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

[khall]

pezk I agree with you mostly, humans killing humans is far more of an issue than dog bite fatalities (less than 50 a year, what is the murder rate in the US?) There is a hysteria in some posters about the bullies with much misunderstanding on the dogs (who often are identified by their looks not their breeding or DNA)

I also agree that many of the bullies are not for just anyone. But you have to look at them as individuals not as a group especially when identifying just by looks and not by actual breed/DNA.

Why? For example here is Lou https://www.petfinder.com/petdetail/37805808 so many posters told me that I was misrepresenting her she was obviously a pit bull mix (Lou is my foster) and I never saw it. I always thought she was ACD mix, so I sent her DNA in to be tested, she came back mix of all kinds from GSP, Rottie, boxer, beagle just a conglomerate with no one breed being the main one found. She looks nothing like any of those breeds, is a short stocky 40lbs with double coat and short tail and unusual markings. Yet many on COTH was convinced she was a “pit bull” just because to them she looked like one. She also has no ACD in her!

BSLs targeting pit bull types do not work and have been shown not to work regardless of what some posters here insist. I agree there is an overpopulation problem of pets, both cats and dogs. Spaying and neutering laws need to be implemented and enforced. Education and low cost spay.neuter clinics go a long way to helping control the pet population. Dangerous dog laws should be on the books and should be enforced. Targeting an animal for their looks and not their behavior is ridiculous.

[pezk]

@khall

pezk I agree with you mostly, humans killing humans is far more of an issue than dog bite fatalities (less than 50 a year, what is the murder rate in the US?) There is a hysteria in some posters about the bullies with much misunderstanding on the dogs (who often are identified by their looks not their breeding or DNA)

I also agree that many of the bullies are not for just anyone. But you have to look at them as individuals not as a group especially when identifying just by looks and not by actual breed/DNA.

Why? For example here is Lou https://www.petfinder.com/petdetail/37805808 so many posters told me that I was misrepresenting her she was obviously a pit bull mix (Lou is my foster) and I never saw it. I always thought she was ACD mix, so I sent her DNA in to be tested, she came back mix of all kinds from GSP, Rottie, boxer, beagle just a conglomerate with no one breed being the main one found. She looks nothing like any of those breeds, is a short stocky 40lbs with double coat and short tail and unusual markings. Yet many on COTH was convinced she was a “pit bull” just because to them she looked like one. She also has no ACD in her!

BSLs targeting pit bull types do not work and have been shown not to work regardless of what some posters here insist. I agree there is an overpopulation problem of pets, both cats and dogs. Spaying and neutering laws need to be implemented and enforced. Education and low cost spay.neuter clinics go a long way to helping control the pet population. Dangerous dog laws should be on the books and should be enforced. Targeting an animal for their looks and not their behavior is ridiculous.

Thats an interesting dog in petfinder link. I would have thought there was some basenji in her. Gosh I dont see pitbull at all. The ins co started by denying ins to pitbull owners, but now many cos have a list of almost 100 breeds. All the usual and many others. So breed doesnt have much relevance to many ins cos anymore. The no 1 dog for bites and outlays of ins money in my state are labs, because there are so many and no one trains them it seems. But the lab isnt on the list for most of the ins cos. And then there are a few ins cos that exclude all dogs from coverage. Doesnt matter breed. The ins co puts dogs in the same nuisance classification as tampolines etc, swimming pools etc… thats ok with me. At least the ins co isnt picking on one breed.
There are good health reasons to delay neutering and spaying dogs. Alot of vets wont do it early anymore. But the rescues and shelters have to s/n because its required by law. No regard for the health of the animal so there we disagree.
if a town has a leash law then it should be enforced. Doesnt matter what the breed. And many a AC knows where the problem neighborhoods are. The town could do a better job in dealing with the problem areas or problem people. Some of it is just ignorance. And some is a I dont care mentality. And those are the ones that are the hardest to deal with and its not just poor people either.
i have a neighbor with a springer, dog has a screw loose too. That dog was loose alot. Both owners were ex Marines and didnt think the law should apply to them. The AC was nice at first but with continued complaints and finding out the dog had lived there for 5 yrs without being licensed, the AC threw the book at them. Large fine for ignoring the licensing law and letting the dog run loose. And that was a dog who in the right situation would bite. I havent seen the dog loose anymore and it still lives there. Have to enforce the laws.

[Gestalt]

I’m not a big dog hater. But if it suits the story you tell yourself I guess I can be. There are so many fantastic big dog breeds, and sure, within those breeds there is always the possibility of a rogue. But seriously, how many ‘death by Collies’ have you read about?

I understand peoples need to defend their choices. No problem, I just wish ALL dog owners would be responsible. Over and out!

[sisu27]

@Gestalt

I’m not a big dog hater. But if it suits the story you tell yourself I guess I can be. There are so many fantastic big dog breeds, and sure, within those breeds there is always the possibility of a rogue. But seriously, how many ‘death by Collies’ have you read about?

I understand peoples need to defend their choices. No problem, I just wish ALL dog owners would be responsible. Over and out!

I think you are combining two different things…the cry for a ban of large dogs and my explanation as to why I am not on board with anyone telling me I HAVE to neuter my dogs. I am not at all sure what “suiting the story you tell yourself” means. I don’t tell myself any story as I am confident in my convictions.

I don’t need to defend my choice to keep my dogs intact. In fact in the world I live in I am never even questioned about it. It is not unusual for working dogs to be intact and is required of conformation dogs. I was simply explaining some of the valid reasons why to those that aren’t educated in the matter.

You may not be a big dog hater but some here are. I think that should be a separate conversation from any relating to the Pitbull but that isn’t the way it goes. I am not here to defend the Pitbull…I couldn’t care less other then I don’t want to see any animal suffer. If the breed quietly faded into history that would be ok by me. No other breed has the propensity to become a deadly weapon in the wrong hands like that one does. The point you make is my point…Collies don’t kill people anymore then many, many large breeds but Pitbull kill more then all of them combined. So a ban on Collies makes as much sense as a ban on any other breed of dog Pitbull aside.

[khall]

sisu and all others who are for BSLs on the bullies:
[INDENT]“A study performed by the American Veterinary Medical Association, the CDC, and the Humane Society of the United States, analyzed dog bite statistics from the last 20 years and found that the statistics don’t show that any breeds are inherently more dangerous than others. The study showed that the most popular large breed dogs at any one time were consistently on the list of breeds that bit fatally. There were a high number of fatal bites from Doberman pinschers in the 1970s, for example, because Dobermans were very popular at that time and there were more Dobermans around, and because Dobermans’ size makes their bites more dangerous. The number of fatal bites from pit bulls rose in the 1980s for the same reason, and the number of bites from Rottweilers in the 1990s. The study also noted that there are no reliable statistics for nonfatal dog bites, so there is no way to know how often smaller breeds are biting.”[/INDENT]
In other words, as the story says, “Biting has more to do with circumstances, behavior, training (or lack thereof), and ignorance on the part of human beings.”

It has everything to do with the percentages not the breed.

[skyon]

@khall

sisu and all others who are for BSLs on the bullies:[INDENT]"A study performed by the American Veterinary Medical Association, the CDC, and the Humane Society of the United States, analyzed dog bite statistics from the last 20 years and found that the statistics don’t show that any breeds are inherently more dangerous than others

Who reported that quote above and what singular study is this that was performed by all three - AVMA, CDC and HSUS - a study is normally performed by one entity. - not all three.

Along with the fact that Insurance for housing, Hospital Emergencies, and Insurance in general are not upping their rates due to false data. That is coming from statistics.

[\It has everything to do with the percentages not the breed.

Correct. Which is why chi’s are not on home insurance lists regardless of being biters themselves. The percentage of insurance payout for hospital and lawsuits comes from real destruction to a person.

[MNEventer]

@sisu27

So conclusive evidence via numerous studies that it shortens a dogs lifespan by means of a painful disease is not reason enough? I agree that only the best breeders should breed but I own a dog from one of the best breeders and 1 from an awful breeder (the rescue) and intend to keep them both intact for a long list of reasons. Breeding is not one of them.

All of these discussions come back to people. People are stupid and careless. Despite all the laws in the world people still do really stupid things and will continue to do so. There is always a degree of punishing the good in an effort to curb the bad but where do you draw the line? Education is always good but the dumbest of the dumb are the most impervious to education so that doesn’t help much since they are the bulk of the problem.

The suggestion that leans toward the banning of all large dogs is absurd. If a mentally ill person can still buy a gun at Walmart in the US I can’t see how any serious dog ownership related legislation will fly. But the big dog haters can dream I suppose.

I don’t think it’s wise to base any major veterinary decisions on those studies. A lot them have non-representative samples (such as internet health records and referrals to veterinary specialty hospitals) or small sample sizes. And other data suggest that while speutering may be correlated with higher risk of cancer, it may be because speutered animals are more likely to live long enough to get cancer than intact animals. More here: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com…er-more-often/

Epidemiology is messy. It’s extremely hard to draw causal links and often you’re only looking at a small piece of the puzzle. It’s like comparing the environmental impact of a sedan vs. a UPS truck. Yes, the sedan burns less gas than the truck, but if the truck makes five deliveries in one trip (instead of those five people driving to the store), it’s less gas burned overall. It’s complicated, and everyone has to weigh the risks and rewards.

[skyon]

Another elderly lady attacked by her tenants dogs. Not going to mention the breed. Look it up. Pay attention to how the law works. No charges since the dog attack was on her private property and she had allowed them in. No previous attacks on record.
http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/78-Year-Old-Woman-Attacked-by-Pitbull-in-New-Haven-Officials-432512563.html

Meanwhile in the Petersburg case, the owners are claiming their five pitbulls would never attack since they played with children. What is sad is they are likely going to get away with it since no call was on record.

At the very minimum, I now know how a mother can have her children attacked in child seats, IN HER VAN on her own property, by dogs she did not own. and an owner somehow walk away with no recourse and that people will still cry out poor innocent dog, since it surely was a humans fault.

Take away is once again, get the record started when you first sense a concern and really, really be careful about the dogs allowed on property. You will have no recourse.

[Marshfield]

@CanadianTrotter

I agree with this, except for the dent in my bank account I saw no problems.

I do believe an altered dog is much easier to deal with and train because they are much more relaxed, especially during heat cycles and breeding seasons.

I can’t compete my girls when they’re in heat (AKC rules) but we don’t stop training. I don’t see any difference; they happily bomb around the agility course in their panties. The boys aren’t allowed to be dicks because there’s a girl in heat around. If they’re working, they’re working and it’s just another distraction they’re to work through

[CanadianTrotter]

@skyon

Another elderly lady attacked by her tenants dogs. Not going to mention the breed. Look it up. Pay attention to how the law works. No charges since the dog attack was on her private property and she had allowed them in. No previous attacks on record.
http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/78-Year-Old-Woman-Attacked-by-Pitbull-in-New-Haven-Officials-432512563.html

Meanwhile in the Petersburg case, the owners are claiming their five pitbulls would never attack since they played with children. What is sad is they are likely going to get away with it since no call was on record.

At the very minimum, I now know how a mother can have her children attacked in child seats, IN HER VAN on her own property, by dogs she did not own. and an owner somehow walk away with no recourse and that people will still cry out poor innocent dog, since it surely was a humans fault.

Take away is once again, get the record started when you first sense a concern and really, really be careful about the dogs allowed on property. You will have no recourse.

The neighbour had to beat the pit bull over the head and knock it out in order to stop the attack…too bad he didn’t have pepper spray, that really would have worked.

[CanadianTrotter]

@Marshfield

I can’t compete my girls when they’re in heat (AKC rules) but we don’t stop training. I don’t see any difference; they happily bomb around the agility course in their panties. The boys aren’t allowed to be dicks because there’s a girl in heat around. If they’re working, they’re working and it’s just another distraction they’re to work through

Most well trained working dogs would of course not be much of a problem being intact.

I’m talking about about the average owner that does not have proper control over their dogs, especially in public.

[CanadianTrotter]

@khall

sisu and all others who are for BSLs on the bullies:
[INDENT]“A study performed by the American Veterinary Medical Association, the CDC, and the Humane Society of the United States, analyzed dog bite statistics from the last 20 years and found that the statistics don’t show that any breeds are inherently more dangerous than others. The study showed that the most popular large breed dogs at any one time were consistently on the list of breeds that bit fatally. There were a high number of fatal bites from Doberman pinschers in the 1970s, for example, because Dobermans were very popular at that time and there were more Dobermans around, and because Dobermans’ size makes their bites more dangerous. The number of fatal bites from pit bulls rose in the 1980s for the same reason, and the number of bites from Rottweilers in the 1990s. The study also noted that there are no reliable statistics for nonfatal dog bites, so there is no way to know how often smaller breeds are biting.”[/INDENT]
In other words, as the story says, “Biting has more to do with circumstances, behavior, training (or lack thereof), and ignorance on the part of human beings.”

It has everything to do with the percentages not the breed.

It doesn’t matter how often the smaller breed dogs are biting…it matters how many pit bulls/pit bull types are causing serious injuries and deaths.

People are not dispensable.

[khall]

AVMA study: https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/Li…revention.aspx

CT it matters when ANY dog bite results in a fatality not just any bully breed. That is what you seem to be missing. That is why dangerous dog laws are needed not BSLs. Many breeds cause dog bite fatalities. As for your people are not dispensable I agree, but it is the owners who are at fault not the dogs when dog bite fatalities occur.

[GoodTimes]

@khall

AVMA study: https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/Li…revention.aspx

CT it matters when ANY dog bite results in a fatality not just any bully breed. That is what you seem to be missing. That is why dangerous dog laws are needed not BSLs. Many breeds cause dog bite fatalities. As for your people are not dispensable I agree, but it is the owners who are at fault not the dogs when dog bite fatalities occur.

Can you please explain to us how a dangerous dog law would be worded and enforced in order to prevent dog attacks? Without naming breeds?
BSLs came about in an attempt to prevent attacks. How do you know a dog is dangerous until it has already done something? By then it’s too late.
Do you go by characteristics?

This is a genuine question. I’ve lived in 9 different municipalities in Ontario, Alberta, and Florida. I’ve never encountered a “dangerous dog law” that did anything to prevent dog attacks other than the threat of having the dog euthanized in the event of a bite. Given that no one believes that their precious dog could do such a thing it’s garbage as far as prevention goes.

I’ll be perfectly honest I would never own a bully breed, I think they’re ugly. I will always own large breed dogs, I don’t trust any strange dogs, but there is something about pit types that ensures I never turn my back. They’re quick and agile for their size, they’re strong for their size, and they’re built like tanks with a low center of gravity and wide base of support. Any dog “could” snap, but I’d prefer a dog with some physical characteristics that at least give me a chance of getting the upper hand. There are several other breeds I’d be very hesitant to own for the same reasons.

[CanadianTrotter]

@khall

AVMA study: https://www.avma.org/KB/Resources/Li…revention.aspx

CT it matters when ANY dog bite results in a fatality not just any bully breed. That is what you seem to be missing. That is why dangerous dog laws are needed not BSLs. Many breeds cause dog bite fatalities. As for your people are not dispensable I agree, but it is the owners who are at fault not the dogs when dog bite fatalities occur.

Stop skirting around the issues with your song and dance. I was replying to you saying and bolding, “The study also noted there are no reliable statistics for non fatal dog bites, so there is no way know how often smaller breeds are biting”. Stop deflecting the issue at hand, personally at this time I could care a less how many non fatal/ non serious dog bites there are…I care about severe maulings and fatalities. There are dangerous dog laws in many areas and that is not stopping severe maulings/deaths by pit bulls/types…they need to stop, end of.

Yes, other dogs have and can cause severe maulings and deaths, that’s why those dogs also need stricter laws than those who don’t.

Yes, the owners are at fault, I blame the human race for making the pit bull/types what they are and for the level of destruction they can and do cause, pit bulls did not mutate on their own.

If you are as good of a dog owner/trainer as you claim and are as experienced with pit bulls/types as you say, then you cannot deny that these dogs are bred to cause as much damage and possibly death to its target. You also cannot deny their mentality, characteristics and personalities that when put into a situation to fight or flee…they are going to fight. You cannot deny their stubbornness and tenacity that once they find a target their intent is not to protect/guard…it is to outright kill.

You are enabling and making excuses for something that is killing innocent people on a regular and consistent basis. The attempts at educating their owners,stopping the dogs from getting into the wrong hands or reducing/stopping overpopulation has failed miserably. The only action that is going to dramatically reduce the number of pit bull/types attacks, maulings and deaths is a cull and ban. The idea of giving pit bull advocates time to fix this problem “their way” while large numbers of people continue to be seriously mauled or killed is not only wrong, it’s reprehensible.

No dog’s life is worth more than that of an innocent person’s life.

[CanadianTrotter]

@GoodTimes

Can you please explain to us how a dangerous dog law would be worded and enforced in order to prevent dog attacks? Without naming breeds?
BSLs came about in an attempt to prevent attacks. How do you know a dog is dangerous until it has already done something? By then it’s too late.
Do you go by characteristics?

This is a genuine question. I’ve lived in 9 different municipalities in Ontario, Alberta, and Florida. I’ve never encountered a “dangerous dog law” that did anything to prevent dog attacks other than the threat of having the dog euthanized in the event of a bite. Given that no one believes that their precious dog could do such a thing it’s garbage as far as prevention goes.

I’ll be perfectly honest I would never own a bully breed, I think they’re ugly. I will always own large breed dogs, I don’t trust any strange dogs, but there is something about pit types that ensures I never turn my back. They’re quick and agile for their size, they’re strong for their size, and they’re built like tanks with a low center of gravity and wide base of support. Any dog “could” snap, but I’d prefer a dog with some physical characteristics that at least give me a chance of getting the upper hand. There are several other breeds I’d be very hesitant to own for the same reasons.

Even current dangerous dog laws are too ambiguous and easy to skirt around.

BSL’s, which would obviously be different and not as drastic as a pit bull/type BSL, need to be put in place according to the proven stats/list of dangerous dogs list and their potential to cause the most harm or death. There is no need for a BSL for the dogs that either don’t have the personality or are physically incapable of causing severe harm or death, they can fall under an updated and much stricter dangerous dog law. If by chance that a person is mauled or killed by a chihuahua or other smaller/more docile breed, then yes it should be euthanized and the owner charged to the fullest extent of the law.

I have always owned large dogs and I would have absolutely no problem if a BSL for the dog’s I owned was created.

[khall]

CT: " while large numbers of people continue to be seriously mauled or killed is not only wrong, it’s reprehensible."

Large numbers? Really? Where do you get your statistics? Last I looked there are less than 40 dog bite fatalities per year. That is less than one per state. So no that is no where near “large numbers”. Many many more are killed by guns than by dogs. THAT is reprehensible, that the US cannot pass any kind of sensible gun laws. Thanks to the NRA and GOP.

CT your focus on the bully breeds shows your extreme bias against them. ALL of the studies done shows that no one breed is more likely to bite than another, there are way more factors involved in dog bites than just breed.

No not every single bully is going to fight. So not true. Otherwise there would not be dog after dog found that have been dumped by the fighters for not fighting. There would not be bait dogs if they all fought. Again there goes your bias and ignorance on the bullies.

ANY large dog has the potential to cause much damage. Rotties come to mind here and your favorite breed the GSDs. These two breeds have been bred for protection and to work. They are large powerful breeds that are also found in dog bite fatality statistics.

CT " it matters how many pit bulls/pit bull types are causing serious injuries and deaths."
This is what I was replying to, this bias focus of yours.

CT so you would be ok with killing all the bullies? I just do not see a complete ban of bully breeds changing dog bite fatalities. Studies world wide show that these bans do nothing to change dog bite fatality statistics overall. That is why many countries are rescinding those bans.

Some facts from the CDC study: It’s also important to note which types of dogs are listed as responsible for bites or fatalities changes over time, depending on which types of dogs are popular for negative functions, such as guarding, at that time. The CDC report also discusses this: “[B]reeds responsible for DBRF have varied over time. … As ascertained from our data, between 1979 and 1980, Great Danes caused the most reported human DBRF. … [S]ince 1975, dogs belonging to more than 30 breeds have been responsible for fatal attacks on people, including Dachshunds, a Yorkshire Terrier, and a Labrador Retriever.” (It’s also key to point out that you are more likely to be killed by lightening than a dog, and dog bites are at historic lows.)

• The CDC report concludes that many factors contribute to whether a dog bites or not and recommends breed-neutral laws that focus on owner responsibility and individual dog behavior rather than breed-discriminatory legislation.

Good Times: the only good indicator of future behavior in a dog is prior behavior. In other words you cannot determine whether a dog is “dangerous” unless they have already shown that behavior. Breed is not a reliable factor in determining dangerous behavior. That is what every single study by reputable organizations shows. So much goes into a dogs behavior.

I am all for euthanizing ANY dangerous dog, one that shows unprovoked aggression towards humans and I have done so with a bully that I rescued. He showed aggression to men and children so he did not get to live. I would do so with ANY dog regardless of breed that shows such behavior and especially any large dog that showed this behavior.

[NEEDS_A_NAP]

Another cautionary tale…

https://pilotonline.com/news/local/before-fatal-pit-bull-attack-virginia-beach-dog-rescue-had/article_d62067c1-0b7e-576f-970a-e11efc166d4b.html

I had wondered when I read the original story how this “rescue” stayed in business charging only $20.00 per adoption. This explains it: the Celeita Kramer business model of charging the owners $4,000.00 to take their dogs off their hands, in addition to their “training” fees of $1,000-3,000.00 per class.

But you have to ask, what kind of mindset would prompt you to adopt from a place that advertises it has training classes for dogs with “uncontrollable behavioral problems.” Their “balanced pack” claim sounds vaguely Cesar Milan-ish to me.

This, to me, is kind of the worst of basing your business on reality TV reality. That this place is still in business is scary.

[red_mares]

I would hate to be Linda’s lawyer. She can probably sue the hell out of the rescue, but there is loads of personal responsibility there. If you adopt a pitbull with limited to no history, from a place that advertises dog training for “uncontrollable behavioral problems,” how can you expect nothing bad to happen?

Besides that they cut and paste the same description for every dog. I looked at their website and every one I clicked on was recommended for “older, considerate children” and “goofy”.

[sisu27]

So let’s pretend this can actually happen.

@CanadianTrotter you are also in Ontario I believe. How exactly would this broad BSL law be written? What exactly would it mean to myself and others that own breeds that would be on this list? You have said it would not affect a “good” dog owner which I consider myself to be. Not trying to be a dick at all but seriously considering how it would work.

In my case the irony is that my “dangerous dog” is not a Doberman but my 23lb Jagdterrier. She is not at all aggressive with people but she hates other dogs intensely and is micromanaged to the nth degree. The proposed breeds/parameters would not include her yet she is the one I have to be extraordinarily careful with. That is a breed you cannot train natural drive out of. So I guess she would be one of the small dog exceptions that although she wouldn’t kill a person (highly unlikely anyways) she would kill other dogs given the opportunity and I would be fined or whatever if I let that happen. I would hope that if that did happen and it was due to someone’s dog being loose and on my property she and I would get a pass.

Back to the matter at hand. Would I need to muzzle my Dobes? Would I need to neuter them? Am I paying more to license them? Am I paying more insurance? Am I restricted from bringing them anywhere? How would it work?

My parents travel in a motor home in the winter months to the US. They have a docked/flopped Doberman. At some RV resorts they do not allow Dobes so she is listed as a hound cross. Nobody questions it somehow and I do not blame my parents for fudging that. How are we verifying breeds? What about big mutts?