Dog kills cat, cat owner shoots dog, dog owner shoots 5 people.

[Kodos]

If a development where I'm thinking of moving has a ban on dogs, that's a plus. Too many people let their dog sit outside and bark all day and night.

[wade moore]

Noticeably lower.

Those breeds are almost a separate issue at this point, and as for them I'd like to see their possession in the U.S. outlawed entirely.

Completely disagree with this one and it is a mentallity that gets me a bit hot under the collar.

If you look at statistics/research the dog breed isn't the problem. It's the owner. If you ban Pit Bulls and Rotts, then it will just move to a different dog breed. I have several articles that follow the trend from breed to breed. At some point it's been German Shephards. At some point Dobermans. Etc, etc. It's not the breed itself, but whatever breed is trendy with the crowd that likes to make trouble.

[wade moore]

If a development where I'm thinking of moving has a ban on dogs, that's a plus. Too many people let their dog sit outside and bark all day and night.

A lot of places have rules on this, I think neighbors are generally unwilling to "rat them out" and/or talk to their neighbor.

I'm very cognizent of other people with my dogs, especially because (and this should get good) I have a dog that is very prone to biting and all 3 of them are barkers to an extent. So, I'm very aware of what noise they are making and try to make them stop and/or bring them inside. I am also super cognizent of what's going on around me when walking the biter and am sure to let the neighbors know (they have a 4 year old) so that we avoid any mishaps at the fence.

[wade moore]

Dola: I do recognize that many dog owners are not so polite/aware.

[DanGarion]

Noticeably lower.

Those breeds are almost a separate issue at this point, and as for them I'd like to see their possession in the U.S. outlawed entirely.

I'd rather see the idiot owners that train their dogs to be violent outlawed.

[DanGarion]

Dola: I do recognize that many dog owners are not so polite/aware.

You can say that about anything. I recognize that many motorcycle riders are not polite/aware.

[BYU 14]

Completely disagree with this one and it is a mentallity that gets me a bit hot under the collar.

If you look at statistics/research the dog breed isn't the problem. It's the owner. If you ban Pit Bulls and Rotts, then it will just move to a different dog breed. I have several articles that follow the trend from breed to breed. At some point it's been German Shephards. At some point Dobermans. Etc, etc. It's not the breed itself, but whatever breed is trendy with the crowd that likes to make trouble.

I agree with you on this Wade, Pits only tend to be unstable if they are raised wrong. If you work to train the aggressive traits out of them they are actually very loving and affectionate Dogs. What I would like to see is stiffer penalties for the owners of Dogs that attack/maim people other animals as a result of the Dog being improperly supervised or restrained. In the end the Dogs are just exhibiting the behavior they are allowed to exhibit.

I know someone who owns wolves, who are a lot more prone to violence than any Dog, but he has established himself as the "pack master" (Yeah I watch Dog whisperer) and they behave fine.

[wade moore]

You can say that about anything. I recognize that many motorcycle riders are not polite/aware.

Yup.

Dogs just tend to be something that can impact you while you're sitting at home minding your own business.

A dog owner as a neighbor that doesn't have any common courtesy can be an absolutely miserable experience.

[Travis]

Bingo. I've been planning on getting a Malamute for a long time (just haven't gotten to a place where it'd be fair to the animal to get one yet) and have already done a lot of looking into what would be needed as far as training to make sure it behaves in as safe a manner as possible. It kills me to see how many bad/ignorant/inattentive owners there are out there (and thankfully most of the one's I know own smaller animals, cats and dogs) and that's where the major issues lie.

As was said, if you remove the current "aggressive" breeds, those same owners will just get the next biggest/available breed in line and those same statistics will reappear in a few years for new breeds.

[Lathum]

If a development where I'm thinking of moving has a ban on dogs, that's a plus. Too many people let their dog sit outside and bark all day and night.

This guy could probably help you with that


http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/7026/newman.jpg (http://img503.imageshack.us/my.php?image=newman.jpg)

[wade moore]

As a side note:

Trust me, having a dog that bites, even if small (like mine) is not fun at times.


Edit: And no, "get rid of it", is not a valid solution.

[lordscarlet]

I think it's funny that people are taking this estimated 5 million dog bite number and distributing those bites to 5 million different dogs, all of whom apparently bite one person, one time, each year.

I mean, come on.

Most, if not all, of the people quoting that statistic have recognized this fact.

[molson]

Most, if not all, of the people quoting that statistic have recognized this fact.

I've also seen the "1 in 15" number analyzed, and I'm just saying that's not even valid as a starting point.

[SportsDino]

The penalty for idiot owners should be more severe.

My very stupid little sister insisted on petting a big dog some jackass was walking down the street one day. Of course the stupid thing bit her, and I had to yank her away before it did any more damage. The owner of course thought the appropriate response was to laugh his ass off.

Several days later here he comes again, my sister appropriately trembled in fear at our steps far away from the sidewalk, and I watched like a hawk while they were walking. The asshole sees us, makes an incredibly rude comment, laughs and LETS THE DOG OFF ITS LEASH!

The stupid mutt charged right into a roundhouse kick to the face and another one in the ribs while it was turning after it fell down. Owner started to fluff up some big ego shit about what he was going to do (I was maybe 2/3's his height, half his weight, and probably a fourth of his age... very brave of him)... I told my sister to run to my mother and call the cops and did my best rabid animal impression until he had leashed his dog and I chased him out of sight.

So I'm under the theory that most dog attacks are caused by chickenshit wannabe bully owners, with a little bit of stupid kids that don't know better to be wary of animals mixed in. Other than that one experience, despite having a dislike of dogs ever since, every other dog has been a decent creature. I think it takes very little training to get a dog to non-hostile behavior, most aggressive dogs are due to their owners stupidity so I think they should be fined harshly.

[gstelmack]

I agree with all of your post, especially the "very stupid little sister" part (we work hard with our kids making sure they get permission from the owner, which of course may or may not have helped in this case). We used to have a neighbor that would take his dog to work or whatever and would let him out of the truck when he was turning onto the street, and the dog would immediately chase all the kids playing in the neighborhood. People like that are what give dogs bad names.

[lordscarlet]

I've also seen the "1 in 15" number analyzed, and I'm just saying that's not even valid as a starting point.

Again, the reality of the number has been recognized by everyone mentioning it. I don't see the need to act like we don't know what we're talking about when we acknowledge the same thing you are saying. If the numbers quoted are correct there is 1 person "attacked" per 15 pet canines in the United States each year. That is a factual statement (if the 75mm/15mm # is correct). That probably means that there are a number of "repeat offenders" in the bunch, but we don't know how many. We have been careful to note that, but all we can do is quote the "1 in 15" until we have more facts.

[molson]

Again, the reality of the number has been recognized by everyone mentioning it. I don't see the need to act like we don't know what we're talking about when we acknowledge the same thing you are saying. If the numbers quoted are correct there is 1 person "attacked" per 15 pet canines in the United States each year. That is a factual statement (if the 75mm/15mm # is correct). That probably means that there are a number of "repeat offenders" in the bunch, but we don't know how many. We have been careful to note that, but all we can do is quote the "1 in 15" until we have more facts.

My opinion is that number was even more of a stretch then those qualifications. You don't agree.

I don't know why this is such a big deal for you.

You said:

"OK, we have gotten on MBBF's case about what the "vast majority" of a percentage of a population is, but... 1 in 15 dogs is a LOT. And that's PER YEAR. I'm sorry, but I'm with JIMGA that the number surprises me. Granted, "1 in 15" doesn't actually mean 1 in 15 dogs. There could be 5 dogs attacking 3 times per year. Regardless, I would have guessed PER YEAR that roughly 1 attack per 100 or so dogs was reported."

So yes, you acknowledged it, but you're still using 1 in 15 as a starting point, which I just think is silly. You said you would have guessed that roughly 1 attack per 100 or so dogs was reported. But the 5 million bite stat this is based on is an estimate of ALL bites (not just those that are reported).

And I'm nots ure what "roughly 1 attack per 100 or so dogs was reported" even means. Does that mean that 1 in 100 attacks are reported? Or that for every 100 dogs, there's 1 reported attack? Neither guess is in any way contradicted by the data, which includes estimates of all dog bites, reported and unreported. You though, found a contradiction because of the "1 in 15" number, which again, I think is silly.

I would guess (total guess) that mabye 1 out of 50 dogs bit someone last year, and the majority of those were playing "accidents" at home involving the owners. I would guess that less than 1 out of 100 dogs bit a stranger last year. And probably far fewer than that. The stats don't contradict those guesses. You think they do, and that's my disagreement.

Resume your thread policing, I hope I've explained myself to your satisfaction.

[lordscarlet]

Resume your thread policing, I hope I've explained myself to your satisfaction.

Hello pot, meet kettle.

[molson]

Hello pot, meet kettle.

I don't know what about my post made you so pissy. Sorry about that.

I didn't agree with the statistical methodolgy being used. You...didn't like that I pointed that out? or that I had an opinion?

sorry

[Passacaglia]

molson, I think that LS said "1 in 15 dogs is a LOT" he meant that one BITE in 15 dogs is a lot. He even later mentions that it "doesn't actually mean 1 in 15 dogs" (although I think his example of 5 dogs attacking 3 times per year is not the best to illustrate that point).

[Pumpy Tudors]

It's been a long time since I had an internet fight. I need to start some shit.

[Lathum]

It's been a long time since I had an internet fight. I need to start some shit.

not since this one

Stories from the Felt (http://blogs.mysanantonio.com/weblogs/poker/2006/02/the-legend-of-p.html)

[molson]

It's been a long time since I had an internet fight. I need to start some shit.

Who's that guy that called you Frumpy Tudors? I don't think you ever settled that shit.

[molson]

molson, I think that LS said "1 in 15 dogs is a LOT" he meant that one BITE in 15 dogs is a lot. He even later mentions that it "doesn't actually mean 1 in 15 dogs" (although I think his example of 5 dogs attacking 3 times per year is not the best to illustrate that point).

Right, he basically said "1 in 15 seems like a lot, I would think it would be more like 1 in 100". And JIMGA said that the more he thought about it, 1 in 15 didn't seem like that much. And then there was some debate about whether "1 in 15" meant this was a "regular occurrence".

I think the whole "1 in 15" premise is faulty. Both in the statistical assumptions, and the assumptions that these are all "attacks". Not just that "1 and 15" isn't the exact number, but the whole ratio is an incredibly misleading starting point.

[Fidatelo]

Right, he basically said "1 in 15 seems like a lot, I would think it would be more like 1 in 100". And JIMGA said that the more he thought about it, 1 in 15 didn't seem like that much. And then there was some debate about whether "1 in 15" meant this was a "regular occurrence".

I think the whole "1 in 15" premise is faulty. Both in the statistical assumptions, and the assumptions that these are all "attacks".

Everyone in every post regarding 1 in 15 used the number knowing it was flawed. You seem to be the only one here who doesn't appear to get it.

[molson]

Everyone in every post regarding 1 in 15 used the number knowing it was flawed. You seem to be the only one here who doesn't appear to get it.

I'm not just saying it's flawed. I'll try again.

I was responding to points like:

""OK, we have gotten on MBBF's case about what the "vast majority" of a percentage of a population is, but... 1 in 15 dogs is a LOT. And that's PER YEAR. I'm sorry, but I'm with JIMGA that the number surprises me. Granted, "1 in 15" doesn't actually mean 1 in 15 dogs. There could be 5 dogs attacking 3 times per year. Regardless, I would have guessed PER YEAR that roughly 1 attack per 100 or so dogs was reported.""

So he's implying that because of this 1 in 15 number, his previous guess of "roughly 1 attack per 100 or so dogs was reported" is way off.

IN MY OPINION, the 1 in 15 number is SO invalid that it doesn't disprove his prior guess of "roughly 1 attack per 100 or so dogs was reported". Both because of the problem with the numbers, and the distinction between "bites" and "attacks".

Later, JIMGA thought that the 1 in 15 number (THOUGH FLAWED) was actually supported somewhat by his anecdotal evidence.

So the 1 in 15 number, though admitted by everybody to be flawed, is still being used to show us how scary dogs in to some degree, and I disagree with the degree.

I don't know why this is such a controversial stance.

[Logan]

It's been a long time since I had an internet fight. I need to start some shit.

Bring it on, cowboy stache.

[sabotai]

And then there's the llamas and emus.

I worked at the safari at Six Flag Great Adventure for a sumeer. Llamas are pretty much cowards. They certainly are jerks and will try to sneak up on you, but you grab a big stick and run at them and they'll take off like their tail's on fire.

Now ostriches, those things are fucking assholes. I had one that tried to pick a fight with me at least a half dozen times a day. He'd walk up to me, do his "I'm so going to fuck you up." dance and it was go time. There was one time when I thought the battle was over, turned my back and he got within a few yards of me before I noticed him and prepared myself. That was close. I pushed him away (with the big stick with a plastic "U" on top) just as he tried to kick me.

[CU Tiger]

Ok I pulled a quick google number and it is wrong...I apologize pleease stone me to death...

Secondly I intentioanlly used a non domestic cat as I feel a bobcat (much smaller than a NAML btw) is as fit a pet as a pit bull both have their place niether is in the home.

As someone who has lived in Buffalo, if you think for a minute the dog/cat population is similar or even remotely close enough to compare between rural NC and Buffalo NY you are sadly mistaken.

My neighbor has over a dozen dogs, none on leashes or chainss andmy kids know them all by name. All stay in the yard and none weigh over 10lbs...thats pretty common where I am, in Buffalo these dogs would freeze to death. Same goes with cats, thats why I made my statement..

The fact that you feel the need to attack me when, as far as I can recollect, we have haad no previous interaction or confrontation does strike me as a bit odd unless you harbor some personal vendetta I have long forgaotten...but to each his own.

[DanGarion]

Ok I pulled a quick google number and it is wrong...I apologize pleease stone me to death...

Secondly I intentioanlly used a non domestic cat as I feel a bobcat (much smaller than a NAML btw) is as fit a pet as a pit bull both have their place niether is in the home.

As someone who has lived in Buffalo, if you think for a minute the dog/cat population is similar or even remotely close enough to compare between rural NC and Buffalo NY you are sadly mistaken.

My neighbor has over a dozen dogs, none on leashes or chainss andmy kids know them all by name. All stay in the yard and none weigh over 10lbs...thats pretty common where I am, in Buffalo these dogs would freeze to death. Same goes with cats, thats why I made my statement..

The fact that you feel the need to attack me when, as far as I can recollect, we have haad no previous interaction or confrontation does strike me as a bit odd unless you harbor some personal vendetta I have long forgaotten...but to each his own.

What's the deal with all the hate for Pit Bulls? Having we already coverred that it's not the dogs it's the owners? Plus the breeding of dogs with agressive characteristics AND breeding dogs for certain traits, such has as much muscle mass as possible.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I don't know why this is such a controversial stance.

Same as I don't really get any controversy in believing that 1 in 15 isn't out of the realm of possibility when you live in a neighborhood that has less than a dozen dogs but two of those have instigated three incidents in less than a year that involved human emergency rooms, veterinary surgeons, animal control, police, and attorneys. (and my personal experience was exponentially the mildest of the bunch)

[CU Tiger]

What's the deal with all the hate for Pit Bulls? Having we already coverred that it's not the dogs it's the owners? Plus the breeding of dogs with agressive characteristics AND breeding dogs for certain traits, such has as much muscle mass as possible.


While I agree the owners are the problem, I think my reasoning is for a slightly different reason that your own.
Pits were bread over dozens of generations to be adept at killing other dogs. As a result dogs that showed timidness, or docile behavior were bred out of the gene pool.
I have an APBT, and have had 3 other pits...that said especially non neutered males, are very dangerous and have been proven more prone attack without warning.

Can an owner train this behavior out? Yes, a very small percentage of dog owners are smart enough or attentive enough to train the behavior out however do to past breeding practices you have by rule a dog more apt to aggressive behavior.

It sucks that humans did this to the breed, but then again it is one of the few pure man made breeds to begin with so no big loss there....

[wade moore]

While I agree the owners are the problem, I think my reasoning is for a slightly different reason that your own.
Pits were bread over dozens of generations to be adept at killing other dogs. As a result dogs that showed timidness, or docile behavior were bred out of the gene pool.
I have an APBT, and have had 3 other pits...that said especially non neutered males, are very dangerous and have been proven more prone attack without warning.

Can an owner train this behavior out? Yes, a very small percentage of dog owners are smart enough or attentive enough to train the behavior out however do to past breeding practices you have by rule a dog more apt to aggressive behavior.

It sucks that humans did this to the breed, but then again it is one of the few pure man made breeds to begin with so no big loss there....

I think you're a bit inaccurate here.

Certain bloodlines have been trained to attack other dogs, yes. But there are a ton of responsible breeders that have not done this. If you understand the bloodline and breeder, this is not an issue. To claim that this is some rampant thing for Pit Bulls is patently false.

[KWhit]

I think all of you who are saying that "It's not the dog. It's the owner" are off base a bit. You're right in that there are a whole lot of shitty dog owners out there who encourage aggressive behavior in their dogs by playing really rough with them or beating them, etc. But these are animals. Even the well-trained dog will attack given a circumstance where it feels cornered and threatened.

My son was attacked by a family dog just because he hopped up from the freaking sofa too fast and scared the damn thing. And the owner of the dog is not what you'd call a bad owner. She treats them like they're her children (creepy, actually), but still, she does nothing at all to promote aggressive behavior.

But this particular dog is a little high strung and was in a new place (visiting my house), and got spooked and nipped at my son. Tore his lip up pretty good and he needed stitches. Could have been much worse.

What's odd is that we had been very clear to him that he needed to be calm and careful around the dogs and treat them very gently and carefully. Well, he was doing a great job of that all day, but then heard someone come in the door and hopped up to see who it was. That's all it took in this circumstance to get a bite in the mouth.

These are animals. Sometimes they are dangerous animals.

[KWhit]

I think you're a bit inaccurate here.

Certain bloodlines have been trained to attack other dogs, yes. But there are a ton of responsible breeders that have not done this. If you understand the bloodline and breeder, this is not an issue. To claim that this is some rampant thing for Pit Bulls is patently false.

But when a pit bull attacks, people can die.

When a terrier attacks (or a house cat for that matter), it's a different story.

I get very uncomfortable around dogs that weigh more than me. I don't care how 'good' their breeding and owner.

[Travis]

Fair enough KWhit, but to go to one line you said, it's not always about whether or not an owner encourages aggressive behavior (in the way they play with the dog, etc), but if they discourage it. I know a lot of owners who aren't aggressive in their interaction with their pets, but also don't do a lot to discourage "playful" aggression, especially when they're puppies. This can lead to bad moments as well.

Like you said though, dog or cat, good owners or bad, they're animals and situations like that will happen sometimes no matter the training, just like some people, no matter their upbringing, will snap and do things highly uncharacteristic of the "norm". It's very sad what happened to your son and hopefully he never has to go through anything like that again.

[DanGarion]

Like you said though, dog or cat, good owners or bad, they're animals and situations like that will happen sometimes no matter the training, just like some people, no matter their upbringing, will snap and do things highly uncharacteristic of the "norm". It's very sad what happened to your son and hopefully he never has to go through anything like that again.

Travis hit it on the head right there.

[Pumpy Tudors]

not since this one

Stories from the Felt (http://blogs.mysanantonio.com/weblogs/poker/2006/02/the-legend-of-p.html)
Yeah, MRobot can kiss my ass.

Who's that guy that called you Frumpy Tudors? I don't think you ever settled that shit.
I had forgotten about that. He still shows up every once in a while, but he doesn't mess with me anymore. He must have seen my bowling video.

Bring it on, cowboy stache.
Sorry, what's that? I couldn't hear you with Jon Bon Jovi sitting on your face.

[larrymcg421]

Same as I don't really get any controversy in believing that 1 in 15 isn't out of the realm of possibility when you live in a neighborhood that has less than a dozen dogs but two of those have instigated three incidents in less than a year that involved human emergency rooms, veterinary surgeons, animal control, police, and attorneys. (and my personal experience was exponentially the mildest of the bunch)

When I was a kid, I had a dog bite me in the mouth. It was the only dog in the neighborhood. So by your rationale I should have concluded that 100% of dogs attack humans?

[larrymcg421]

It's been a long time since I had an internet fight. I need to start some shit.

I was gonna start something just for fun, but I figure the Arena Football League cancelling their season is painful enough for you.

[Pumpy Tudors]

I was gonna start something just for fun, but I figure the Arena Football League cancelling their season is painful enough for you.
Losing the AFL this year did hurt. They'd be entering the playoffs right about now. :(

[SportsDino]

I'll second that you need to discourage the aggressive behavior actively, we had a cat (I was at college so wasn't around it enough)... never really trained it to be the spawn of satan, but never discouraged its very aggressive 'playful' behavior (well basically attaching itself to your arm with its teeth and hanging on for dear life as you swing your arm around trying to get it off).

That cat mellowed a little bit, but was always a very aggressive cat because of it never being trained against that (my mother babied it until it got to be too big and clawed her good one time when she spooked it).

Another thing that ticks me off is people that spoil an animal rotten and then never take accountability for its misbehavior, but when it comes back and bites them they just dump the animal to the shelter.

Even good pets though should probably be treated like the plague around very small children.

[wade moore]

My son was attacked by a family dog just because he hopped up from the freaking sofa too fast and scared the damn thing. And the owner of the dog is not what you'd call a bad owner. She treats them like they're her children (creepy, actually), but still, she does nothing at all to promote aggressive behavior.

Not to be mean here, but you're just wrong.

This owner treatment often actually encourages the exact behavior you saw.

Not to get too deep in this, but if the owner does not take control of situations, the dog will not feel calm and will react badly when they feel scared or threatened.

[sabotai]

But when a pit bull attacks, people can die.

When a terrier attacks (or a house cat for that matter), it's a different story.

When you say "pit bull", are you refering to the breed known as the "American Pit Bull Terrier"?

[EagleFan]

There are way too many openings in this story to really judge everything.

Was the cat wandering free and went into the neighbor's yard where the dog was outside?

Did the cat owner shoot the dog with the dog owner standing right there?

Was the dog threatening in any way at that time, or the dog's owner.

Did the dog's owner have a gun on him at the time of the dog being shot (if you are standing there with your dog and someone pulls out a gun and shoots I think it's fair game for you to return fire at that point as you have no idea what this guy is about to do).

Did the dog's owner have to go and get the gun? It becomes much more deliberate in that case.



Once he shot the daughter he went WAY too far. The shooting of the cat owner could potentially be justified depending on the circumstances and the perceived threat.


The good news is that no one died but one of the idiots who was shooting.

[johnnyshaka]

My wife will be in our yard watching our two little girls and then all of sudden there will be a dog or two in the yard, or close enough to it, that she has to quickly gather up the girls, shuttle them inside, all the while watching out of one eye to make sure the dogs aren't heading her way. Luckily, there haven't been any attacks but I'd prefer it wouldn't get that far.

We've called the cops several times and the city several times regarding these two dogs who are seen regularly wandering the neighbourhood. We started calling back in March and we know a few other neighbours have called, too. It's absolutely ridiculous because nothing has been done or else the deterents aren't steep enough because the situation hasn't improved.

Instead, I'm currently shelling out $2000 (money I don't really have to spend on something like this in the first place) to have a fence built to deter these dogs and any other unwanted visitors into my yard...something we haven't had to worry about during the first 7 years in this neighbourhood. Why the hell do I have to put up a fence to keep pests OUT OF MY YARD when irresponsible pet owners should be making sure they are keeping their animals in their yard. Friggin' annoying!!

[Huckleberry]

90% or so of American humans regularly receive a paycheque once every 15 days during a year.

I've never received a "paycheque" - I think that must be a Canadian thing. :p

[Fidatelo]

I've never received a "paycheque" - I think that must be a Canadian thing. :p

You're just one of the 10%!

[JonInMiddleGA]

We've called the cops several times and the city several times regarding these two dogs who are seen regularly wandering the neighbourhood. We started calling back in March and we know a few other neighbours have called, too. It's absolutely ridiculous because nothing has been done or else the deterents aren't steep enough because the situation hasn't improved.

Assuming that there are laws in place that should cover this (and not everywhere has those so I'm taking a leap of faith on that) then I have to ask to make sure that you've both gone up the food chain within law enforcement to try to get satisfaction and if so then taken steps with whatever political entity has authority over the cops.

Kind of like my observation in one of the education threads, the key to getting appropriate action out of folks sometimes is as simple as making it more painful not to do what you want than it is to just do it.

[KWhit]

Not to be mean here, but you're just wrong.

This owner treatment often actually encourages the exact behavior you saw.

Not to get too deep in this, but if the owner does not take control of situations, the dog will not feel calm and will react badly when they feel scared or threatened.

Shurg.

I don't know enough about raising dogs, or in fact all of the details about what she has done about their behavior (nor do you, so I don't know how you can call me 'wrong' with such certainty).

But, I do know that she has sent them to obedience training (more than once, since they often get some form of 'training' class whenever she boards them) and is generally very good about rewarding good behavior and punishing bad behavior. So I would say she is a better owner than 90% of the dog owners I've been around who basically let their dog either run wild or tie it up in the yard for it's whole life.

The statement I made about her treating them like her children is more along the lines of the fact that most of the pictures of her in her house or on Facebook have the dogs in them, she gets them gourmet dog treats from a specialty store, she puts bows in their hair, she takes them to a doggy chiropractor and some sort of dog whisperer type thing. Crazy stuff like that.

[johnnyshaka]

Assuming that there are laws in place that should cover this (and not everywhere has those so I'm taking a leap of faith on that) then I have to ask to make sure that you've both gone up the food chain within law enforcement to try to get satisfaction and if so then taken steps with whatever political entity has authority over the cops.

Kind of like my observation in one of the education threads, the key to getting appropriate action out of folks sometimes is as simple as making it more painful not to do what you want than it is to just do it.

Fair question, of course, and we have done everything they've asked us to do. The problem is that the penalties/punishments are obviously not enough of a pain in the ass. My understanding is that the pet owners (which we had to find on our own because nobody would come out to do that...so my wife has to pack the two kids up in the stroller with a big dog or two on the lose...makes f'ing sense to me) will be "served" and given time to rectify the situation. After that period we were to notify the police again if the dogs were seen on the lose again...which we have at least a half dozen times...then they would be fined an increasing about each time. I'm not sure how long or how many fines they have to get before whatever the next step is.

So, either they aren't fining them or else the fines aren't sufficient enough to make the dog owners smarten up because this is absolutely silly.

As I type this the guys are within an hour or two of completing our fence and gates so at least my wife and girls can play safely in the backyard. Something tells me any fines that these assholes were levied won't come to anything near what I've just paid for this fence...that's what chaps my ass.

[MrDNA]

You know, Johnny, you could get a nice handgun for a lot less than $2,000...

[johnnyshaka]

You are probably right...maybe next time.

[Sgran]

or just misplace some poisoned ground beef.

[gstelmack]

We've called the cops several times and the city several times regarding these two dogs who are seen regularly wandering the neighbourhood.

Usually there is a specific animal control number to call, was that included in the list?

I do know I had a dog wandering around my neighborhood late one night obviously lost and had no trouble getting a police car (since animal control had closed for the night, the number rolled over to the police) to come out to check on it. But then again Cary is not exactly crime central so they probably came out because they were bored...

[JonInMiddleGA]

Since it seems to be turning into a night where responsibility counts for shit, I may as well throw this one in the mix too. What the hell, it's not like it's going to make anything worse.

Boy attacked by neighbor's pit bulls | Breaking News | OnlineAthens.com (http://www.onlineathens.com/stories/061209/bre_450282568.shtml)
A trio of pit bulls mauled a 13-year-old this afternoon at an eastside apartment complex.

The teen was returning to his home from the basketball court at Willow Mist apartments on Seagraves Drive at about 12:15 p.m. when a pit bull apparently jumped through the screen window of a neighbor’s apartment, Athens-Clarke police said.

The teen tried to run, but the dog knocked him to the ground and bit his face, abdomen and legs, according to police.

Two smaller pit bulls ran from the same apartment and joined the attack.

“The boy tried to outrun them, but they caught him and tackled him,” police Lt. Keith Morris said. “They just mauled him.”

The teen managed to escape to his apartment, where someone called the police.

“It’s the worst dog attack I’ve seen in my 26 years,” Senior Police Officer Charlie Snyder said.

The teen was taken to Athens Regional Medical Center for treatment.

The dogs’ owner was not home at the time, and police haven’t decided whether to file criminal charges.

Athens-Clarke Animal Control officers took custody of the smaller pit bulls but continue to search for the larger dog that initiated the attack.

re: "haven't decided" -- in case anyone hasn't figured it out from previous stories, Athens-Clarke contains a higher than normal percentage of keystone cops.

re: "jumped through the screen window" -- I swear that reads like something out of a modern big screen comedy. I get this vision of Ben Affleck or Jack Black walking past a window when a pit bull suddenly pounces on them.

re: "two others ran from the same apartment" -- It takes a very special kind of moron to keep three pit bulls in an apartment. If your village is ever looking for a new idiot I can probably find you a good deal locally as we've got an overstock.

[fantom1979]

I have seen cats do that all the time... :rolleyes:

[Sgran]

I'm sure it was the teen's fault for displaying fear. You see, dogs can sense fear, and therefore if you're afraid of dogs, then it's your fault when they bite your face off.

[TCY Junkie]

I'm sure it was the teen's fault for displaying fear. You see, dogs can sense fear, and therefore if you're afraid of dogs, then it's your fault when they bite your face off.

There was a pit bull hiding behind a tree on this country road. Our tire must have been afraid of it because as soon as we passed it, it jumped from its hiding spot and started biting the tire. We were laughing, but if it was some kid on a bike they would have been in trouble.

[SFL Cat]

I was just wondering where the part about the location of the dog's attack on the cat came from.

Here's the Charlotte Observer version (http://www.charlotteobserver.com/breaking/story/749753.html) of the story but it also doesn't say where that happened either.

Around 11 p.m. Wednesday night, the sheriff's office says, a man's pit bull dog attacked and killed a neighbor's cat, and the cat's owner responded by shooting and killing the dog. Then, authorities say, the dog's owner got into an altercation with the neighbor, shooting him and his daughter.

A different version of the story (http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/1545729.html) by the same writer appears in the RaleighNews-Observer and adds this detail
Neighbors told reporters at the scene that the dispute actually goes back several months, when the dog bit a girl in the neighborhood.

Pit bull...nuff said.

[Lathum]

Pit bull...nuff said.

yup, would anyone read this story with the breed of dog omitted and not assume it was a pit bull?

They should destroy every one of them, if you want a dog get a golden retriever.

[JonInMiddleGA]

And yesterday, a search warrant reveals that there was a second gun on the roof of the pit bull owner's house. Still unclear whether he planted it there as part of a larger plan (police believe they walked into an ambush) or if there was a second intended shooter from his side or what.

Second gun found in Caldwell County shootout - Charlotte- msnbc.com (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31315630/ns/local_news-local_news/)

Meanwhile the 8 year old girl is home after spending 8 days in the hospital, her father remains hospitalized fighting infection from the shooting.

[wade moore]

yup, would anyone read this story with the breed of dog omitted and not assume it was a pit bull?

They should destroy every one of them, if you want a dog get a golden retriever.

Lathum - I usually cut you slack when a lot of people give you a hard time.

This is a fucking idiotic, piece of shit, uneducated, moronic post even beyond what you usually do.

I hope you think twice before posting such idiotic drivel again.

[Lathum]

Lathum - I usually cut you slack when a lot of people give you a hard time.

This is a fucking idiotic, piece of shit, uneducated, moronic post even beyond what you usually do.

I hope you think twice before posting such idiotic drivel again.

ok, how many more kids need to get mauled before it becomes less idiotic?

what if it was your kid? Would you feel the same way?

[sabotai]

Give all of the shitty Pit Bull owners a Golden Retriever, then Golden Retrievers will soon get the same reputation.

[Lathum]

I love it when Wade gets fired up, it's like he wants to be a pit bull when really he is a yorkie.

Teh interwebs are serious places.

[wade moore]

ok, how many more kids need to get mauled before it becomes less idiotic?

what if it was your kid? Would you feel the same way?

Give all of the shitty Pit Bull owners a Golden Retriever, then Golden Retrievers will soon get the same reputation.

I love it when Wade gets fired up, it's like he wants to be a pit bull when really he is a yorkie.

Teh interwebs are serious places.

The discussion has been had in this very thread multiple times.

In the 70's it was German Shephards.

In the 80's it was Dobermans.

In the 90's it was Rotterweilers.

Now it is Pit Bulls.


This has NOTHING to do with a breed's nature and everything to do with the owners that choose to make them aggressive. They pick large, powerful breeds and teach them to act this way.

Next decade it may be a Mastiff, or Great Danes, or who knows what. The breed is not the issue. If you kill off every Pit Bull on the planet today, there will be some other breed that is "fine" now that is suddenly a danger to society.

It is horrible that this happens to children, but exterminating a breed, making them illegal, whatever shows a complete lack of understanding of the issue - and basic compassion.

[JonInMiddleGA]

They pick large, powerful breeds and teach them to act this way.

Then if need be, we eliminate the ability for them to acquire "large, powerful breeds".

The current generation of pit bulls and mastiffs should be the last one. Mandatory spay & neuter, with draconian penalties for failure to do so.
And even harsher penalties for those who fail to control the fucking monsters they've created.

[molson]

The discussion has been had in this very thread multiple times.

In the 70's it was German Shephards.

In the 80's it was Dobermans.

In the 90's it was Rotterweilers.

Now it is Pit Bulls.

This has NOTHING to do with a breed's nature and everything to do with the owners that choose to make them aggressive. They pick large, powerful breeds and teach them to act this way.

Next decade it may be a Mastiff, or Great Danes, or who knows what. The breed is not the issue. If you kill off every Pit Bull on the planet today, there will be some other breed that is "fine" now that is suddenly a danger to society.

It is horrible that this happens to children, but exterminating a breed, making them illegal, whatever shows a complete lack of understanding of the issue - and basic compassion.

To claim it has NOTHING to do with a breed's nature kills your credibility.

Dog breeds are distinctive. Some are smarter, some are more loyal, some are more aggressive.

It's possible to be a "good" owner and have a non-aggressive pit bull, you just have to be a far better owner than one would need to be with a golden retriever. As long as the world has bad (or even average) dog owners (which will be forever), some breeds are just far more dangerous than others.

If every dog owner in the world were perfect, this wouldn't be a problem. But that's not reality. People claiming, "I have 3 pit bulls and they're all sweet" isn't much comfort to the kid who has his face eaten off.

Pit bulls are banned in a lot of cities, and entire countries and some Canadian provinces. I seriously doubt those areas now have a problem with aggressive golden retrievers.

[wade moore]

To claim it has NOTHING to do with a breed's nature kills your credibility.

Dog breeds are distinctive. Some are smarter, some are more loyal, some are more aggressive.

It's possible to be a "good" owner and have a non-aggressive pit bull, you just have to be a far better owner than one would need to be with a golden retriever. As long as the world has bad (or even average) dog owners (which will be forever), some breeds are just far more dangerous than others.

If every dog owner in the world were perfect, this wouldn't be a problem. But that's not reality. People claiming, "I have 3 pit bulls and they're all sweet" isn't much comfort to the kid who has his face eaten off.

Pit bulls are banned in a lot of cities, and entire countries and some Canadian provinces. I seriously doubt those areas now have a problem with aggressive golden retrievers.

Or German Shephards, or Dobermans, or Rottweilers...

Yet go back to previous generations and we're having this same conversation about those breeds.

Yes - there are some breeds that are more prone to aggression. But that does not mean they naturally eat children's faces off. That's just not the case.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Like you said though, dog or cat, good owners or bad, they're animals and situations like that will happen sometimes no matter the training, just like some people, no matter their upbringing, will snap and do things highly uncharacteristic of the "norm". It's very sad what happened to your son and hopefully he never has to go through anything like that again.

I haven't really followed this thread at all, but I think this is an important point.

My wife and I adopted a dog from Detroit Animal Control 3 years ago. He was only 3 months old when we got him. We don't know anything about where he came from. He's a shepard mix of some kind, probably with a little doberman, lab, maybe rottweiler. He's a medium sized dog, fluctuating between 50-60 lbs.

I feel like my wife and I have done everything we could with him. We did obedience school when we first got him, we walked him around our little downtown to get him used to people, took him to the dog park and doggy day care to get him socialized with other dogs, worked with him at home, etc.

Everything was great until after the first year or so. He's still a good dog, but it turns out we ended up with a neurotic, highly-strung animal. He's overly protective of my wife. If we're on walks we can't let strangers pet him. There are times when I've been walking him and we pass someone who he just doesn't like for some reason and he'll stripe, lunge a bit and start barking very aggressively at people. We can't leave him tied up outside a store, even for a minute, because he'll do the same thing for certain. He'll even bark agressively at people who come inside our house (new friends, friends from out of town, etc.) who he doesn't know. It sucks.

We've had a dog behavioralist over to see him a few times and have followed everything she says. My wife even takes him out for runs on her bike (5 miles a day or so) to help him burn off his excess energy, but he still has his issues.

I love my dog and wouldn't give him up for anything, but it's not exactly what we had in mind. We hoped that he could travel places with us, we could take him around our little downtown, eat outside while he sits on the sidewalk, take him to some friends, etc. We really can't do these things. It's just too much of a risk. He's never biten anyone, but he certainly could. So, knowing what kind of dog we have and the potential risks associated with him, we structure our lives in a way to do everything we can to ensure he doesn't hurt anyone. So far, so good. *knocks soundly on wood*

That's really just an incredibly long winded way of saying that, even though these are domesticated animals, they are still animals. Regardless of the owner's efforts to train them, they can be unpredictable.

Heck, my wife's cousin has this dog, 100 lbs. German Shepard/Akita mix. She's known to be aggressive to other dogs, but never bit a person until I met her. I had met her for about 20 minutes. I petted her a few times, all was great, and then I bent over her while petting and all of a sudden she snapped and bit my face. Luckily, only one tooth got me. It was an 8 stitch cut running from just under one nostril to the top of my lip. It now looks pretty cool. That said, I have become much more careful around dogs I don't know.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

It was an 8 stitch cut running from just under one nostril to the top of my lip. It now looks pretty cool.

http://www.cedmagic.com/featured/demo-program/4757-cheech-marin.jpg

[RendeR]

Pit bull terriers exist because people bred them for their aggression and ability to survive in a fight. They were CREATED to fight in dog fights. This breed didn't exist on its own, it was created for its fighting ability.

Obviously there are some terrible owners in the universe, but if you claim that this breed of dog is not inherently aggressive and instinctually dangerous you're a bloody fool.

[Lathum]

We hoped that he could travel places with us, we could take him around our little downtown, eat outside while he sits on the sidewalk, take him to some friends, etc.

.

I have a golden retriever and these are the kind of things we do with him

[Honolulu_Blue]

I have a golden retriever and these are the kind of things we do with him

Glad to hear it. Did you guys get him from a shelter? It's pretty rare to adopt a golden retriever from a shelter.

At the time we were looking to get a dog, we were dead set on only getting a rescue. Given the over-crowding problem in shelters and the over-abundance of adoptable dogs in the US, we felt compelled not to buy a dog from a breeder, but do our part to help the over-crowding problem.

After this experience, my wife mentioned that the next time we get a dog she probably would want to know much more about his bloodlines and the like. Again, that's not a sure thing either since dogs from the same litter can be wildly different, but it's a start.

[Lathum]

He was a rescue dog, he was with a family who had kids that were abusive to him. He is 11 but to this day he still cowers when you raise your hand. But he is great with kids, loves people, and is everything a dog should be.

[stevew]

I haven't really followed this thread at all, but I think this is an important point.

My wife and I adopted a dog from Detroit Animal Control 3 years ago. He was only 3 months old when we got him. We don't know anything about where he came from. He's a shepard mix of some kind, probably with a little doberman, lab, maybe rottweiler. He's a medium sized dog, fluctuating between 50-60 lbs.

I feel like my wife and I have done everything we could with him. We did obedience school when we first got him, we walked him around our little downtown to get him used to people, took him to the dog park and doggy day care to get him socialized with other dogs, worked with him at home, etc.

Everything was great until after the first year or so. He's still a good dog, but it turns out we ended up with a neurotic, highly-strung animal. He's overly protective of my wife. If we're on walks we can't let strangers pet him. There are times when I've been walking him and we pass someone who he just doesn't like for some reason and he'll stripe, lunge a bit and start barking very aggressively at people. We can't leave him tied up outside a store, even for a minute, because he'll do the same thing for certain. He'll even bark agressively at people who come inside our house (new friends, friends from out of town, etc.) who he doesn't know. It sucks.

We've had a dog behavioralist over to see him a few times and have followed everything she says. My wife even takes him out for runs on her bike (5 miles a day or so) to help him burn off his excess energy, but he still has his issues.

I love my dog and wouldn't give him up for anything, but it's not exactly what we had in mind. We hoped that he could travel places with us, we could take him around our little downtown, eat outside while he sits on the sidewalk, take him to some friends, etc. We really can't do these things. It's just too much of a risk. He's never biten anyone, but he certainly could. So, knowing what kind of dog we have and the potential risks associated with him, we structure our lives in a way to do everything we can to ensure he doesn't hurt anyone. So far, so good. *knocks soundly on wood*

That's really just an incredibly long winded way of saying that, even though these are domesticated animals, they are still animals. Regardless of the owner's efforts to train them, they can be unpredictable.



We had pretty much the same experience, but I ended up bailing after 6 or so months. I think it was a Pit Bull mix, it wasn't super obvious when we got him what he was. They told us at the shelter he was some sort of boxer mix. But he was so aggressive I couldn't control him. Tried and tried to do things like walking him, he was just too uncontrollable. Looking back, if I would have had a fenced in yard I would have tried harder to make it work. I'd let him out in the back yard on a very long lead(I think 50-75 feet), he'd see a neighbor and go into kill zone mode. In the end with the possible risk of injury to the kids, and never being able to have family over(he almost attacked my grandfather), we took Freddy back to the pound. I assume he was probably destroyed. I spent like 1500 bucks on this dog(and for me that's like a shit ton ton of money) due to him having Parvo when we got him, and of course all the other vet type stuff you do for a pet.

[Honolulu_Blue]

He was a rescue dog, he was with a family who had kids that were abusive to him. He is 11 but to this day he still cowers when you raise your hand. But he is great with kids, loves people, and is everything a dog should be.

That's awesome you were able to rescue. It sucks that he was abused like that. I raise my hand to my dog and he doesn't even flinch. God forbid I get a broom, the vaccuum, open or close the blinds, open or close the windows, shake a plastic garbage bag, bump into the rack holding our pots and pans, or any other dozens of things that send him scurrying away in fear, head down, tail tucked firmly between his legs.

He's just a neurotic, overly-sensitive dog. He's gotten incredibly nervous around me just by the fact that I'm tense from playing a computer game. He's put his forepaws up on my lap -- sort of his way of trying to tell me everything is fine -- a couple of different times, once when I was playing Half-Life 2 and twice while I was playing "L4D". And I'm by no means a shouter or yeller. He just senses it.

[Honolulu_Blue]

We had pretty much the same experience, but I ended up bailing after 6 or so months. I think it was a Pit Bull mix, it wasn't super obvious when we got him what he was. They told us at the shelter he was some sort of boxer mix. But he was so aggressive I couldn't control him. Tried and tried to do things like walking him, he was just too uncontrollable. Looking back, if I would have had a fenced in yard I would have tried harder to make it work. I'd let him out in the back yard on a very long lead(I think 50-75 feet), he'd see a neighbor and go into kill zone mode. In the end with the possible risk of injury to the kids, and never being able to have family over(he almost attacked my grandfather), we took Freddy back to the pound. I assume he was probably destroyed. I spent like 1500 bucks on this dog(and for me that's like a shit ton ton of money) due to him having Parvo when we got him, and of course all the other vet type stuff you do for a pet.

You guys sound like it you had it worse than us. Our dog isn't quite that bad. When he have folks stay over for a day or two, he may bark at them initially, but he's totally fine after a bit. He'll even crawl up onto their lap sometimes. He's much more likely to bark at a man, especially one who owns (and therefore smells) like another dog.

In some ways it seems like at some point he just defined his "pack" and those in it get the full super excited so happy to see you treatment, and those out of it, not so much. For example, he loves my entire immediate family, my close friends, lots of my wife's close friends, but some of my other friends who weren't around when he was younger it can be a little more touch and go.

It sounds like you made the right choice. At some point you have to cut your losses and realize that the situation isn't good for you or the dog.

[Lathum]

He's just a neurotic, overly-sensitive dog. He's gotten incredibly nervous around me just by the fact that I'm tense from playing a computer game. He's put his forepaws up on my lap -- sort of his way of trying to tell me everything is fine -- a couple of different times, once when I was playing Half-Life 2 and twice while I was playing "L4D". And I'm by no means a shouter or yeller. He just senses it.

Dogs are like that, when my wife cries he is always there up her ass. He knows where we are upset. He really is my best friend.

[DanGarion]

The discussion has been had in this very thread multiple times.

In the 70's it was German Shephards.

In the 80's it was Dobermans.

In the 90's it was Rotterweilers.

Now it is Pit Bulls.


This has NOTHING to do with a breed's nature and everything to do with the owners that choose to make them aggressive. They pick large, powerful breeds and teach them to act this way.

Next decade it may be a Mastiff, or Great Danes, or who knows what. The breed is not the issue. If you kill off every Pit Bull on the planet today, there will be some other breed that is "fine" now that is suddenly a danger to society.

It is horrible that this happens to children, but exterminating a breed, making them illegal, whatever shows a complete lack of understanding of the issue - and basic compassion.

I'm glad Wade and I can agree on this. People are so up in arms about pitbulls when it's not the breed, it's the owners. And by that I mean people have to take responsibility for their dog. If the dog is aggressive or has those tendencies it's the owners responsibility to control them.

[RainMaker]

Breeds have nothing to do with the attacks, it's just a giant coincidence that pit bulls are responsible for most of the serious dog attacks in this country.

Statistically it is the most dangerous dog in this country. You can argue it's an owners fault or whatever, but the fact is that you are more likely to be attacked seriously by a pitbull than any other dog.

[Lathum]

I'm glad Wade and I can agree on this. People are so up in arms about pitbulls when it's not the breed, it's the owners. And by that I mean people have to take responsibility for their dog. If the dog is aggressive or has those tendencies it's the owners responsibility to control them.

yeah, this makes perfect sense. Thats why you hear about all the St. Bernard attacks because of their shitty owners, or great danes, or labs, or retrievers.

[wade moore]

yeah, this makes perfect sense. Thats why you hear about all the St. Bernard attacks because of their shitty owners, or great danes, or labs, or retrievers.

Are you even listening?

If we destroyed every single Pit Bull, another breed would become the most dangerous that is far more dangerous than others. And if you go to previous decades, it IS another breed.

They become a status symbl with people that want an aggressive dog.

The only thing destroying Pit Bulls accomplishes is creating a new aggressive breed.

[Lathum]

Are you even listening?

If we destroyed every single Pit Bull, another breed would become the most dangerous that is far more dangerous than others. And if you go to previous decades, it IS another breed.

They become a status symbl with people that want an aggressive dog.

The only thing destroying Pit Bulls accomplishes is creating a new aggressive breed.

thanks for proving my point.

never had you pinned for the pit bull thug life type.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Are you even listening?

If we destroyed every single Pit Bull, another breed would become the most dangerous that is far more dangerous than others. And if you go to previous decades, it IS another breed.

They become a status symbl with people that want an aggressive dog.

The only thing destroying Pit Bulls accomplishes is creating a new aggressive breed.

I think this is right. There's obviously a demand for aggressive dogs in the world. Be it for status, dog fighting, guarding property or what not. People have been breeding dogs for thousands of years to meet their various needs and will continue to do so.

thanks for proving my point.

never had you pinned for the pit bull thug life type.

Are you really advocating getting rid of every dog of every breed that could possibly be aggressive? So, not just pit bulls, but dobermans, German Sheppards, Rotweilers, Akitas, etc?

In your perfect world are the only breed of dogs labs and golden retrievers? As noted above, people will find the most aggressive dogs of those breeds and will do what they can to get an aggressive line out of them.

I find it odd.

Listen, there's no doubt that pit bulls, on average, are a much more aggressive and more dangerous breed of dog than most, if not all, other breeds. They also attend to attract rather careless owners who do little to keep this aggression in check. I would certainly be in favor of tight restrictions on ownership of these dogs and strict punishment for anyone who does own them but is careless.

Still, this nuclear option is not a real solution.

[Lathum]

Of course I'm not advocating that. I haven't heard of a sheppard, Rotweiler, or doberman attack since the 70's, 80,s or 90,s.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Of course I'm not advocating that. I haven't heard of a sheppard, Rotweiler, or doberman attack since the 70's, 80,s or 90,s.

A Rotweiler killed an infant in Michigan a couple years back. And an Akita/German Sheppard mix bit my face last year.

[Lathum]

A Rotweiler killed an infant in Michigan a couple years back. And an Akita/German Sheppard mix bit my face last year.

clearly you missed my sarcasm

[CU Tiger]

The major difference I believe is how much damage has been done to the breed through the intentional genetic manipualtion.

You have a breed that is faster,stronger and has 10x the biting force of Sheppards, Dobers, Rooties etc.

Yes it goes without saying that if you outlaw Pits another aggressive dog will become most popular and their attacks will increase.

This is akin to sayng if cars were outlawed, of course horse riding fatalities would increase. Would you then argue that a drunken horse rider is just as dangerous as a drunked auto driver?

Now I do not advocate destroying a breed....but maybe there needs to be better control of it. I don't know.

[Sgran]

I'm a vegetarian with a master's degree in environmentalism. I'm such a left-wing treehugging green that PETA got me on their mailing list and I can't get off.

If there was a vote on whether we should destroy all dogs in an urban setting I would vote "yes". If that meant that cats had to go also I'd still vote yes. i just don't see the place for domesticated animals in an urban (or sub-urban) setting. Want a dog? Buy a farm. Want a fish? cool. Parakeets are also highly entertaining.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I'm a vegetarian with a master's degree in environmentalism. I'm such a left-wing treehugging green that PETA got me on their mailing list and I can't get off.

If you were really a left-wing treehugging green, wouldn't being on PETA's mailing get you off?

:D

[lungs]

i just don't see the place for domesticated animals in an urban (or sub-urban) setting. Want a dog? Buy a farm. Want a fish? cool. Parakeets are also highly entertaining.

+1 even though it's totally unrealistic. After coming to the realization that my dogs simply were not house dogs, it was nice to let them outside and run as they please.

[RainMaker]

If we destroyed every single Pit Bull, another breed would become the most dangerous that is far more dangerous than others. And if you go to previous decades, it IS another breed.

That's like saying if we killed all murderers in the country, rapists would now be designated the most dangerous criminals.

I'm not advocating that, but the fact is that less pitbulls = less attacks.

[wade moore]

That's like saying if we killed all murderers in the country, rapists would now be designated the most dangerous criminals.

I'm not advocating that, but the fact is that less pitbulls = less attacks.


Look up the facts.

k, thx.

I'm done with this. Anyone that cares to research it will see that it was other breeds in previous decades. Getting rid of a single breed will accomplish exactly nothing.

[sabotai]

The major difference I believe is how much damage has been done to the breed through the intentional genetic manipualtion.

You have a breed that is faster,stronger and has 10x the biting force of Sheppards, Dobers, Rooties etc.

This is not true. Pit Bulls do not have a stronger bite force than German Sheppards or Rottweilers. A National Geographic show tested the bite forces for these dogs and did two trials for each. The pit bull had a bite for of 130 and 235 (I assume PSI), the German Sheppard got a 130 and 238 and the Rottweiler got a 265 and a 328.

If the pit bull had 10X the biting force, they'd be biting down at 2000-3000 PSI.

YouTube - Bite force competition. Pitbull, Rottweiler, and Shepherd (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbwMs7cjK0Y)

[RainMaker]

Look up the facts.

k, thx.

I'm done with this. Anyone that cares to research it will see that it was other breeds in previous decades. Getting rid of a single breed will accomplish exactly nothing.

That is what the facts say. The CDC shows that pitbulls killed more people than any other breed from the 70's to the start of this decade.

http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/dogbreeds.pdf

And another study over the last 30 years that shows pitbulls have way more bites than any other breed.

http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%201982%20to%202006%20Clifton.pdf

Those are the facts. If you have something different, please post.

[CU Tiger]

This is not true. Pit Bulls do not have a stronger bite force than German Sheppards or Rottweilers. A National Geographic show tested the bite forces for these dogs and did two trials for each. The pit bull had a bite for of 130 and 235 (I assume PSI), the German Sheppard got a 130 and 238 and the Rottweiler got a 265 and a 328.

If the pit bull had 10X the biting force, they'd be biting down at 2000-3000 PSI.

YouTube - Bite force competition. Pitbull, Rottweiler, and Shepherd (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbwMs7cjK0Y)


Interesting...thanks.
I guess thats what I get for believing what I had heard without research.
I am still a bit pessimistic oin the breed, but thats probably a personal prejudice. I owned a rotty for years and he was cuddly and harmless.....never been around pits that much and when I have they seemed skitish.

[CU Tiger]

http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/dogbreeds.pdf




I really want to know who died from the cocker spaniel attack....:D

[JeeberD]

What I've always heard about what makes pit bulls so dangerous is not that they bite harder than other breeds, but that they bite and don't let go.

[wade moore]

That is what the facts say. The CDC shows that pitbulls killed more people than any other breed from the 70's to the start of this decade.

http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/dogbreeds.pdf

And another study over the last 30 years that shows pitbulls have way more bites than any other breed.

http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%201982%20to%202006%20Clifton.pdf

Those are the facts. If you have something different, please post.

I like how you ignore that for the last 3 segments of the top study, rottweilers doubled the number of deaths as pits.

And I love how you say "from the 70's. This study is a 20 year period from 1979-1998. That doesn't include "the 70's". And doesn't include this decade either. It actually proves my point that in the 90's, the Rottweiler was the "kill them all" breed (33 deaths to the 21 for Pits).

Edit: And unfortunately your second link doesn't show by year, so it really doesn't tell me much of anything as far as the point that I'm trying to make.

[RendeR]

I like how you ignore that for the last 3 segments of the top study, rottweilers doubled the number of deaths as pits.

And I love how you say "from the 70's. This study is a 20 year period from 1979-1998. That doesn't include "the 70's". And doesn't include this decade either. It actually proves my point that in the 90's, the Rottweiler was the "kill them all" breed (33 deaths to the 21 for Pits).

Edit: And unfortunately your second link doesn't show by year, so it really doesn't tell me much of anything as far as the point that I'm trying to make.


As much as I enjoy someone's argument being picked apart, the only point you're serving to maker here is that both rotties and pits should be put down.

People being KILLED by house pets? Unacceptable in any community.

[wade moore]

As much as I enjoy someone's argument being picked apart, the only point you're serving to maker here is that both rotties and pits should be put down.

People being KILLED by house pets? Unacceptable in any community.

The point, imo, is that owners that raise their dogs to be aggressive should have much stiffer penalties/enforcement.

[molson]

I like how you ignore that for the last 3 segments of the top study, rottweilers doubled the number of deaths as pits.

And I love how you say "from the 70's. This study is a 20 year period from 1979-1998. That doesn't include "the 70's". And doesn't include this decade either. It actually proves my point that in the 90's, the Rottweiler was the "kill them all" breed (33 deaths to the 21 for Pits).

Edit: And unfortunately your second link doesn't show by year, so it really doesn't tell me much of anything as far as the point that I'm trying to make.

I don't think anyone's defending rotweilers. That top link reports that 60% of dog mauling deaths are those two breeds. That's pretty insane.

Yes, if you eliminate those two breeds, another dog would be #1. Something would have to be. And that #1 would have higher death rates then they do now, yes. But no breed would approach those numbers without decades of breeding specifically for fighting/aggression. Pit bulls are an abomination of a breed. The aggression in innate, it doesn't have to be taught to explode (not in every case, but that risk is always there)

Pit Bulls aren't some brand new flash-in-the pan agressive dog. They've had their reputation has long as I've bee alive, at least.

There's never going to be a worldwide ban of pit bulls or rotweilers, so the idea that german shephards will just replace them as the monster breed just isn't realistic. More practically, if a town or state bans pitbulls, that town will be safer.

[RendeR]

The point, imo, is that owners that raise their dogs to be aggressive should have much stiffer penalties/enforcement.


And counter-point is that no matter how well trained and loved some breeds of dogs are (specifically those two and a few others) there is no guarantee they won't kill some random 4 yr old who gets excited because there is a "doggy" nearby and flail wildly triggering the dogs "OOOH EAT THAT!" response.

I don;t give a damn how well anyone treats their pets, if that breed has a record of killing it is NOT a safe breed of animal and should not be a house pet. You might disagree. I pray nothing tragic ever happens to you and yours or anyone in your community.

[wade moore]

I don't think anyone's defending rotweilers. That top link reports that 60% of dog mauling deaths are those two breeds. That's pretty insane.

Yes, if you eliminate those two breeds, another dog would be #1. Something would have to be. And that #1 would have higher death rates then they do now, yes. But no breed would approach those numbers without decades of breeding specifically for fighting/aggression. Pit bulls are an abomination of a breed. The aggression in innate, it doesn't have to be taught to explode (not in every case, but that risk is lways there)

Pit Bulls aren't some brand new flash-in-the pan agressive dog. They've had their reputation has long as I've bee alive, at least.

There's never going to be a worldwide ban of pit bulls or rotweilers, so the idea that german shephards will just replace them as the monster breed just isn't realistic. More practically, if a town or state bans pitbulls, that town will be safer.

I know I've said I'd back out of this thread, but the return of reasoned responses has kept me in it.

I think there's a gray area in my argument that I'm not articulating well, and that many will probably scoff at anyways.

If you punish the people, rather than the dog - the aggression that has been bred into many Pit Bull bloodlines can be bred out. I use Doberman's as my prime example because I know them pretty well as we strongly considered getting one at one point (and still might, but have opted for Miniature Pinschers in the meantime). Doberman's were horribly aggressive dogs in many bloodlines in the 60's and early 70's. They have always been good watch dogs - initially bred to protect traveling salesmen/vendors in Europe from thieves. As times progressed, the breeding didn't always. A concentrated effort was put forth starting in the 70's to breed that aggression out of the dog. Doberman's are still physically one of the most powerful dogs out there - this is why they and German Shephards are the most common police dog - but the aggression was bred out.

That can't be done with Pits right now. Why not? Because there is no real effort to enforce existing laws combined with very few laws with any real teeth (pardon the pun) behind them. So what you have is a rogue sect of "breeders" that are making bloodlines designed to maximize aggression and fighting ability. Pits were originally bred, duh, to handle large cattle. So, they had to have very powerful bodies and jaws to do so. This behavior, like the Doberman's watch dog behavior decades ago, is being exploited by a bad element.

The solution here is to get rid of the element that is emphasizing a negative characteristic in the bloodline.

Like I've said - if you eliminated a breed in an area, the bad element would find another breed to maximize some aggressive trait they have built-in. Maybe it's the Mastiff as I said earlier that is probably the strongest breed, maybe it's a it's a different breed of Bull Terrier, who knows. Maybe it takes time, but they will become just as feered as Pit Bulls. There is nothing super-special about Pit Bulls. There are breeds that are bigger, stronger, and faster. It's just the element that has created these troublesome bloodlines. If you take that breed away, they will work on another.

Short of eliminating all powerful breeds (which I don't think anyone but JiMGA would try to suggest), dealing with the breeds is not the solution. Dealing with individual dogs and the monsters creating these bloodlines is the solution.

Ok, that was a lot - but that's where I'm coming from.

[wade moore]

And counter-point is that no matter how well trained and loved some breeds of dogs are (specifically those two and a few others) there is no guarantee they won't kill some random 4 yr old who gets excited because there is a "doggy" nearby and flail wildly triggering the dogs "OOOH EAT THAT!" response.

I don;t give a damn how well anyone treats their pets, if that breed has a record of killing it is NOT a safe breed of animal and should not be a house pet. You might disagree. I pray nothing tragic ever happens to you and yours or anyone in your community.

FWIW - I come from a position of being very close to a couple of folks that rescue Pit Bulls - which includes friend of a friend being running a rescue group that houses Mike Vick Pits to this day.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Short of eliminating all powerful breeds (which I don't think anyone but JiMGA would try to suggest)

If you think I'm alone in considering that a reasonable possibility (at worst), you're waaaay wrong. I'm actually more reasonable than a good portion of the populace, I'm not calling for the immediate extermination of the all existing ones, only an end to future breeding and let attrition (and a major reform of dog ownership, breeding, and responsibility laws) take care of the problem naturally.

If measures to put an end to pit bulls entirely ever goes to a vote somewhere, I'd say it's no worse than 50-50 than they'll have a short life expectancy. And at the rate things are going, something like that might not be too far off.

[wade moore]

If you think I'm alone in considering that a reasonable possibility (at worst), you're waaaay wrong. I'm actually more reasonable than a good portion of the populace, I'm not calling for the immediate extermination of the all existing ones, only an end to future breeding and let attrition (and a major reform of dog ownership, breeding, and responsibility laws) take care of the problem naturally.

If measures to put an end to pit bulls entirely ever goes to a vote somewhere, I'd say it's no worse than 50-50 than they'll have a short life expectancy. And at the rate things are going, something like that might not be too far off.

Oddly enough, I think you and I are not THAT far off on the solution here.

I think the only disagreement we'd have is that there are breeds that need to be eliminated.

Outside of that - I agree with.. "and a major reform of dog ownership, breeding, and responsibility laws".. I just don't think that reform should include outlawing the future breeding of X breed of dog.

That being said - I actually buy the argument of "eliminate all powerful breeds" over "eliminate Pit Bulls". Because it gets to the heart of the perceived "problem" rather than stigmatizing a specific breed and not dealing with the real issue.

[DanGarion]

This is not true. Pit Bulls do not have a stronger bite force than German Sheppards or Rottweilers. A National Geographic show tested the bite forces for these dogs and did two trials for each. The pit bull had a bite for of 130 and 235 (I assume PSI), the German Sheppard got a 130 and 238 and the Rottweiler got a 265 and a 328.

If the pit bull had 10X the biting force, they'd be biting down at 2000-3000 PSI.

YouTube - Bite force competition. Pitbull, Rottweiler, and Shepherd (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbwMs7cjK0Y)

Fortunately for all of us some people like making up their own statistics to prove their point.

[DanGarion]

Of course important part of all these statistics is left out. In these dog biting and deaths, how many of these attacks were property protection related? As in the dog was guarding someones property, as it was trained to do?

[wade moore]

Of course important part of all these statistics is left out. In these dog biting and deaths, how many of these attacks were property protection related? As in the dog was guarding someones property, as it was trained to do?

Eh, I think that's going to come out in the wash to an extent. I'm not one that believes that having those numbers would really change much.

[KWhit]

And counter-point is that no matter how well trained and loved some breeds of dogs are (specifically those two and a few others) there is no guarantee they won't kill some random 4 yr old who gets excited because there is a "doggy" nearby and flail wildly triggering the dogs "OOOH EAT THAT!" response.

I don't give a damn how well anyone treats their pets, if that breed has a record of killing it is NOT a safe breed of animal and should not be a house pet. You might disagree. I pray nothing tragic ever happens to you and yours or anyone in your community.

I agree with this 100% (except the praying part, but that's another thread). Animals are animals. I think it is ridiculous to allow people to have animals as pets who have the physical power to tear most people's throats out - even able bodies adults, not to mention kids.

I wish laws were in place to keep any of these powerful breeds from being allowed as pets.

[johnnyshaka]

I agree with this 100% (except the praying part, but that's another thread). Animals are animals. I think it is ridiculous to allow people to have animals as pets who have the physical power to tear most people's throats out - even able bodies adults, not to mention kids.

I wish laws were in place to keep any of these powerful breeds from being allowed as pets.

I concur.

I used to deliver papers as a kid and there were a handful of houses I would refuse to approach because I didn't trust the storm/screen door to hold back any number of big, barking dogs as I approached to drop off the paper. Same went for collection time, if the front door wasn't closed, I wouldn't bother trying to collect and instead called my supervisor to do so.

That isn't right, IMO.

[wade moore]

Color me surprised - I didn't think the movement against powerful breeds would get more than the one supporter on this message board.

Like I said - I actually buy that more than just one breed.

[larrymcg421]

I think part of the problem is dog owners who are lazy, and just want to let the dog out so it can do its business while the owner sits on the couch watching UFC.

I have a Giant Schnauzer, which is a pretty big dog for an apartment, but I've never had problems, because I walk her regularly. She's always on leash outside, except at the dog park. She stays in a large crate while I'm away at work.

So, I'd agree that if you're not willing to do the work required to make sure your dog won't harm someone, then you shouldn't own one.

[JonInMiddleGA]

'Brutal dog attack' killed couple | News | OnlineAthens.com (http://www.onlineathens.com/stories/081809/new_482836253.shtml)

This really isn't exactly the same subject this thread was on but it seemed close enough & better than a separate thread. Just an awful story. I'll note that several of the Atlanta area TV news crews have footage of some of the dogs believe to be responsible, there's everything in the pack from a doberman & very small young chow to what looked like a sheltie.

One of the things that ought to jump out is the absence of any animal control in the county which is adjacent to Athens (Clarke County). Locals have said that calls to the sheriff's department about various dogs usually get a response that includes a reminder that if you shoot dog(s) on your property that it's a violation not to bury the body afterwards. Meanwhile if I were a betting man, I'd call it even money or better that the abandoned house in question will be the subject of a mysterious fire sometime in the next few months.

Just an incredibly fucked up situation afaic.

LEXINGTON - A roaming pack of dogs mauled a former University of Georgia professor and his librarian wife to death on a dirt road in Oglethorpe County last weekend, investigators said Monday.

An autopsy done at the Georgia Bureau of Investigation's Crime Lab in Decatur showed that dogs killed 65-year-old Sherry Schweder, a UGA bibliographer known on campus as Sherry Allen, Oglethorpe County Coroner James Mathews said. Her husband, Lothar Karl Schweder, 77, a former German professor at UGA, died from similar injuries, Mathews said.

"It positively came back that it was a brutal dog attack as the cause of death," he said.

On Monday, animal control officers from Madison County - Oglethorpe does not have an animal control department - rounded up a dozen or so dogs suspected in the attack from a neighbor's house at the end of the road where the couple were mauled, Oglethorpe County Sheriff Mike Smith said.

Authorities are in the process of determining what to do with the dogs.

"We got a court order from the Superior Court here to capture the dogs," said Smith, who added that he planned to meet with District Attorney Bob Lavender to discuss whether any charges will be filed against the owner.

"I've been working in Oglethorpe for 30 years, and I've never seen anything like this," he said.

The two apparently were attacked in sequence on Howard Thaxton Road, just a few hundred yards from their house on Georgia Highway 77 about two miles northeast of Lexington, according to the account Smith gave.

Sherry Schweder, who often would take her pets along the road, had gone out for a walk sometime late last week when she got attacked, he said.

Smith believes her husband, worried that she had not returned home, took the couple's Honda sedan and drove down the road looking for her. The dogs attacked him when he found her and got out of the car, Smith said.

Their bodies lay on either side of the road next to the car before visiting Jehovah's Witnesses found them Saturday morning.

Authorities said little during the early stages of the investigation. "We did not know what we had at first because the bodies were so mutilated," Smith said. "We wanted to thoroughly investigate what happened."

Investigators traced the dogs, of mixed breeds and various sizes, to a house farther down the dead-end dirt road, Smith said. The owner no longer lives in the house but visits every other day to feed the dogs, he said.

Lanier Bridges, who lives across Howard Thaxton Road from the Schweders, said he has seen the dogs up by his house only once - earlier on Monday - and that they did not seem aggressive.

"I just hope these dogs are the right ones," Bridges said. "We're all wary out here in the country right now."

Friends and colleagues said both had a lot of cats and dogs, and also adopted strays.

Nan McMurry, director for collection development at UGA Libraries, called Sherry Allen's command of language "quite extraordinary." She ordered books in most Western European languages for the library system and could also read Arabic, Russian and Chinese, McMurry said.

Their sons - Mark Schweder, who lives in Aiken, S.C., and York Schweder, from Hutchinson, Kan. - could hardly believe such a thing could happen to their parents, animal lovers who adopted several dogs and cats.

The couple divorced when Mark Schweder was 2 years old, he said. Lothar Schweder left the University of Georgia in 1973 and moved to Kansas. He worked for and retired from the Kansas prison system, York Schweder said, while Sherry Allen stayed at UGA, where she started working in 1974.

Mark Schweder said his father, though a thousand miles away, stayed persistent in talking to his mother. Eventually, he won her back.

They remarried in 2000, when Mark was 32, and the couple moved onto seven acres in Oglethorpe County.

"They were just dearly loved people," Mark Schweder said of his parents. "And they loved it out here. They loved their pets as if they were their children."

[RendeR]

If they can prove those dogs were in fact the ones that killed them (would seem fairly obvious at this point but you never know) then the owner that ignores them other than to stop by feeding them should be charged with both murders and put away for life.

Fucking pathetic.

[DaddyTorgo]

If they can prove those dogs were in fact the ones that killed them (would seem fairly obvious at this point but you never know) then the owner that ignores them other than to stop by feeding them should be charged with both murders and put away for life.

Fucking pathetic.

+1