I think you missed the point. The dogs were going to kill due to their nature whereas the humans made a conscious decision to kill.
So, it's different, right? :hmm:
I think you missed the point. The dogs were going to kill due to their nature whereas the humans made a conscious decision to kill.
Far more people die on bicycles every year than via dogs of any kind. Clearly we need to ban bicycles as well.
...and fast food.
...and cars.
...and tall trees.
.....and farm equipment.
...and swimming pools.
:hmm:
ya'll seem to be missing the point that the pitbull in the OP is deemed to have been an "ideal' pitbull that would "never hurt anyone" and was supposed to be family friendly.
this is not a "gangsta chain around neck" pitbull that killed the woman.
Agreed. All Pit bulls would be spay'd or neutered before they could even be sold. All shelters would have to do this as well when they are adopted. And a waiver would have to be signed by the person taking the pit bull.
Any new breeding would be outlawed. It won't stop it, but the other laws would at least take the numbers down. And it would for licensed breeders. Pit bull attacks leading to death are on the rise, there is clearly something wrong with the breed.
What exactly is it that people see that they just have to have a pit bull regardless of this happening? There are plenty of other similar breeds that you don't have to gamble on. It makes no sense to me.
there is nothing wrong with the breed simply because attacks are rising.
attacks are rising because pit bull numbers are rising. And unfortunately, they are being raised in deplorable circumstances.
the same with how German Shepards had the most attacks in the early 80s--they were the most popular breed at the time.
The APBT has been one of, if not the most popular breeds to own in this country since inception, and only now we seem to have a problem?
something is odd with the way you interpret numbers.
I don't believe that for a second, if you want to post stats on ownership numbers going up I'd be more then happy to analyze and look at the data, but I think this is your opinion. Your opinion doesn't matter, more and more cities, municipalities and states are passing breed specific legislation in response to a number of well-publicized incidents involving pit bull-type dogs. You may not agree with it, but its happening. The breed will continue to be banned in more and more places and with good reason.
My opinion doesn't matter either, because I'm not the one passing the legislation nationwide. Worldwide actually, since all over Canada and other countries like Australia are doing it as well. It all ranges from banning ownership, mandatory spay/neuter for all pit bulls, mandatory microchip implants and liability insurance, or prohibiting people convicted of a felony from owning pit bulls. But Pitt bulls are at the center of every BSL bill passed everywhere in the country and the world.
So clearly, this isn't just a few peoples opinion on a message board, this is a global issue that is getting notice.
posting for the elventybillionth time on ATOT:
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/02/06/060206fa_fact
it's not really opinion; history of the breed and a proper examination of the numbers doesn't really fly into the opinion realm.
Honestly, I used to support the failed and misguided notion that pit bulls were deadly weapons and monsters and should be completely outlawed, until I started investigating the matter, rather than simply spout out what reactionary and sensationalist reporting wants me to think.
OK where are the numbers in that article, I'm not going to read five pages to get the numbers. And is there support for the numbers that the author used?
Secondly, it doesn't matter if you or I agree, its happening. Like I said, I do not support BANNING the breed outright without conditions and considerations, I do agree with having to spay/neuter all pit bulls and having some of the other things done that are already being done. Such as mandatory liability insurance on the pet, and other such things.
he problem with banning is how do you define a pit bull? there are many, many breeds that people recognize as "pit bull," and if you go to a shelter, the majority of the dogs are some type of mix. People that think they are demons simply by genetics would not be able to accept any kind of "pit bull" blood.
the article goes on at length based on an SPCA (I think) study from ~80-2003? or so. It's in there somewhere.
Fuck that dog and fuck pit bull supporters. Those dogs need to be illegal to own in residential areas. Like I've told my neighbor who kept letting her pitbull out, I'm going to put a bullet in it's head if I see it loose again. And I won't hesitate to run over it with my car either.
A pit bull is a loaded weopon. Most pit bull owners that i see treat their dog no differently than owners of labs or other breeds. Pit bulls are instinctively agressive to other animals and i believe this agressive instinct can also displayed toward people without provocation.
You should tell her to learn how to control a dog.
The problem isn't bad dogs, it's humans that think they know how to take care of dogs.
I agree. I have dealt with and owned many different breeds of dog including pit bulls. The situation with Pits is they're stereotyped due to for the most part because there's pieces of garbage out there that acquire them for the wrong reason i.e... to fight. Or you get the backwards moron who ties the dog to a tree and leaves him outside 24/7 or throws him in a crate 24/7. Then they wonder why the dog is off the wall when they let it off the leash or out of the crate once in a while. They don't train them...at all. They scream and yell and smack the dog around between beers and during commercial breaks while watching Jerry Springer. If you can't take care of a dog, don't get a dog, or any animal. Yes they are strong dogs, yes they are tough dogs and if you train them to hurt or abuse them they will be aggressive. Any dog will be aggressive if you train them to be, if you abuse them or mistreat them.
Other reasons a dog can snap is a brain tumor, rabies, meningitis, or other specific illnesses.
I have read the stats about pits, most are BS when you dig deeper.
the dog in the OP was none of this.
A pit bull is a loaded weopon. Most pit bull owners that i see treat their dog no differently than owners of labs or other breeds. Pit bulls are instinctively agressive to other animals and i believe this agressive instinct can also displayed toward people without provocation.
Autopsy. They're checking the dog for illnesses. Right? Something else about foul play. Usually more to the story. If it gets reported is a different story.
"Tazi is being held for observation while a necropsy is preformed of the suspect dog Gunner for signs of illness or other possible causes for the attack. Police are also investigating the slight possibility of foul play by other unknown parties in the interim including ordering an autopsy for Darla Napora. "...you never know, so that is why we are waiting for the reports to make sure we didn't miss anything,"said Pacifica Police Captain Dave Bertini.
Results of the autopsy and necropsy are not expect to be announced for several weeks."
With that, I feel very bad this happened no matter what the reason. That shouldn't happen to anybody.
my first thought with the ptehr dog cowering in the corner was that there was some sort of home invasion--and wondering who's blood that was. The one dog going after the owner, possibly after the attacker, could be an issue of confusion.
it's all speculative, I didn't want to bring it up yesterday b/c it sounds so bizarre, and one would assume that the suggestion would have appeared in the article if the police likewise thought something was odd.
...then again, it is a horribly-written article, and pit bull is involved...so yeah. assume nothing but sensationalism and partial truth.