Pitbutll Mauls 4 Yr Old Boy

[skjl47]

And you'll notice I agreed with that. Unfortunately THIS animal is a threat to the community both human and animal.

Most kids are killed by negligent or sadistic parents. Look it up at CDC.gov


Well that's horse **** http://mabbr.org/pit-bull-ownership/the-truth-about-pit-bulls/. Similar study looked at the fatal dog attacks in a 6 year period. Pitts accounted for the most kills at 66. Saint Berarnds accounted for 13. Due to the relative numbers Pitt bulls would have to have killed 260 people to equal the relative risk of a saint. I have a rescued saint so thats why those numbers stuck with me. Pittbulls as the media uses the term covers 6 breeds including American Staffasherie Terrier, American Pittbull Terrier, American Bull Terrier, Dogo Argetino, American Bulldog and all mixes (drawing a blank on the 6 th). The statistic you quoted comes from a statistical falsehood mostly parroted by Collen Lynn. The number of fatalities are cumulative for for all the above breeds and mixes. The total number of dogs was taken from the number of registered American Pittbull Terrier. CDC and the American Veterinary Medical Association go into why it's horse ****.

Hello; Just did a search and found some more sites about dog bites. For what it is worth my dog was a husky and is on the list. I loved my husky but understood that he needed watching. I was not blind to the potential damage the dog was capable of. He was well treated but quick death to any small animals that got into my fenced yard. I never took him around people off a lead. I was lucky that he never attacked a person.
It seems to me that those who defend the aggressive breeds without considering the evidence are making things worse. The dog attacks cannot be just about the owners, there must be some connection with the traits of the particular breeds. As far as I know, no one is disputing that labs are water loving dogs. That some dog breeds make better trackers. That some breeds are better at herding than others and so on. That the many traits of various dogs are pretty much breed specific seems to be understood. Why then does the tendency for some breeds to be more aggressive seem so hard to accept.

http://dogbitelaw.com/dog-bite-statistics/the-breeds-most-likely-to-kill.html

http://www.livescience.com/27145-are-pit-bulls-dangerous.html

 

[ballinouttacntrol]

I don't know what is the latest but I remember reading that a petition to save the dog got 40,000 + sigs and the fundraiser for the kid's medicals got $6000

We need a petition to fight the petition! A petition to put the dog down or import to mexico for a dog fighting ring where it must win it's freedom

 

[skjl47]

I don't know what is the latest but I remember reading that a petition to save the dog got 40,000 + sigs and the fundraiser for the kid's medicals got $6000

Hello; WOW! Over 40,000 people want to save a dog that mauled a four year old? How distressing. At least the fundraiser for the medical bills makes sense. If each of the 40,000 who signed the petition were the donors then that comes to 15 cents each. I guess there is no way to know how many petitioners actually made a contribution?

 

[Crazy mike]

[/B]



Hello; Just did a search and found some more sites about dog bites. For what it is worth my dog was a husky and is on the list. I loved my husky but understood that he needed watching. I was not blind to the potential damage the dog was capable of. He was well treated but quick death to any small animals that got into my fenced yard. I never took him around people off a lead. I was lucky that he never attacked a person.
It seems to me that those who defend the aggressive breeds without considering the evidence are making things worse. The dog attacks cannot be just about the owners, there must be some connection with the traits of the particular breeds. As far as I know, no one is disputing that labs are water loving dogs. That some dog breeds make better trackers. That some breeds are better at herding than others and so on. That the many traits of various dogs are pretty much breed specific seems to be understood. Why then does the tendency for some breeds to be more aggressive seem so hard to accept.

http://dogbitelaw.com/dog-bite-statistics/the-breeds-most-likely-to-kill.html

http://www.livescience.com/27145-are-pit-bulls-dangerous.html

some breeds where bred to be aggressive but not towards human for the most part. Pits where bred to fight dogs and kill small things. I expect a pit to have a degree of dog aggression or prey drive towards small animals what I don't expect is aggression towards people. Aggression towards people is a result of bad genetics, poor socialization, abuse, weak temperament or some combination thereof. To say pits account for a lot dog bites is simply media hype and false info. There are literally thousands of undocumented dogs bites. Plus to even guess at a specific breed population is ludicrous. Those statistics are based off dog licensing and kennel registration correct? How many people actually register their dogs?

Sent from my VS840 4G

 

[Warborg]

I don't know what is the latest but I remember reading that a petition to save the dog got 40,000 + sigs and the fundraiser for the kid's medicals got $6000

Sad the society we live in. Image if those 40,000 would have each given a dollar to the boy

 

[skjl47]

hello; Here is a link to what has been going on here in Tennessee.

http://pitattacksbystate.blogspot.com/2010/02/tennessee-attacks-since-111309.html

 

[FMA4ME]

I think the people who gave to the dog were misled. They probably got a few select snippets of the whole story. ..at least that's what I hope.

 

[skjl47]

some breeds where bred to be aggressive but not towards human for the most part. Pits where bred to fight dogs and kill small things. I expect a pit to have a degree of dog aggression or prey drive towards small animals what I don't expect is aggression towards people. Aggression towards people is a result of bad genetics, poor socialization, abuse, weak temperament or some combination thereof. To say pits account for a lot dog bites is simply media hype and false info. There are literally thousands of undocumented dogs bites. Plus to even guess at a specific breed population is ludicrous. Those statistics are based off dog licensing and kennel registration correct? How many people actually register their dogs?

Sent from my VS840 4G

Hello; Bad genetics? How does this work? Some pittbulls have good genetics and the ones that bite have bad genetics. How are we supposeed to tell the difference? Should the ones with bad genetics be identified and put down when identified. Are not breed specific traits linked to genetics?

The unreported dog attacks are obiviously not included in these reports because they are not reported. The reported attacks are included and near as I can see are not biased against pittbulls, the numbers just work out that way.

I am not aware that the statistics are restricted to "dog licensing and kennel registration" only. Even if so, This would only limit the total pool of dogs measured and should not affect the percentage of attacks by specific breeds. If the pittbulls still turn out to be involved the higher percentage of attacks, that is still significant.

 

[Crazy mike]

Hello; Bad genetics? How does this work? Some pittbulls have good genetics and the ones that bite have bad genetics. How are we supposeed to tell the difference? Should the ones with bad genetics be identified and put down when identified. Are not breed specific traits linked to genetics?

The unreported dog attacks are obiviously not included in these reports because they are not reported. The reported attacks are included and near as I can see are not biased against pittbulls, the numbers just work out that way.

I am not aware that the statistics are restricted to "dog licensing and kennel registration" only. Even if so, This would only limit the total pool of dogs measured and should not affect the percentage of attacks by specific breeds. If the pittbulls still turn out to be involved the higher percentage of attacks, that is still significant.

Having worked in a animal shelter for coming on five years I can say with certainty that a well bred dog ,with an sound temperament, good socialization and properly owned shouldn't bite without a good reason. Unfortunately because pits are bred by people who have no knowledge of how to breed a healthy safe animal (along with many popular breeds) we end up with a influx of poorly bred animals.

Poor genetics is linked to unsafe animals. I've seen countless mixed breed and purebred dogs that weren't safe because they are poorly bred. A poorly bred dog lacks healthy and sound temperament.
Sent from my VS840 4G

 

[petspoiler]

I don't know what is the latest but I remember reading that a petition to save the dog got 40,000 + sigs and the fundraiser for the kid's medicals got $6000

Judge calls for recess in dog-mauling case (TODAY)

PHOENIX — "A dog that attacked a 4-year-old Phoenix boy was ruled a "vicious animal" Tuesday, under Phoenix law, but a judge has yet to determine the animal's fate.

A two-hour recess was called shortly before noon.

It is a legal case that has attracted a team of top death penalty lawyers, candlelight vigils and a polarizing Internet debate on mercy, blame and animal violence.

The source of the dispute is a pit bull that mauled a 4-year-old boy last month as he and a friend were playing in a yard. The attack left Kevin Vicente with a broken eye socket and jaw, and the boy has months, if not years, of reconstructive surgery ahead of him.

A judge heard arguments on whether Mickey should live or die, ........."


[the rest of article is repeat of events)

That's about all the update for now. the case is still being heard in court today. no ruling yet.

It's a completely absurd waste of monetary resources, which should all be used to help the boy and family.
His mother was employed originally, and now must spend all time at her boys' bedside.

Would any of the people rioting for the dogs' life go blindfolded into the cage with it and a fresh bone? hell no.
That's a better chance than that little boy ever had, because now they totally know what the animal is capable of. That little boy could not have known. NO baby ever should, they are innocent.