible scars all over his face and arms, but avoided saying anything at first. After a few minutes he had to ask.

Brother: Dude, what happened? Were you in a car wreck or something?

GCG: Naw, my dog(pit bull) got into it with the neighbors dogs(Weimariners). He was killing one of them, and I managed to get him off and was trying to get him back to the house when he went after me. When he got me on the ground, I knew I was in trouble if I couldn't get him off his feet. He got ahold of my face a couple of times and ripped it mostly off. Had one eye out of the socket. I thought I was dead, but I managed to sweep his legs out from under him and get on top and was trying to choke him out. Wasn't working but I noticed as I was over top of him that the blood running from my head was pouring onto his face and getiing in his nostrils. I let the blood go right in his nostrils for a minute and he finally passed out.

Brother: Did you kill him?

GCG: Naw, he's out back. He's a sweet dog.

Nice narrative bro... Lesson learned - mama don't let your babies grow up to be golf cart guys.

Seriously, pit bulls are bred specifically not to bite owners when separating dogs in the fighting pit.

For anybody who wants to engage in a serious discussion, watch

. It truly captures the pit bull condition.

 

[jomar]

It doesn't matter how these dogs are raised. Well, at least to me it doesn't matter. You never know with any dog. They all can snap. However, if one did leave the room and their shih tzu decided to get a wild hair, it wouldn't result in quite the same degree of carnage that we see with pits. You do get that, yes?

Are you saying we should ban all dogs over 20 lbs?

 

[Pantherz]

My brother and I both have golf carts we use at a campground on weekends. Last week my brother went to see our "golf cart guy" to get some work done on his. He said he noticed when he got there that the guy had terrible scars all over his face and arms, but avoided saying anything at first. After a few minutes he had to ask.

Brother: Dude, what happened? Were you in a car wreck or something?

GCG: Naw, my dog(pit bull) got into it with the neighbors dogs(Weimariners). He was killing one of them, and I managed to get him off and was trying to get him back to the house when he went after me. When he got me on the ground, I knew I was in trouble if I couldn't get him off his feet. He got ahold of my face a couple of times and ripped it mostly off. Had one eye out of the socket. I thought I was dead, but I managed to sweep his legs out from under him and get on top and was trying to choke him out. Wasn't working but I noticed as I was over top of him that the blood running from my head was pouring onto his face and getiing in his nostrils. I let the blood go right in his nostrils for a minute and he finally passed out.

Brother: Did you kill him?

GCG: Naw, he's out back. He's a sweet dog.

Nice narrative bro... Lesson learned - mama don't let your babies grow up to be golf cart guys.

Seriously, pit bulls are bred specifically not to bite owners when separating dogs in the fighting pit.

For anybody who wants to engage in a serious discussion, watch

Good documentary. Their message was pretty clear and I agree about what is happening to cause the attacks. Unfortunately I didn't see an easy solution. Some of the people in the most danger are the good samaritans who want to adopt this poor breed of mistreated dog, but wind up putting their own family in danger by not knowing how to handle this breed. They adopt an animal with no knowledge of what is was subjected to before they got it. Then, the sweet family pet snaps and a kid gets mauled or worse.

I think if you took 100 people, gave them 100 different breeds of puppies, that the plt bull would be no more likely to bite humans than most other dogs given the same treatment. However, if they did attack, the damage is quick and severe.

In the example I cited above, I just can't believe this guy still trusts this dog with his family. I'm pretty sure he has kids, but don't know their ages. The dog ripped his face to shreds, but he still has the dog.

The story of the American Pit Bull is a sad one. Unfortunately, the vast majority of the people breeding them are not doing it for the right reasons, nor putting them in responsible owners hands. Therefore, the problem just keeps getting worse.

 

[TxBuckeye]

My brother and I both have golf carts we use at a campground on weekends. Last week my brother went to see our "golf cart guy" to get some work done on his. He said he noticed when he got there that the guy had terrible scars all over his face and arms, but avoided saying anything at first. After a few minutes he had to ask.

Brother: Dude, what happened? Were you in a car wreck or something?

GCG: Naw, my dog(pit bull) got into it with the neighbors dogs(Weimariners). He was killing one of them, and I managed to get him off and was trying to get him back to the house when he went after me. When he got me on the ground, I knew I was in trouble if I couldn't get him off his feet. He got ahold of my face a couple of times and ripped it mostly off. Had one eye out of the socket. I thought I was dead, but I managed to sweep his legs out from under him and get on top and was trying to choke him out. Wasn't working but I noticed as I was over top of him that the blood running from my head was pouring onto his face and getiing in his nostrils. I let the blood go right in his nostrils for a minute and he finally passed out.

Brother: Did you kill him?

GCG: Naw, he's out back. He's a sweet dog.

Should probably cross-post this in the "Humans are stupid" thread.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

Pitbull Really Wants That Stick

http://youtu.be/JChvEsOI8I8

 

[Chaka]

Pitbull Really Wants That Stick

http://youtu.be/JChvEsOI8I8

Maybe he's just really into crossfit.

 

[TxBuckeye]

He's probably trying to hang himself before any of the other pitbulls see him in that sweater.

 

[East Coast Bias]

Southern California woman fatally mauled by pit bulls.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Man Slapped with Second-Degree Murder Charge in Fatal Pit Bull Mauling

May 31, 2013 6:00am

Prosecutors in Los Angeles are looking to throw the book at a man whose pack of dogs mauled a jogger to death. Today, he was charged with second-degree murder.

During a hearing today, Alex Donald Jackson sat behind a plexiglass wall while being arraigned in a Los Angeles County court.

The 29-year-old’s pit bulls allegedly were responsible for the fatal mauling of 63-year-old Pamela Devitt on May 9. Devitt was out for a jog near Jackson’s house in the Mojave Desert when she was attacked.

“It is kind of a unique situation,” Prosecutor Samantha MacDonald said today. “I don’t know that it’s been done very often. We’re just going to try to prosecute it to the full extent of the law, and I think that the evidence will speak for itself.”

MacDonald said officials decided to charge Jackson with second-degree murder, but she wouldn’t explain why. She told reporters that because it was an open case she could not reveal further information about the case against Jackson.

An L.A. County judge told Jackson today that he had a right to a preliminary hearing within 10 days. His attorney, Robert Chu, of the L.A. County Public Defender’s Office, told the court that he will need more time to review the case.

Jackson’s next hearing was scheduled for June 14. He’s being held on $1,000,050 bail.

Chu did not immediately return calls from ABCNews.com for comment.

Jackson was arrested Thursday morning after DNA tests on his dogs showed blood on their muzzles and coats matched that of Devitt. If convicted, he could face life in prison, according to the District Attorney’s Office.

An autopsy revealed that Devitt had died of blood loss attributed to sharp-force trauma. She sustained approximately 150 to 200 puncture wounds, John Corina of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department’s Homicide Division told ABCNews.com.

When an officer arrived at the scene, one of the dogs was still mauling Devitt, Corina said. The deputy approached, and the dog ran off but soon turned around and came at the officer, he added. The deputy fired a shot and the dog ran off again, only to turn around a moment later and come at the officer a second time, according to Corina, who added the dog took off again after the officer fired a second shot.

The fence around Jackson’s property was only three to four feet high, Corina said, and the dogs could easily hop over it. He said that police found other people who had similar stories about the dogs attacking people.

Corina said that the dogs, which appeared to be of varying ages, were all fully grown. He said that they were with the Los Angeles County Department of Animal Control, and would likely be euthanized.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/05/murder-charged-in-fatal-pit-bull-mauling/

 

[Mister CIA]

Man Slapped with Second-Degree Murder Charge in Fatal Pit Bull Mauling

May 31, 2013 6:00am

Prosecutors in Los Angeles are looking to throw the book at a man whose pack of dogs mauled a jogger to death. Today, he was charged with second-degree murder.

During a hearing today, Alex Donald Jackson sat behind a plexiglass wall while being arraigned in a Los Angeles County court.

The 29-year-old’s pit bulls allegedly were responsible for the fatal mauling of 63-year-old Pamela Devitt on May 9. Devitt was out for a jog near Jackson’s house in the Mojave Desert when she was attacked.

“It is kind of a unique situation,” Prosecutor Samantha MacDonald said today. “I don’t know that it’s been done very often. We’re just going to try to prosecute it to the full extent of the law, and I think that the evidence will speak for itself.”

MacDonald said officials decided to charge Jackson with second-degree murder, but she wouldn’t explain why. She told reporters that because it was an open case she could not reveal further information about the case against Jackson.

An L.A. County judge told Jackson today that he had a right to a preliminary hearing within 10 days. His attorney, Robert Chu, of the L.A. County Public Defender’s Office, told the court that he will need more time to review the case.

Jackson’s next hearing was scheduled for June 14. He’s being held on $1,000,050 bail.

Chu did not immediately return calls from ABCNews.com for comment.

Jackson was arrested Thursday morning after DNA tests on his dogs showed blood on their muzzles and coats matched that of Devitt. If convicted, he could face life in prison, according to the District Attorney’s Office.

An autopsy revealed that Devitt had died of blood loss attributed to sharp-force trauma. She sustained approximately 150 to 200 puncture wounds, John Corina of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department’s Homicide Division told ABCNews.com.

When an officer arrived at the scene, one of the dogs was still mauling Devitt, Corina said. The deputy approached, and the dog ran off but soon turned around and came at the officer, he added. The deputy fired a shot and the dog ran off again, only to turn around a moment later and come at the officer a second time, according to Corina, who added the dog took off again after the officer fired a second shot.

The fence around Jackson’s property was only three to four feet high, Corina said, and the dogs could easily hop over it. He said that police found other people who had similar stories about the dogs attacking people.

Corina said that the dogs, which appeared to be of varying ages, were all fully grown. He said that they were with the Los Angeles County Department of Animal Control, and would likely be euthanized.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/05/murder-charged-in-fatal-pit-bull-mauling/

Excellent!

Actually murder seems a little out of touch (though I don't know all the pertinent details), but still it's a step in the right direction - make dog owners responsible for the actions of their dogs. It's so simple.

 

[[icon]]

PItbull saves woman from burning home....

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/04/18055161-pit-bull-saves-new-york-woman-from-burning-home?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=8

How do we know this dog is a pit?

Because we know how to read. "He's a pit bull, too," said Stallworth. "They have such bad reps, but he's such a good boy."

 

[FattyVM]

My brother and I both have golf carts we use at a campground on weekends. Last week my brother went to see our "golf cart guy" to get some work done on his. He said he noticed when he got there that the guy had terrible scars all over his face and arms, but avoided saying anything at first. After a few minutes he had to ask.

Brother: Dude, what happened? Were you in a car wreck or something?

GCG: Naw, my dog(pit bull) got into it with the neighbors dogs(Weimariners). He was killing one of them, and I managed to get him off and was trying to get him back to the house when he went after me. When he got me on the ground, I knew I was in trouble if I couldn't get him off his feet. He got ahold of my face a couple of times and ripped it mostly off. Had one eye out of the socket. I thought I was dead, but I managed to sweep his legs out from under him and get on top and was trying to choke him out. Wasn't working but I noticed as I was over top of him that the blood running from my head was pouring onto his face and getiing in his nostrils. I let the blood go right in his nostrils for a minute and he finally passed out.

Brother: Did you kill him?

GCG: Naw, he's out back. He's a sweet dog.

Nice narrative bro... Lesson learned - mama don't let your babies grow up to be golf cart guys.

Seriously, pit bulls are bred specifically not to bite owners when separating dogs in the fighting pit.

For anybody who wants to engage in a serious discussion, watch

This vid is great, and I agree with it.

 

[beavers]

PItbull saves woman from burning home....

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/04/18055161-pit-bull-saves-new-york-woman-from-burning-home?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=8

How do we know this dog is a pit?

Because we know how to read."He's a pit bull, too," said Stallworth. "They have such bad reps, but he's such a good boy."

I was being sarcastic.

 

[azgroover]

They should put the dog man down.

Pit bull bites off Rochester man's tongue

Pontiac — A 33-year-old Rochester man had part of his tongue bitten off and eaten when he tried to make friends with a pit bull, according to the Oakland County Sheriffs Office.

Deputies were called to a home in the 800 block of N. Perry Street at about 11:30 p.m. Wednesday on reports of an animal bite.

An investigation showed that the victim was visiting the owner of the animal and at some point, while trying to make friends with the dog, stuck out his tongue while face-to-face with the animal.

The dog bit off a substantial portion of the man’s tongue and ate it, according to authorities. The bit-off portion was not recovered and believed swallowed by the dog.

The man was transported to McLaren Hospital for treatment.

According to deputies, this is the second time in four months that this particular pit bull has bitten someone. The dog has been quarantined for the next 10 days by the Oakland County Animal Control department, which will investigate the incident.

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130808/METRO02/308080092#ixzz2bOcEDyp9

 

[glock]

They should put the dog man down.

Pit bull bites off Rochester man's tongue

Pontiac — A 33-year-old Rochester man had part of his tongue bitten off and eaten when he tried to make friends with a pit bull, according to the Oakland County Sheriffs Office.

Deputies were called to a home in the 800 block of N. Perry Street at about 11:30 p.m. Wednesday on reports of an animal bite.

An investigation showed that the victim was visiting the owner of the animal and at some point, while trying to make friends with the dog, stuck out his tongue while face-to-face with the animal.

The dog bit off a substantial portion of the man’s tongue and ate it, according to authorities. The bit-off portion was not recovered and believed swallowed by the dog.

The man was transported to McLaren Hospital for treatment.

According to deputies, this is the second time in four months that this particular pit bull has bitten someone. The dog has been quarantined for the next 10 days by the Oakland County Animal Control department, which will investigate the incident.

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130808/METRO02/308080092#ixzz2bOcEDyp9

Well, he did stick out his tongue at the dog. What did he expect!?

 

[Chaka]

This is the first attack update since May 9th? You guys are slipping, but feel free to strike up the hysteria all the same.

 

[stbugs]

This is the first attack update since May 9th? You guys are slipping, but feel free to strike up the hysteria all the same.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=pit+bull+attacks

Here you go, plenty on the first page in the last couple weeks. Only 6.5 millions results.

 

[cheese]

There is a pit bull that has been wandering into my yard recently. I have a young daughter that plays outside almost constantly. The dog seems completely friendly. I have to admit, the only reason I'm concerned is that it's a pit bull and the reputation they have for attacks. Would you be concerned just based on the nature of the breed or treat this as any other dog that found it's way into the neighborhood?

FWIW, I don't know the owner, but he is friends with a neighbor (who I do know) and brings his dog over. Once in a while the dog roams free while they are hanging out doing whatever.

I'm a passive person who would rather ignore this and I frankly don't care if a dog comes through our yard generally speaking. However, my daughter's safety is obviously factor 1, 2, and 3 here so if that's an issue I will talk to the guy and get it stopped.

 

[Jobber]

There is a pit bull that has been wandering into my yard recently. I have a young daughter that plays outside almost constantly. The dog seems completely friendly. I have to admit, the only reason I'm concerned is that it's a pit bull and the reputation they have for attacks. Would you be concerned just based on the nature of the breed or treat this as any other dog that found it's way into the neighborhood?

FWIW, I don't know the owner, but he is friends with a neighbor (who I do know) and brings his dog over. Once in a while the dog roams free while they are hanging out doing whatever.

I'm a passive person who would rather ignore this and I frankly don't care if a dog comes through our yard generally speaking. However, my daughter's safety is obviously factor 1, 2, and 3 here so if that's an issue I will talk to the guy and get it stopped.

Tough situation. Keep in mind that most pit attack stories start out with the owner and others saying "He was always such a nice dog...". I'd have a talk with the your daughter first to tell her to stay far away from that dog if she sees it. Talking to the neighbor...maybe. I guess it depends on how often you see it running around.

 

[Cliff Clavin]

There is a pit bull that has been wandering into my yard recently. I have a young daughter that plays outside almost constantly. The dog seems completely friendly. I have to admit, the only reason I'm concerned is that it's a pit bull and the reputation they have for attacks. Would you be concerned just based on the nature of the breed or treat this as any other dog that found it's way into the neighborhood?

FWIW, I don't know the owner, but he is friends with a neighbor (who I do know) and brings his dog over. Once in a while the dog roams free while they are hanging out doing whatever.

I'm a passive person who would rather ignore this and I frankly don't care if a dog comes through our yard generally speaking. However, my daughter's safety is obviously factor 1, 2, and 3 here so if that's an issue I will talk to the guy and get it stopped.

I'd be concerned with any dog wondering into my yard where my daughter. No matter the temperament/history/breed should a big dog be left alone with a kid.