What's new

Pit Bull attack!

Goldiegirl

先輩
10 Aug 2006
1,624
69
58
On the 22nd of March my husband and black lab, Finn, were attacked by a pit bull dog. It was a vicious attack. I had just gotten out of the shower when I heard screaming and howling. I looked out the window and saw blood all over the snow and my husband and dog rolling around with a pit bull attached to Finn's throat. I ran out barefooted and beat the dog of my husband and Finn. It took me three times to get the dog off. My husband wasn't hurt as he had a thick down winter jacket on but Finn had to go to the emergency vet. He had punctures above his eye and neck and a front toenail ripped off to the bone and the muscle of his shoulder was pulled from the bone and fascia. He's fine though and came through everything like the happy dog he is.

Here is a problem. I want to sue the owners, my husband doesn't. He doesn't want to cause a problem. I wouldn't sue them except for the fact that they witnessed the attack and did NOTHING to help. When I got their dog to release Finn, he ran to them and they went running down the road. I was so angry at them.

I called the sheriff and he said that on his drive to my house he received two more calls of dogs being attacked by a pit bull. The owners have been ticketed for having loose dogs. (there was a 2nd pit bull that watched the attack but didn't do anything) The sheriff said we should press charges and get reimbursed for our vet bill. The bill was just shy of $300.00, and that is all I am looking for. I actually don't care about the money. I want to make a point with these people. You can't have dogs like that running loose. It's not the first time we have had run ins with them. They are loose at least 3-4 times a week! Once they went for Finn when he was 12 weeks old! So I know that this isn't a one time accident.

I am also starting a petition to either ban pit bulls or require them to have a special license. My neighbors are all in favor. I am not sure though how I feel on this though. I think any dog can be vicious, and don't want to single out any one dog breed, but pit bulls are bred to be aggressive and with out proper care, conditioning and training they can be just as dangerous as a loaded gun. You have to have a background check to get a gun and have a license, why should it be any different with a dog that has the potential to be a killer? I am just not sure. I love dogs.

What do you all think?
 
I would at least talk to a lawyer about it.................

if it doesn't cost anything, not fair you should have to pay. Chances are the dogs would be put down if it went to court, when it's the owners who should be put down. The best outcome would require the owners to prove they can be fenced in with no chance to escape again and they pay your vet bills and court costs. You husband and dog are lucky, usually a pit bull will not break off an attack until their victim is dead. Sure sounds like the owners are the problem here.

Uncle Frank

:(
 
I agree the owners are a problem. If my dog was killed it would have been terrible, but what about my husband or my nieces and nephews or the other kids in the neighborhood. I have all these what if scenarios going through my head! I can go to small claims for the actual cost of the vet bill, the sheriff wrote up an excellent report, and thankfully my dogs are licensed and current on all the required vaccines. I am not looking for punitive damages or pain and suffering. I want to make a point with these people. I think once dogs attack like this one did, there isn't much hope for it being a "safe" dog ever again. Yes their are people like the dog whisperer who will say it can be done, but these are not people who are going to do anything. I don't want to sound mean but they are renters in a low cost rental. They don't have the money to properly take care of their animals. But just because they don't have a lot of money, they should have had the common decency to help me get their dog off my husband and dog. Finn was being suffocated to death. His tongue had turned bluish, black! I had to beat the pit bull on the head and eyes to finally get him to release the third time. I was like a wild woman. I knew I had to act like the bigger threat to this dog, he turned for me and I thought I was dead. I just went nuts and attacked the dog! I can only imagine what I looked like!
 
The owners are at fault here; recall that famous San Francisco case? In this particular case, you should talk to your husband most lovingly, and explain that it is only fair and just that the matter be delt with, otherwise, in the future, if some child is actually killed by one of the dogs (and such has happened before, if my memory serves me well, and I do recall at least one slightly famous face surgery need on one lady) part of the responsibility of that child's death could be said (in a way of looking at it) as resting on the shoulders of those who didn't act...if you catch my drift.

In all natural fairness, you two should act, you should get the owners to cover the vet costs, because their extended family incurred the cost. Also, any clothing replacement costs should be added. If the case ends up that the dogs have to be taken from the family, and eventually are put to death...that is simply the way of nature. If it had been in the wild, the same would have happened--either the attacker wins or looses. In this case, it is fair to win. Please do pursue it !
 
I am going to show my husband your post. I have tried to explain, that it's not a money issue. It's the principal. We are responsible owners and did nothing wrong in this attack. The pit bull was loose and on our back yard! How do you feel safe again? It's not fair that we no longer walk our dogs in the back woods and now walk on the road. The sheriff told us to get pepper spray to protect ourselves. It makes me feel so sad that it's come down to this. Honestly if they would've helped, and even showed some remorse I wouldn't have thought of suing them. I just can't imagine what went through their heads while they were watching this whole bloody scene unfold in front of them.
 
I am also starting a petition to either ban pit bulls or require them to have a special license. My neighbors are all in favor. I am not sure though how I feel on this though. I think any dog can be vicious, and don't want to single out any one dog breed, but pit bulls are bred to be aggressive and with out proper care, conditioning and training they can be just as dangerous as a loaded gun. You have to have a background check to get a gun and have a license, why should it be any different with a dog that has the potential to be a killer? I am just not sure. I love dogs.




I don't personally believe pit bulls are aggressive dogs by nature, by nature they are very loving and loyal animals and can make great family pets- what makes a pit bull aggressive is how the owner trains it and treats it.

Unfortunately many pit bulls end up in the hands of bad owners because the media paints the image of these dogs as violent, aggressive and strong dogs- unfortunately because of this media image, many idiots who just want a dog as a status symbol to make them look hard end up buying pit bulls, and many of these sorts of owners will actively encourage the dog to be aggressive.

The only person who would want to breed a pit bull to be aggressive is someone who shouldn't be breeding dogs at all.

Your quote;

"but pit bulls are bred to be aggressive and with out proper care, conditioning and training they can be just as dangerous as a loaded gun"

Really don't you think that this can be true for any dog?


Anyways, some tips on how to behave when you get attacked by a dog;

A Threatened Dog Often Bites

* Never run from or scream at a dog.
* Do not challenge the dog by staring it right in the eye.
* Be as still as possible if approached by an unfamiliar dog.
* If a dog knocks you over, roll into a ball and stay still.

Dog Owners CAN Help

* Spay / neuter your dog, this can calm them down.
* Train your dog in obedience.
* DO NOT play aggressive games with your dog.
* Keep your dog healthy, an unnoticed injury can make a dog aggressive.
* Follow leash laws.
* Unsocialized dogs that are left outside are more likely to bite than those maintained as house dogs.

http://www.plasticsurgery4u.com/procedure_folder/dog_bite.html



Did this dogs owners have this dog on a leash?

The main problem is, is that if you press charges against these people the dog will mostly likely be killed for its violent behavior, however i think this is such a shame considering that the whole situation sounds largely like the owners fault rather than the dogs- it will be killed for their irresponsible behavior.

"First it was the Bloodhound, sensationalized in the dramatizations of Uncle Tom's Cabin. Then it was the Doberman Pinscher, symbol of the Nazi menace for a nation at war. Today, it is the Pit bull that is vilified for the depravity of his master.

At perhaps no time in history has mankind been as ignorant of natural canine behavior as we find ourselves at the beginning of the 21st century. The human/dog bondツ―the most complex and profound inter-species relationship in the history of mankindツ―has now been reduced to a simple axiom: Breed of dog = degree of dangerousness";

Fatal Dogs Attacks: The Best Dog Stories Behind the Statistics Review


The problem is not the breed, but rather the people.
 
The dog is a proven vicious dog...it mauled 3 dogs in the span of an hour. I think it is an aggressive dog, and it is owned by people who obviously can not manage it. There ARE different levels of aggression bred into certain breeds of dogs based on what there use was going to be. For instance my lab is a retriever he is in no way an attack or even guard dog, my sister-in-laws yorkie although small is more aggressive and can catch and kill small rodents. So it is uneducated to say that pit bulls aren't more aggressive, they are, it's what they were bred to do, so you need to be the right kind of person to own and breed them. Can any dog be aggressive, of course, but by nature it's easier to work with a a dog that has a natural tendency towards aggression.
 
I am also starting a petition to either ban pit bulls or require them to have a special license. My neighbors are all in favor. I am not sure though how I feel on this though. I think any dog can be vicious, and don't want to single out any one dog breed, but pit bulls are bred to be aggressive and with out proper care, conditioning and training they can be just as dangerous as a loaded gun. You have to have a background check to get a gun and have a license, why should it be any different with a dog that has the potential to be a killer? I am just not sure. I love dogs.
What do you all think?
Not much. Only because I know too many EXTREMELY responsible owners who keep either half or full pits indoors, mostly as guard dogs in drug infested neighborhoods, without the animals so much as scratching the furniture but who would find a license fee burdensome. A regulatory system would almost certainly have the effect of pushing not only them but the problems of Fighting, Neglect, Abandonment and Dangerous dogs even further underground.
 
The dog is a proven vicious dog...it mauled 3 dogs in the span of an hour. I think it is an aggressive dog, and it is owned by people who obviously can not manage it. There ARE different levels of aggression bred into certain breeds of dogs based on what there use was going to be. For instance my lab is a retriever he is in no way an attack or even guard dog, my sister-in-laws yorkie although small is more aggressive and can catch and kill small rodents. So it is uneducated to say that pit bulls aren't more aggressive, they are, it's what they were bred to do, so you need to be the right kind of person to own and breed them. Can any dog be aggressive, of course, but by nature it's easier to work with a a dog that has a natural tendency towards aggression.


Well you yourself have just stated the reason why this dog has issues- its not because of its breed, but because the owners can't manage to look after the dog properly. It wouldn't matter what type of breed of dog the owners had, the fact still remains that they don't seem to know how to train a dog properly. They could have a German Shepard, a Beagle, a Collie etc and it would make an ounce of difference to their ability to train the dog.

Pit bulls were never bred to be aggressive towards people, they were bred to be able to subdue a bull by bitting its ankles if the bull tried to gore its owner. Thus any aggression they display towards people is not normal or desired- however almost all cases of dogs being aggressive towards people come about either because the dog hasn't been brought up properly or the person is not treating the dog properly.

"Statistics about dog bites are difficult to analyze because the term "pit bull" may be used to refer to other breeds. The differences in appearance which separate dog breeds are often hard to determine. Generally, dogs are categorized by differences in outward physical attributes. Recently, the decoding of the canine genome has allowed scientific testing to determine dog breeds, but this method is not yet widely used.[3] Because of these uncertainties, statistics regarding dog bites are scientifically suspect. Yet another problem in gathering data is the lack of information about the total dog population. Despite the lack of hard data, public perception is that pit bulls are more likely to bite than other breeds.[4]

"The problem with statistics appears to be that there is no consistency in where the figures are obtained, nor are there variables included in most studies. Some studies use AKC numbers, some use HSUS numbers and others use CDC&P numbers. Few include causes or contributing circumstances to the attacks, nor are the total numbers of dogs in a certain breed taken into consideration. There is no national recording system for non-fatal dog bites in the United States."";

Pit bull - Wikipedia

"In many shelters across the United States, Pit Bulls or dogs that appear to be Pit Bulls comprise a large portion of the shelter's population and may be destroyed due to the stigma associated with the breed (or because of overcrowding). [6]

Nevertheless, they can and often do make wonderful family pets and featured on the American Little Rascals and Our Gang television shows. The American Temperament Testing Society gives the American Pit Bull Terrier breed a "pass" percentage of 84.1%. The average of all breeds is 81.5%. [7]

While friendliness and tolerance towards humans are traits of the breed [4], there are, as in any breed, those that are dangerous toward humans. Many attacks by other dog breeds are misclassified as "pit bulls" by media reports.[8]

Any owner of a Pit Bull must train the dog well. Lack of proper socialization and strong training can result in a dog with aggressive tendencies. Under the care of an overly-permissive or uneducated owner, Pit Bulls (or any other large breed) can become very dangerous dogs.";

Pit bull - Wikipedia


This isn't a problem with the breed, its a problem with the people that end up keeping the dogs- even in your situation with the pit bull that attacked, this is clear that this is the case. I don't think you are right to call me "uneducated", when there is a lot of good evidence that support my opinions.
 
Not much. Only because I know too many EXTREMELY responsible owners who keep either half or full pits indoors, mostly as guard dogs in drug infested neighborhoods, without the animals so much as scratching the furniture but who would find a license fee burdensome. A regulatory system would almost certainly have the effect of pushing not only them but the problems of Fighting, Neglect, Abandonment and Dangerous dogs even further underground.


I agree, banning the breed won't solve the problem of the many bad owners that keep the poor animals. The general public has gone through many phases over history of attaching stigma to certain breeds of dogs, from Bloodhounds to Dobermans etc- the Pit bull is simply the modern equivilent to these old breed stigma's. Yes, a Pit Bulls bite can inflict a lot of damage, but they are not aggressive dogs by nature, according to the American Temperament Test Society, a Bullmastiff has a worse tempera ment (77% score) than an American Pit Bull Terrier (84.3% score), yet i don't see anyone trying to ban Bullmastiff's for their temperament. ATTS;

http://www.atts.org/index.html
 
I'd find the owners' house and break their window with a nice brick, if they start to whine, I'd just tell them that they better **** or I'll bloody sue them.
 
I'd find the owners' house and break their window with a nice brick, if they start to whine, I'd just tell them that they better **** or I'll bloody sue them.


Lol to sue someone is such the American way 😌 . Seriously though, the owners of this Pit Bull should be forced to attend dog training classes or be banned from keeping a dog again- its pretty obvious in this cases that they bought a dog which they could not handle or train properly, and its likely that because of this the dog will be put down now.

IMHO, too many people buy dogs (especially puppies) not realizing how much work needs to be put into looking after them properly, and the dog ends up developing into a less than desirable animal because of it. All dogs need a lot of time, energy, money and general devotion put into them. No one breed is necessarily easier to look after than another, because all dogs are individual animals and they all need a lot of work put into raising them well.
 
It is simply uneducated to say that certain breeds are not prone to be more aggressive. The fact is humans have bred dogs to do jobs for them. You would be hard pressed to train a king charles spaniel to become a guard dog, they were bred to be lap dogs. To say that people alone make a dog what it is, is simply oversimplification. Yes there are pit bulls that are well behaved, yes there are german shepherds that are well behave ( i owned one). The fact is that certain breeds have been bred and have the ability to be easily trained or neglected into aggressive behavior. I was vet tech for 8 years, I have seen many dogs. I was more likely to get bit by a terrier breed than a retriever breed, that doesn't mean all terriers are terrible, it's just their nature. Certain breeds were developed to be watch dogs, guardian dogs, herding dogs, they have to be smart and they have to be willing to act aggressively. My lab would never be a herding dog no matter how much training he received, it's not his nature, he will however retrieve any thrown object. We as humans bred certain traits into dogs, not every dog will express that trait in a negative way, or in any way for that matter, but the fact is MOST have the ability.

I am not suing for money. My husband and my dog were attacked on OUR property. Why should I have to pay for the wounds inflicted on my dog? We did nothing wrong. If suing is the American way, then, I am doing the American thing. I protect my family and what is mine.
 
It is simply uneducated to say that certain breeds are not prone to be more aggressive. The fact is humans have bred dogs to do jobs for them. You would be hard pressed to train a king charles spaniel to become a guard dog, they were bred to be lap dogs. To say that people alone make a dog what it is, is simply oversimplification. Yes there are pit bulls that are well behaved, yes there are german shepherds that are well behave ( i owned one). The fact is that certain breeds have been bred and have the ability to be easily trained or neglected into aggressive behavior. I was vet tech for 8 years, I have seen many dogs. I was more likely to get bit by a terrier breed than a retriever breed, that doesn't mean all terriers are terrible, it's just their nature. Certain breeds were developed to be watch dogs, guardian dogs, herding dogs, they have to be smart and they have to be willing to act aggressively. My lab would never be a herding dog no matter how much training he received, it's not his nature, he will however retrieve any thrown object. We as humans bred certain traits into dogs, not every dog will express that trait in a negative way, or in any way for that matter, but the fact is MOST have the ability.

I am not suing for money. My husband and my dog were attacked on OUR property. Why should I have to pay for the wounds inflicted on my dog? We did nothing wrong. If suing is the American way, then, I am doing the American thing. I protect my family and what is mine.



Yes but what you were previously saying is that Pit Bulls are inherently aggressive by nature and so they should be banned (you called it the "dog that has the potential to be a killer).

Working dogs like Pit Bulls were bred for a good loyal and trustworthy nature, they were bred for their physique and their intelligence- they were never bred to be aggressive towards people. You are saying that in essence Pit Bulls should be banned because its in their temperament to attack people- this is not true at all, and IMHO, pretty much all cases of Pit Bulls have far more to do with the way its raised than because of the breed it is.

You say you were more likely to get bitten as a vet assistant by certain breeds than others, did you not consider that the dogs behavior has more to do with how the owners raised it rather than because it has (in your opinion) an inherently aggressive aspect to its nature (more so than other dog breeds)? If a family you knew got a pit bull, would you be against them having one?
A lot of people keep Pit Bulls because of the social stigma attached to them, these people want the dog as a status symbol to make them look hard etc- they often actively encourage the dog to be aggressive. If such pit bulls do become aggressive, it is not because its the dogs fault, but rather the owners fault.

If you ban the dogs, you will simply take away the millions of loved pit bulls which are living happily and safely with their families. If you make people get a license of these dogs, you will only end up pushing up their status as a symbol of wealth in bad communities, and so more people will buy the animals for the wrong reasons. You also cannot prove that someone is going to be a good owner by making them buy a license to get the dog, and by putting in a licensing system you will only encourage more back yard breeding of these dogs as there will probably be plenty of people that will want the dog breed but don't want to buy a license for it etc.

Surely you see that banning a breed (which on the whole makes a great family pet) is far too draconian? And surely you see that making people apply for licenses (which will cost money) to keep such a breed of dog won't actually ensure they look after it properly?

These are the true colors of the pit bull;






Pit Bulls are not a danger to society and do not deserve to be banned. You got unlucky- a dog attacked your partner, the owners did not raise this dog properly which is why it behaved the way it did. If this dog had happened to have been a Collie, would you be calling out for the ban of Collies like you are with Pit Bulls now?

Edit: Another video you should see;

"American Pit Bull; American Tragedy";



What you are doing is discriminating against a particular breed of dog- you call me uneducated for trying not to discriminate against pit bulls, but i think its you who is the one ignorant of the the American Pit Bull tragedy- you really think banning the breed is a good thing for our society? Because of the stigma which you perpetuate along with the media of these dogs, its one of the main reasons why they become such victims of abuse.
 
I've had a similar situation with uncaring neighbors.
Best thing to do is get a petition signed with local animal control folks, if you have them in your area, and get as many neighbors to sign it as possible, then have the animal control folks go to them and let them take care of the situation. Each state and city/county may have different rules...but if enough people complain, something will get done.
 
While this isn't particularly the Serious Discussion sub-forum, it is interesting to look into matters regarding animal disposition by genetic/hereditary linage, as well as by individual environment...as there would be an overlap to that, for sure.

In that there are animals which can be dangerous to other life forms, it should be a natural matter of concern about how the members of those animal social groups fit in with that of others. (how could I make that more general? hee, hee, hee..)

With certain breeds of dogs, mixed in with human society with or without training, there is an element of possible danger. With a breed of dog which is generally recognized to have an average disposition towards aggresiveness, depending on human involvement, it is more econocial to apply control over presence and ownership that it is to inspect ownership's environment, and control that.

Therefore, regarding the ownership of certain breeds of dogs, or other animals naturally disposed to possible aggresiveness, it would be best to have some way of restricting it; thus a license would be a more economically productive method of allowing that animal to intermix with human society.
 
Last edited:
Hm well i do sympathize with you Goldy Girl, it must have been a scary situation, but i just disagree with you wanting to ban or license these animals right now.
 
With certain breeds of dogs, mixed in with human society with or without training, there is an element of possible danger. With a breed of dog which is generally recognized to have an average disposition towards aggresiveness, depending on human involvement, it is more econocial to apply control over presence and ownership that it is to inspect ownership's environment, and control that.
Therefore, regarding the ownership of certain breeds of dogs, or other animals naturally disposed to possiblyeaggresiveness, it would be best to have some way of restricting it; thus a license would be a more economically productive method of allowing that animal to intermix with human society.

The problem with the pit bull is that there is a lot of hype and stigma attached to the breed which has mostly largely been a modern thing- this hype and stigma has not always been around, if pit bulls were truly inheriantly aggressive then they were have always had a bad reputation for such stuff as far back as their history goes- unfortunately i believe that the public perception of their temperament is largely influenced by the media, which will almost always be biased. Numerous other dog breeds (like Dobermans or Bloodhounds) have been at the brunt in the past of the same sort of stigma that pit bulls receive now days, except these other breeds no longer have the same stigma as times have changed- i believe that one day, as has happened in the past, a new dog breed will replace the pit bull as a breed to fear as times change.

One of the main problems with all of this inherent aggressiveness in pit bulls problem is that none of the statistics are reliable as so many of them do not take a lot of important factors into consideration (like no one really knows how large the population of pit bulls is, and info on the situation/circumstances of the dog attack is rarely taken in etc)- so we cannot really accurately suggest that these dogs are in their nature any more aggressive than any other dog.
Until we get more accurate information and statistics, then to discriminate against the dog would be just that and nothing more.
 
One key point in the description here, would surely be the following:

naturally disposed to possible aggresiveness

From my recollection, as well as my sister's experience in 'dog handling' in California, and, what we have here on this thread, it is clear enough that there are a number of breeds of dogs, the pit bull being one of them, that have that natural disposition to more easily be possibly aggressive. This is true in that, as an example, we would almost surely never hear of an attack (regardless of lack in care and training) on humans by a French Poodle.

Therefore while it may well be true that the media's focus on the Pit Bull has, to whatever degree and in whatever manner, given that breed a negative image in the eye of the public, it is nevertheless true that some breeds of dogs have a natural disposition wherein there is a greater margin for aggresiveness to be displayed--especially without proper training and care.

I reason, therefore, that any evidence that a society would need, is already there. That some domestic breeds of dogs have a greater potential for an agressive act than other breeds, and that all these breeds need to be given consideration. For such reasons, as the logic goes, most cities in many post-industrial nations surely have 'leash laws,' for dogs, whereas cats can run free. (In Japan it's a national law...I do believe.)
 
One key point in the description here, would surely be the following:
naturally disposed to possible aggresiveness
From my recollection, as well as my sister's experience in 'dog handling' in California, and, what we have here on this thread, it is clear enough that there are a number of breeds of dogs, the pit bull being one of them, that have that natural disposition to more easily be possibly aggressive. This is true in that, as an example, we would almost surely never hear of an attack (regardless of lack in care and training) on humans by a French Poodle.
Therefore while it may well be true that the media's focus on the Pit Bull has, to whatever degree and in whatever manner, given that breed a negative image in the eye of the public, it is nevertheless true that some breeds of dogs have a natural disposition wherein there is a greater margin for aggresiveness to be displayed--especially without proper training and care.
I reason, therefore, that any evidence that a society would need, is already there. That some domestic breeds of dogs have a greater potential for an agressive act than other breeds, and that all these breeds need to be given consideration. For such reasons, as the logic goes, most cities in many post-industrial nations surely have 'leash laws,' for dogs, whereas cats can run free. (In Japan it's a national law...I do believe.)


You'll never guess what, but i was attacked by a French Poodle once 😊 .

Anyways, i agree better leash laws need to be put into place, but i don't think the breed itself should have to be banned, or that people would have to buy a license to keep it (that could create a whole range of other problems). If it makes people happy, then the dog could be made to wear a muzzle so it can't bite even if it wants to.
 
And part two begins...another ATTACK this morning and the sheriff is on the way.


Its the owners fault that the dog is like this (a dog with good training wouldn't do this), and to be honest i'm surprised the dog wasn't taken in yesterday- why wasn't the dog caught yesterday when such a disturbed aggressive dog is on the loose? I ask you again though, if this dog was a breed like a collie, would you be wanting to ban or license collies as a breed? Or is it simply because of this one dog that has made you want to do this all of a sudden?
I don't see your motive in writing "attack" in caps lock- whats your point? This particular dog is obviously disturbed (no one is debating that), but that doesn't mean its entire breed needs to be abolished etc.

Honestly, those owners need a proper beating with a stick driven through with a rusty nail.


They shouldn't be allowed to keep any dog again considering how poorly they've trained this one. Part of a dog owners responsibility is to train their dog properly so it behaves itself well in public. A dog like this couldn't have become this aggressive so quickly with no other signs of this in its behavior, the owners must have known that it had issues before these incidents happened- a good dog doesn't just suddenly start mauling other dogs and people one day for no particular reason with no past warning etc.
 
Last edited:
Its the owners fault that the dog is like this (a dog with good training wouldn't do this), and to be honest i'm surprised the dog wasn't taken in yesterday- why wasn't the dog caught yesterday when such a disturbed aggressive dog is on the loose?
Yeah, me too. I don't know what laws are in place here but certainly there are jurisdictions where the owners of roaming, aggressive dogs would face felony charges and substantial jail time (5-10 yrs?) for a serious injury attack.
 
As far as I'm concerned, there has been way too much unnecessary discussion here about the intrinsic qualities of Pit Bulls. The main point is that the owners of the vicious dog (and this particular dog is obviously vicious) ought to suffer severe negative consequences for the actions of their dog. I think it is almost certain that they are not so much unable to control the dog as they are unwilling to control it. It would not surprise me at all if they strongly approve of the dog's behavior. There are such people.
 
Back
Top Bottom