Man fatally mauled, dog killed, by pit bulls on dog walk

[JanM]

What hurts me is the thought that the poor man who died suffered by watching his pet being shredded alive by vicious, dangerous animals. And that from reports those same animals had slaughtered other animals before. I still haven’t heard an update on the child in NYC that was mauled by his father’s dogs, and if he’ll ever see again. I don’t care who the father says those animals belonged to, they were his responsibility.

Attacks on animals and humans will continue until people with vicious animals that are allowed to keep them after attacks, and aren’t prosecuted. There needs to be a push to have every state have dangerous and vicious animal laws, and ones that include attacks on other animals, as well as humans. I don’t care what breed anyone has, if they control that animal, and take responsibility for keeping other people and animals safe. However, I think that attacks by animals on public property should be criminal charges, and not a citation from animal control. I also don’t think any animal that kills other people’s animals, or attacks humans off property should ever be returned to the original owner, or adopted out, yes I mean put down.

[AMWookey]

@Sswor

Would also like to add that it is those “pro-pit bull” pics that make it so easy to ID the breed/type from pics of dogs responsible for fatal maulings. It’s the same breed/type of dog, that’s quite clear.

Genetics are indeed funny sometimes. I submit that behavior tendencies may follow phenotype. Physical ability certainly does. There is a certain hind end arrangement in horses that allows for one to jump a big fence–especially when combined with how the neck is set on, proportion of the back. Whether it wants to or not can be another story, but very generally–we all “enjoy” doing that which we are good at.

If it’s so easy why have people on this board misidentified them before? Or been unable to differentiate between bully breeds and pit bull types?

[enjoytheride]

@rubles

What the heck is so wrong with an off-leash dog quietly walking with it’s owner. Some think it’s a crime. Flexi leads allow dogs to get a little distance and seem to be acceptable.

because in most public parks in most cities it’s against the law. Even excluding a perfectly trained dog who stays at heel and has perfect recall no matter what (say if someone shows up on a horse in a multi use park) most people seem to think their fluffy is the exception.

But really, it’s against the law. If you can’t follow park rules you don’t deserve to be in the park.

[rubles]

Was I in a park? Where did I say I lived in a city. Tut, tut jumping to conclusions aren’t we.

[vineyridge]

Why do people get so outraged about death and injury by dog? There are a lot of other causes of death and injury with similar annual low numbers that seem to be accepted or ignored.

[CanadianTrotter]

@khall

quote from CT:

Khall, it isn’t the strength of the bite…it is the number of bites and length of the attack. Most dogs will bite 1-2 times and retreat, the majority of pit bulls do not.

Again, this is your beliefs where is the facts that your beliefs are based on? You have not posted one single reputable organization that is in favor of BSLs. Not one reputable study that shows PB types are more likely to be involved in dog bite fatalities. You cannot because no reputable study has shown such, no reputable organization is in favor of BSLs. All you and Sswor and vacation have posted are your beliefs, inflammatory rhetoric (most dogs bite 1-2 times and retreat, the majority of pit bulls do not) not facts. Read what I quoted from JAVMA, breed is not a factor in dog bite fatalities. That was a 10 yr long study done. The only common denominator found in the dog most often is that the attacking dog was an intact male dog.

Khall, there have been reputable sites and sources offered in the past on threads just like this, they were either ignored, dismissed or torn apart by weak and uneducated arguements. I am not going to waste my time searching for reputable or academic studies and reports only for them to fall on deaf ears or for the pro pit bull people to become rude, snarky and insulting…which is exactly what is happening on this thread right now.

I agree that there are other dog breeds that are more aggressive than the Pit Bull, GSD and Rottie, any experienced dog person can vouch for that. The undeniable fact remains that the Pit Bull, GSD and Rottie can cause more damage than the other breeds that are more aggressive than they are due to size, any experienced dog person will testify to that. Also, any experienced and unbiased dog person will state that out of the Pit Bull, GSD and Rottie, the Pit Bull is much more tenacious when involved in a full scale attack. It is undeniable that the Pit Bull can and has caused the largest number of serious maulings and deaths out of all other dogs. The easiest way to prove this would be to get the dog attack reports from every hospital, why this hasn’t been done, I’m not sure. I did do a quick search and found this outdated source, which I am confident you will say is inadmissible in this debate, but it does give an idea of what I’m saying.

http://journals.lww.com/annalsofsurgery/Abstract/2011/04000/Mortality,_Mauling,_and_Maiming_by_Vicious_Dogs.23.aspx

• Abstract
• In Brief
• Author Information

[h=5]Abstract[/h] Objective: Maiming and death due to dog bites are uncommon but preventable tragedies. We postulated that patients admitted to a level I trauma center with dog bites would have severe injuries and that the gravest injuries would be those caused by pit bulls.

Design: We reviewed the medical records of patients admitted to our level I trauma center with dog bites during a 15-year period. We determined the demographic characteristics of the patients, their outcomes, and the breed and characteristics of the dogs that caused the injuries.

Results: Our Trauma and Emergency Surgery Services treated 228 patients with dog bite injuries; for 82 of those patients, the breed of dog involved was recorded (29 were injured by pit bulls). Compared with attacks by other breeds of dogs, attacks by pit bulls were associated with a higher median Injury Severity Scale score (4 vs. 1; P = 0.002), a higher risk of an admission Glasgow Coma Scale score of 8 or lower (17.2% vs. 0%; P = 0.006), higher median hospital charges ($10,500 vs. $7200; P = 0.003), and a higher risk of death (10.3% vs. 0%; P = 0.041).

Conclusions: Attacks by pit bulls are associated with higher morbidity rates, higher hospital charges, and a higher risk of death than are attacks by other breeds of dogs. Strict regulation of pit bulls may substantially reduce the US mortality rates related to dog bites. [h=5]In Brief[/h]
In this retrospective review of patients admitted to our level I trauma center with dog bites during a 15-year period, we compared outcome measures for Pit Bull attacks to all other breeds and found significant differences in Injury Severity Scale score, admission Glasgow Coma Score, median hospital charges, and risk of death.

The Pit Bull debate will continue to go round and round in a vicious circle the exact same way that the gun control debate will. In the end it isn’t the pit bull or the gun that is the actual problem, it is the irresponsible owners. Because there is absolutely no way that the irresponsible owners can be controlled in a reasonable time span in order to stop the large amount of innocent deaths, the tool/weapon used to cause these deaths need to be either taken away or have very strict blanket regulations put in place in order to stop the fatalities. Responsible owners should not mind having these regulations put into place if it means it will stop the unnecessary deaths.

In the end, because stricter laws and regulations are not being put into place, irresponsible owners are only making the Pit Bull’s case worse. Even some the somewhat more responsible owners do not follow or adhere to the laws and regulations already put in place, which in truth makes them an irresponsible owner. When and if there is ever a strict Pit Bull BSL put into place throughout the US, there is nobody to blame except for the irresponsible owners themselves.

[CanadianTrotter]

I also found this and found it quite interesting.

http://atts.org/breed-statistics/statistics-page1/

[beowulf]

@CanadianTrotter

Khall, there have been reputable sites and sources offered in the past on threads just like this, they were either ignored, dismissed or torn apart by weak and uneducated arguements. I am not going to waste my time searching for reputable or academic studies and reports only for them to fall on deaf ears or for the pro pit bull people to become rude, snarky and insulting…which is exactly what is happening on this thread right now.

I agree that there are other dog breeds that are more aggressive than the Pit Bull, GSD and Rottie, any experienced dog person can vouch for that. The undeniable fact remains that the Pit Bull, GSD and Rottie can cause more damage than the other breeds that are more aggressive than they are due to size, any experienced dog person will testify to that. Also, any experienced and unbiased dog person will state that out of the Pit Bull, GSD and Rottie, the Pit Bull is much more tenacious when involved in a full scale attack. It is undeniable that the Pit Bull can and has caused the largest number of serious maulings and deaths out of all other dogs. The easiest way to prove this would be to get the dog attack reports from every hospital, why this hasn’t been done, I’m not sure. I did do a quick search and found this outdated source, which I am confident you will say is inadmissible in this debate, but it does give an idea of what I’m saying.

http://journals.lww.com/annalsofsurgery/Abstract/2011/04000/Mortality,_Mauling,_and_Maiming_by_Vicious_Dogs.23.aspx

The Pit Bull debate will continue to go round and round in a vicious circle the exact same way that the gun control debate will. In the end it isn’t the pit bull or the gun that is the actual problem, it is the irresponsible owners. Because there is absolutely no way that the irresponsible owners can be controlled in a reasonable time span in order to stop the large amount of innocent deaths, the tool/weapon used to cause these deaths need to be either taken away or have very strict blanket regulations put in place in order to stop the fatalities. Responsible owners should not mind having these regulations put into place if it means it will stop the unnecessary deaths.

In the end, because stricter laws and regulations are not being put into place, irresponsible owners are only making the Pit Bull’s case worse. Even some the somewhat more responsible owners do not follow or adhere to the laws and regulations already put in place, which in truth makes them an irresponsible owner. When and if there is ever a strict Pit Bull BSL put into place throughout the US, there is nobody to blame except for the irresponsible owners themselves.

IOW, “I will not waste my time educating myself.”

So, “I refuse to provide sources because they will be ripped apart”

That does not make a compelling or believable argument that BSL is the answer.

[Angela_Freda]

@CanadianTrotter

Khall, there have been reputable sites and sources offered in the past on threads just like this, they were either ignored, dismissed or torn apart by weak and uneducated arguements. I am not going to waste my time searching for reputable or academic studies and reports only for them to fall on deaf ears or for the pro pit bull people to become rude, snarky and insulting…which is exactly what is happening on this thread right now.

I agree that there are other dog breeds that are more aggressive than the Pit Bull, GSD and Rottie, any experienced dog person can vouch for that. The undeniable fact remains that the Pit Bull, GSD and Rottie can cause more damage than the other breeds that are more aggressive than they are due to size, any experienced dog person will testify to that. Also, any experienced and unbiased dog person will state that out of the Pit Bull, GSD and Rottie, the Pit Bull is much more tenacious when involved in a full scale attack. It is undeniable that the Pit Bull can and has caused the largest number of serious maulings and deaths out of all other dogs. The easiest way to prove this would be to get the dog attack reports from every hospital, why this hasn’t been done, I’m not sure. I did do a quick search and found this outdated source, which I am confident you will say is inadmissible in this debate, but it does give an idea of what I’m saying.

PB types are also very popular amongst those least likely to be good stewards… their number also, therefore, works against them when comparing them to other breeds who could be as bad, and have as many incidences but do not suffer the same popularity that PBs do.
I also don’t hear the same volume about those other breeds as I do for PBs from apologists and people who prefer to pretend the problem is non-existent and simply a witch hunt from people who hate dogs.

[rubles]

[QUOTE=CanadianTrotter;n9675711]
I also found this and found it quite interesting.

http://atts.org/breed-statistics/statistics-page1/[/QUOTE

[rubles]

[QUOTE=rubles;n9675829]

Oh good grief. My dogs were given those tests too–they all passed for what it’s worth. Not much but I did get certificates proving they did. What’s just as important is to learn the reasons those dogs didn’t pass but of course, that’s not quoted.

[CanadianTrotter]

@beowulf

IOW, “I will not waste my time educating myself.”

So, “I refuse to provide sources because they will be ripped apart”

That does not make a compelling or believable argument that BSL is the answer.

No, I will not waste my time providing the sources that have already been provided in past and previous threads only to be inconclusively ripped apart by biased and uneducated responses as they were previously.

Innocent people are being continuously ripped apart by pit bulls In the US…end of.

If you want to be continuously insulting to people’s opinions…have at it and enjoy your day.

[Marshfield]

@Angela Freda

PB types are also very popular amongst those least likely to be good stewards… their number also, therefore, works against them when comparing them to other breeds who could be as bad, and have as many incidences but do not suffer the same popularity that PBs do.
I also don’t hear the same volume about those other breeds as I do for PBs from apologists and people who prefer to pretend the problem is non-existent and simply a witch hunt from people who hate dogs.

To put it bluntly–I rarely meet an Akita owned by an idiot. The folks I know with Malinois, GSD, Rotties, Akitas understand the power and potential of the dogs in their lives and take appropriate precautions.

[CanadianTrotter]

@rubles

Oh good grief. My dogs were given those tests too–they all passed for what it’s worth. Not much but I did get certificates proving they did. What’s just as important is to learn the reasons those dogs didn’t pass but of course, that’s not quoted.

Good grief what, rubles? Can’t you respond without snark or ignorance? This is where I start to stop listening to people in the current debate and any future or different debate. If a person cannot control their own behaviour, how can they control a dog’s or a child’s even?

I said I found the site interesting, I didn’t say or claim it was reputable or valid…just that it was interesting.

[khall]

Quote from CT: I am not going to waste my time searching for reputable or academic studies and reports only for them to fall on deaf ears or for the pro pit bull people to become rude, snarky and insulting…which is exactly what is happening on this thread right now.

Re CT: first of all I have not nor never been rude, snarky or insulting ever on this thread or any other. I am very careful with my words because words and their meanings matter. Please quote where I have been rude etc, please. If you are saying that I have been rude, snarky because I have been diligent in my demands for facts, research and evidence to back up your claims of PB type dogs, then that is your problem, not mine. News reports are anecdotal evidence not facts. While personal testimony does have some bearing, it does not carry the weight that research does.

Anecdotal evidence is evidence from anecdotes, i.e., evidence collected in a casual or informal manner and relying heavily or entirely on personal testimony.

In other words, unless we all agree with your beliefs and feelings we should just stop questioning you. We should not ask for facts to back up your beliefs and feelings because we might disprove those by real research from reputable organizations. I am sorry, but as a quaint saying here in the South that applies in this case: That dog don’t hunt for me. Or unless you can back up your feelings and beliefs with fact based research from reputable organizations, your beliefs don’t gel with me.

Again quoting from CT from a “study” she found to back up her/his beliefs:
Conclusions: Attacks by pit bulls are associated with higher morbidity rates, higher hospital charges, and a higher risk of death than are attacks by other breeds of dogs. Strict regulation of pit bulls may substantially reduce the US mortality rates related to dog bites. In Brief

In this retrospective review of patients admitted to our level I trauma center with dog bites during a 15-year period, we compared outcome measures for Pit Bull attacks to all other breeds and found significant differences in Injury Severity Scale score, admission Glasgow Coma Score, median hospital charges, and risk of death.

This is so flawed because the “study” is saying %100 they can identify the dogs in the attacks as pit bulls. I think I have said and have backed up over and over again with facts and research, you CANNOT identify a mixed breed dog just by looking at them. Unless you have factual identification, which the JAVMA 10 yr long study showed that was rare, you cannot assume these identifications of the dogs are correct. The only factual based identification of dogs would be breed papers or DNA.

Here is more evidence you CANNOT identify a dog just by looks: https://smartdogs.wordpress.com/2008…y-dna-testing/

Quote from CT: Also, any experienced and unbiased dog person will state that out of the Pit Bull, GSD and Rottie, the Pit Bull is much more tenacious when involved in a full scale attack. It is undeniable that the Pit Bull can and has caused the largest number of serious maulings and deaths out of all other dogs. The easiest way to prove this would be to get the dog attack reports from every hospital, why this hasn’t been done, I’m not sure.

Again, these are your beliefs, not facts based on research and evidence. Any experienced and unbiased dog person would know that all dogs are individuals, some who are of the same breed (remember now “Pit bull” is not a breed but a type of dog) will have similar characteristics based on the breed. You are grouping a type of dog, usually based on their looks, not genetics, and attributing to them certain characteristics. There is NO scientific research to back up your beliefs, in fact every bit of research shows your beliefs are false. For many reasons: (I sound like a broken record here) you cannot identify a “pit bull” just by looking at them, much goes into how a dog behaves, not just genetics, the only reliable indicator of future behavior is past behavior, not breed, not type, not hair coat. Again, the ONLY fact based common denominator in dog bite fatalities in the dogs were that %84 of them were intact male dogs.

[red_mares]

@CanadianTrotter

I also found this and found it quite interesting.

http://atts.org/breed-statistics/statistics-page1/

It looks fairly useless to me. The tests are voluntary. If someone makes an effort to take a dog to be tested, they have to care enough to do it. There are only 9 or 10 tests scheduled so far this year, and they are spread over quite a wide area. The numbers of dogs tested is low enough to be considered anecdotal, and I wouldn’t consider it representative of any breed. They’ve tested ~34,000 dogs in 40 years, that’s less than 1000/ year

One source on quick google search said that 78K pitbulls were euthanized each year. The page you referenced showed that around 1600 Am Pitt Bull Terriers & AmStaff have been tested since 1977. Even if those 1600 were tested in one year, it only would be 2% relative to the number of dogs put down.

If they picked the 6 largest shelter/shelter systems and temperament tested every dog that went through for a couple years the resulting data would be somewhat meaningful. I would wager it would be skewed more to fail than passing.

[CanadianTrotter]

@red mares

It looks fairly useless to me. The tests are voluntary. If someone makes an effort to take a dog to be tested, they have to care enough to do it. There are only 9 or 10 tests scheduled so far this year, and they are spread over quite a wide area. The numbers of dogs tested is low enough to be considered anecdotal, and I wouldn’t consider it representative of any breed. They’ve tested ~34,000 dogs in 40 years, that’s less than 1000/ year

One source on quick google search said that 78K pitbulls were euthanized each year. The page you referenced showed that around 1600 Am Pitt Bull Terriers & AmStaff have been tested since 1977. Even if those 1600 were tested in one year, it only would be 2% relative to the number of dogs put down.

If they picked the 6 largest shelter/shelter systems and temperament tested every dog that went through for a couple years the resulting data would be somewhat meaningful. I would wager it would be skewed more to fail than passing.

Yes, probably quite useless as you said. As I said, I found it interesting that is all.

It is probably as useless as any other source of stats available at this time.

The best way to gain the truest possible stats would be to get the dog attack files from all hospitals. If the pro pit bull people are serious about saving the pit bull from a BSL, why aren’t they doing this?

[CanadianTrotter]

Originally posted by khall

Re CT: first of all I have not nor never been rude, snarky or insulting ever on this thread or any other. I am very careful with my words because words and their meanings matter. Please quote where I have been rude etc, please. If you are saying that I have been rude, snarky because I have been diligent in my demands for facts, research and evidence to back up your claims of PB type dogs, then that is your problem, not mine. News reports are anecdotal evidence not facts. While personal testimony does have some bearing, it does not carry the weight that research does.

I didn’t point any fingers at you at all.

As I said, the research and evidence has been posted on here in previous pit bull threads, it’s a broken record that I don’t want to be a part of. It’s most definitely not a problem.

There is tons of research out there about pit bulls, each different source has something different to say or claim and none can claim to be unbiased.

You may believe that news reports are anecodtal, the articles and who they are written by can be biased and willfully ignorant so I tend to take those with a grain of salt or discount them altogether. But the witness accounts and photographs of the victims after the attack in these news reports, I tend to believe and count as proof. Did you take the pictures and videos of planes that were flown into the Twin Towers as anecodtal?

[CanadianTrotter]

Originally posted by khall

Again, these are your beliefs, not facts based on research and evidence. Any experienced and unbiased dog person would know that all dogs are individuals, some who are of the same breed (remember now “Pit bull” is not a breed but a type of dog) will have similar characteristics based on the breed. You are grouping a type of dog, usually based on their looks, not genetics, and attributing to them certain characteristics. There is NO scientific research to back up your beliefs, in fact every bit of research shows your beliefs are false. For many reasons: (I sound like a broken record here) you cannot identify a “pit bull” just by looking at them, much goes into how a dog behaves, not just genetics, the only reliable indicator of future behavior is past behavior, not breed, not type, not hair coat. Again, the ONLY fact based common denominator in dog bite fatalities in the dogs were that %84 of them were intact male dogs.

In turn there is absolutely no scientific research or proof to prove the dogs each individual dog being named as Pit Bull/Pit Bull Type did/do not have any trace of pit bull genetics in them.

[khall]

[QUOTE=CanadianTrotter;n9675906]

I didn’t point any fingers at you at all.

What did you mean by this: Quote from CT: Khall, there have been reputable sites and sources offered in the past on threads just like this, they were either ignored, dismissed or torn apart by weak and uneducated arguements. I am not going to waste my time searching for reputable or academic studies and reports only for them to fall on deaf ears or for the pro pit bull people to become rude, snarky and insulting…which is exactly what is happening on this thread right now.

You singled me out, I am a pro “pit bull” proponent, how can I not take it that you are saying I have been rude, snarky and insulting?

Quote by CT: In turn there is absolutely no scientific research or proof to prove the dogs each individual dog being named as Pit Bull/Pit Bull Type did/do not have any trace of pit bull genetics in them.

Yes there has, DNA i.e. factual evidence that a “pit bull” type dog has no “pit bull” in them.
https://books.google.com/books?id=hbEVF7RrUiIC&pg=PA12&lpg=PA12&dq=niko+dna+evidence&source=bl&ots=pYQ16rwkHB&sig=EtoBAtkdQymVK-WEvjyMglWLi7U&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiTtLjb-snSAhUG7iYKHSOcBmAQ6AEIODAE#v=onepage&q=niko%20dna%20evidence&f=false
It would follow, in other words I can extrapolate from the above information that the looks of the dog is not showing their genetic makeup. So you would have to test each individual dog for their DNA unless they have breed papers.

quote by CT: You may believe that news reports are anecodtal, the articles and who they are written by can be biased and willfully ignorant so I tend to take those with a grain of salt or discount them altogether. But the witness accounts and photographs of the victims after the attack in these news reports, I tend to believe and count as proof. Did you take the pictures and videos of planes that were flown into the Twin Towers as anecodtal?

OMG really CT? You will bring a national tragedy to back up your misguided beliefs? How low can you go?

First of all, pictorial and video evidence is factual to a point (because you can edit and photo shop), but again a picture of the dog is only going to tell you what he looks like, not his genetic makeup. Why I call them block heads instead of pit bulls. Eye witness accounts same thing, they can only see what the dog looks like, not DNA. I don’t believe that news reports on attacks are anecdotal it is fact that news reports are anecdotal, they rely on eyewitness accounts and interviews, not fact based research. Often using stock photos of a dog, not pictures of the actual dog involved in the attack.