Woman suing owner of dog that her dogs killed

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
a reply to: Lyxdeslic

The AmStaff is considered to be a pitbull, but so is the APBT ( American Pit Bull Terrier). They used to be the same, but the bloodlines are now separate. That's why people say pit bull "type". They're generally talking about these two breeds or any dog that looks like them.

Here's an article about it. Source

There is no breed with the name “Pit Bull.” When that term is used, it’s usually referring to either American Staffordshire Terriers or American Pit Bull Terriers, and sometimes to the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, a British breed. It’s also a label given to any dog who resembles those breeds, even if that dog is a Lab mix and has little or no “pit bull” in his background.

Right, I just mean that if you use another name, over just "pitbull" people tend to give a better reaction. It registers in peoples heads as not being as dangerous, or not dangerous at all.

a reply to: Lyxdeslic

Ah! I see. Yes, a "terrier" sounds much less dangerous to the majority of the public.

originally posted by: NightSkyeB4Dawn

originally posted by: Tangerine


I once had a rescued pitbull and a 20 lb terrier mix. The 20 lb terrier mix used to lie in the center of the bed and the pitbull would walk up to the bed, reach out and kiss her. She, the 20 lb terrier, would respond by jumping on his head and biting him. The 70 lb pitbull's response was to walk around the room shaking his head and making an "ooooh" sound as if to say, "Ooooh, I don't know why she did that. Oooooh, poor me." A friend had a 10 lb dog and my pitbull used to play tug of war with him and let the little dog believe it was an even match.

My Charlie ( a Yellow Lab Chow mix rescue) would do that also, especially when Nia (my second Rhodesian Ridgeback rescue) was a puppy. She was smart enough to know that if she didn't let the smaller or weaker dog win, they would stop playing.

All of my animals are rescue animals, even my turtle. I Have a Ridgeless Ridgeback (too often people's first guess is that he is a pit bull, shows you how much some people know about dog breeds. To be fair, most people don't know what a Rhodesian Ridgeback is anyway. I saved two less than perfect specimens because the breeder couldn't afford to feed a puppy that wasn't going to bring a return on her investment. One is a beautiful classic Ridgeback with an impressive pedigree, but she had a dermoid cyst, so she had to be put down. I couldn't let that happen, so she became another member of my pack of misfits.

I applaud you for rescuing animals.

I was at a major veterinary hospital once sitting in the waiting room with my pit bull mix. Another woman was sitting with her huge Rhodesian Ridgeback. Someone entered the room with a billy goat. My pit bull mix jumped up on the bench I was sitting on and put his front half in my lap and his back half in the lap of the person sitting next to me (fortunately, she was a dog-lover) to get as far away from the goat as he could. The Rhodesian Ridgeback hid her head under her person's arm. They were terrified of that goat!

originally posted by: Lyxdeslic

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Tangerine

My dog was six months old, didn't even have his adult teeth yet, and when I said he's was a Pitbull (he's solid black so people had a hard time telling what he is) they'd back away. I always wanted to ask them if they were seriously THAT terrified of a dog that wasn't even as long as my arm (he was the runt, and is always going to be tiny).

Make up a different breed name. My boyfriend used to tell people that our pitbull was a Yontshire terrier. There's no such thing but it usually prevented an immediate negative reaction to him.

Very true.


Mhm. What's funny is if you use the actual name for a Pitbull "American Staffordshire Terrier," people don't cry danger. Because they don't know they are the same as "Pitbulls." It's how when I was younger we were able to get our pitbulls into a town that didn't allow Pitbulls. That shows just how ignorant some people are. It's one thing to be scared of something for a reason, and for you to be educated on that reason.

originally posted by: Lyxdeslic

originally posted by: queenofswords

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: queenofswords
We will have to agree to disagree, BH. This breed is a dangerous unpredictable breed, imo. I just had a conversation with a law enforcement friend about this issue, and he said that when they get a call about a dog attack, about 75% of the time, a pit bull is involved. I personally think that most people that insist on owning this breed are either thug-wanabes or gentle loving kind-hearted people that can't stand to see pits "discriminated" against and therefore adopt them to give them a loving home. That's good.

I don't know where you live but that suggests that almost everyone has a pitbull or the cop is ignorant.

How so? ??? You aren't making sense. Let me reiterate. About 75% of the calls pertaining to dog attacks involve a pit bull. Simple. If there are 100 calls in a month/year/whatever about a dog attacking someone, 75 of those will involve pit bulls. No ignorant cop here as far as I can calculate....but, otoh...????

According to dogsbite.org between 2005 and 2013, two dog breeds accounted for 74% of attacks that resulted in death. Pitbulls and Rottweilers. What do these dogs have in common? Both are used as fighting and bait dogs.
According to LiveScience.com, the majority of dog bite fatalities are in these breeds:
-Pitbulls.
-Rottweilers.
-German Shepherds.
-Huskies.
-Wolf Hybrids.
-Malamutes.
-Dobermans.
-ChowChows.
-Saint Bernards.
-Great Danes.

Do you hold all of those breeds to the same standards? They are equally as dangerous as the others and have fatally bitten someone. You want to know what all of those dogs have in common? They are protective by instinct. And BIG DOGS.
I mean... A Great Dane is bigger than most women. Big dogs are more dangerous than little ones. The same as a big person being more dangerous than a small person. More weight, more muscle. Pitbulls, rottweilers, German shepherds, Huskies and wolf hybrids all have the same 'lock jaw' that some people have talked about here. Do you hold them to the same standards? Honestly, I don't think anyone can talk and be taken seriously about a breed until they own one, or have spent time around them. Not just zoned in on these incidents. I say this because often times, no one reports the victims play in the incident. A lot of times they are kids. Kids who play and don't know the signs of a dog 'saying' "get away from me." Kids tease animals, too. An untrained dog will growl, and bark, and probably try to bite. That's where ownership comes into play. A dog depends on the owner, like a child depends on a parent. A bad owner will equal a bad dog. My suggestion? Spend time at a pitbull rescue and see the difference between trained and untrained.

No dog has a jaw that locks. Please don't perpetuate that nonsense even if you didn't mean it literally. I agree with the rest that you said. A significant percentage of the people who get these dogs want them to be aggressive and abuse or otherwise encourage them to be so. Some are simply ignorant about dogs and don't realize that they have to be trained and socialized. Many of them have the same lax attitude toward their children.

I'm always surprised by the number of people who, despite the huge numbers of dogs, know nothing about dog behavior and can't read dog body language. It's a testament to the non-aggressive temperament of most dogs that these people aren't bitten on a regular basis. Kids usually get bitten because they approach strange dogs, hug or maul them, run or jump around and make high-pitched sounds. That's the parents' fault but the kids and, ultimately, the dogs, pay the price. When I was a teenager, I had a beautiful collie who would literally cringe when she heard the word "Lassie" because it was inevitably followed by a horde of strange kids pulling wagons and riding tricycles coming toward her, throwing their arms around her and hugging her. Fortunately, she had the sweetest disposition and never bit.

Unfortunately, it's human nature to tense up and stare at that which we perceive to be threatening and that's what people who are dog phobic do when they encounter dogs. Doing those two things sends a threat message to the dog because that's how canines threaten each other. Submissive dogs will back off unless they're confined or tied and can't. Dominant dogs will meet the challenge. It's no different from two men meeting and one threatening the other except, in this case, the human doesn't have a clue that s/he is threatening the dog. Another thing that triggers bad results in some dog breeds (herding breeds, for example) is running. They're bred to chase and herd and a human they might otherwise ignore gets chased and nipped when s/he runs. Often, the nip is superficial but the person feels that s/he has been attacked by a big dog.

As for the likely behavior of dogs, I always tell people to look at the other end of the leash. I may be mistaken, but I think I heard somewhere that in Germany dog owners are required to train their dogs and learn about dog behavior. Great idea. Considering how many dogs there are, we should also train people, starting with children, how to behave around dogs and dog behavior. It's one of those practical skills that gets overlooked in the educational system.

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: Lyxdeslic

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Tangerine

My dog was six months old, didn't even have his adult teeth yet, and when I said he's was a Pitbull (he's solid black so people had a hard time telling what he is) they'd back away. I always wanted to ask them if they were seriously THAT terrified of a dog that wasn't even as long as my arm (he was the runt, and is always going to be tiny).

Make up a different breed name. My boyfriend used to tell people that our pitbull was a Yontshire terrier. There's no such thing but it usually prevented an immediate negative reaction to him.

Very true.


Mhm. What's funny is if you use the actual name for a Pitbull "American Staffordshire Terrier," people don't cry danger. Because they don't know they are the same as "Pitbulls." It's how when I was younger we were able to get our pitbulls into a town that didn't allow Pitbulls. That shows just how ignorant some people are. It's one thing to be scared of something for a reason, and for you to be educated on that reason.

Yes, it's amazing how our perception of people and animals is prejudiced by labels. I always made a point of getting colorful collars for my big dogs to send the subtle message that they weren't dangerous. You have no idea how difficult it is to find a pink collar big enough for a large dog.

a reply to: Tangerine

It also doesn't help that a huge number of "Pitbull" attacks are actually Pitbull TYPE dogs. Dogs that look anything like a Pitbull get labeled Pitbull, and counted as an attack by one. You can see it when you look at the statistics. And of course they get labeled as Pitbull attacks, which gives them ore of a bad name.

When pit bulls get out of their confines and form packs they are aggressive and dangerous animals, end of story.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Tangerine

It also doesn't help that a huge number of "Pitbull" attacks are actually Pitbull TYPE dogs. Dogs that look anything like a Pitbull get labeled Pitbull, and counted as an attack by one. You can see it when you look at the statistics. And of course they get labeled as Pitbull attacks, which gives them ore of a bad name.

Pitbull hysteria was concocted and spread by the media. The damage is done. It will be several generations before the negative publicity is forgotten about.

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Tangerine

It also doesn't help that a huge number of "Pitbull" attacks are actually Pitbull TYPE dogs. Dogs that look anything like a Pitbull get labeled Pitbull, and counted as an attack by one. You can see it when you look at the statistics. And of course they get labeled as Pitbull attacks, which gives them ore of a bad name.

Pitbull hysteria was concocted and spread by the media. The damage is done. It will be several generations before the negative publicity is forgotten about.

Why? Why would the media even want to vilify a dog breed? I understand them vilifying a political party, a cable news channel, religion, or another person.....but a breed of dog? Makes absolutely no sense.

I didn't realize Huskies were on the bite list that high up.

Here's my 1 year old girl on Halloween with about 200 adults and only god knows how many kids, but it was 3-4 times the adults. I have an advantage here though as I'm very rural and most parents train their kids to ask before petting, out of who knows how many kids ALL of them asked before touching. She was a busy girl hehe.

I had 3 dogs there that night, and they all loved it. We don't do door to door because it's too spread out so we have trick or treat at our local park, it's a hoot with what seems like everyone in town there hehe.



Lil

a reply to: ItCameFromOuterSpace

Don't blame the dogs, blame the owners. Honestly smaller breeds are worse, I grew up with one of the worst (as a study has shown) Weinerdogs. They are agressive little sods. But given they were breed to go down a hole after badgers, that explains a LOT.

a reply to: queenofswords

Just look back and you'll clearly see the media doing it. St Bernards when Cujo came out, then it was German Shepards, then it was Rottweilers and Doberman types, now it's Pitbulls. They'll do anything to keep their ratings up, and dog attacks are one way to keep their ratings up.

originally posted by: queenofswords

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Tangerine

It also doesn't help that a huge number of "Pitbull" attacks are actually Pitbull TYPE dogs. Dogs that look anything like a Pitbull get labeled Pitbull, and counted as an attack by one. You can see it when you look at the statistics. And of course they get labeled as Pitbull attacks, which gives them ore of a bad name.

Pitbull hysteria was concocted and spread by the media. The damage is done. It will be several generations before the negative publicity is forgotten about.

Why? Why would the media even want to vilify a dog breed? I understand them vilifying a political party, a cable news channel, religion, or another person.....but a breed of dog? Makes absolutely no sense.

The various forms of media don't make money unless someone pays to read, listen to or view their product. Collectively, they manufacture all sorts of drama that wouldn't otherwise exist. Surely, you've noticed this. If one story about one topic gets feedback, they manufacture or enhance different stories about that topic. How else would you explain "The Real Housewives of New Jersey", the Kardashian headlines, and fear-mongering about everything except pencil erasers? Hell, there are probably fear-mongering stories about pencil erasers, too, in addition to those wholly manufactured stories about razor blades in Hallowe'en apples. Also, anyone who has been interviewed on radio, on TV or in the newspapers about any topic becomes an "expert" in that field and gets passed around from one story to another irregardless of actual expertise in a given field. Pitbull hysteria was ideal to manufacture drama. On the one side, there were some actual attacks by dogs labeled (by those "experts") as pitbulls. On the other side there were dog lovers who were actually familiar with pitbulls. Drama, drama, drama.

If you can't control your dogs, don't cry and sue the victim. They need to take the dogs away. You can call me a cold bastard but I'd feed them steaks with rat poison in it if they were my neighbors.

that is sad

a reply to: Noinden

Only thing:If a Wiener/Chihuahua/other small breed bites my child,i can take him for a tetanus shot and treat the actual bite with colloidal silver(which is amazing for wounds,btw,my son got scratched up Badly a while ago going over a fence,looked like a werewolf got hold of him,a thick,jagged rip in his leg,20cm long. 3/4 days after the silver it looks like like an old injury from years ago) But if a pitbull or bigger,more powerful breed had to bite him,the picture would be vastly different.

Look,i'll give my honest opinion-and i know this won't be popular-but i am not on ATS to make friends or to be popular-i am here,like,i assume,every other member, to give their honest heartfelt take on things,and i feel that it would be best to just let the breed gradually die out.If there was a "king/queen of the world" type scenario,i would issue a decree to let the Pitbulls currently alive,live out their lives-but no more breeding of them,till the breed becomes obsolete.To be fair,i would also let any blithering idiot like this woman suffer very severe consequences for her stupidity,no matter what breed of dog she owns.And if a case like hers were brought before me,she would be given the given the choice to stand down,or meet madame guillotine,seriously.I am that disgusted by this creature.

As i said,i am not here to make friends,i am here like anyone else to give MY own individualistic opinion/take on things.I know there are numerous responsible,sensible owners of PitBulls out there,who propably would think i'm a moronic asshole for my view on this matter.But these reports in the media,are not sucked out of anyone's thumb,because of some sinister agenda against a particular breed of dog.What i,and you may have read in the papers,on the net or in magazines,seen on tv etc-is not baseless propaganda against a particular breed of dog.It amounts to facts that can be verified.These dogs are a particularly dangerous breed.Out of all the wonderful range of fantastic dog breeds out there,is it too much to ask,that a particularly dangerous breed is allowed to gradually die off? It's not like there are not enough other breeds out there to choose from.

If children,adults and animals regularly got savaged by any number of other breeds-we WOULD know about it.The reason why we keep hearing reports about Pit Bulls savaging people and other animals-is because it's PIT BULLS/PIT BULL X breeds doing the savaging. I'm not saying Rotties,Dobermans,German Shepherds etc are Not dangerous breeds-yet reports of these breeds attacking and/or savaging small children,adults and other animals are not half or even a quarter as prevalent as reports-FACTUAL reports-of PitBull's doing the same.

Crucify me,but that is my take on the whole PitBull matter.

a reply to: Eagle3d

Not as sad as innocent animals,or children being savaged.

originally posted by: Raxoxane
a reply to: Noinden

Only thing:If a Wiener/Chihuahua/other small breed bites my child,i can take him for a tetanus shot and treat the actual bite with colloidal silver(which is amazing for wounds,btw,my son got scratched up Badly a while ago going over a fence,looked like a werewolf got hold of him,a thick,jagged rip in his leg,20cm long. 3/4 days after the silver it looks like like an old injury from years ago) But if a pitbull or bigger,more powerful breed had to bite him,the picture would be vastly different.

Look,i'll give my honest opinion-and i know this won't be popular-but i am not on ATS to make friends or to be popular-i am here,like,i assume,every other member, to give their honest heartfelt take on things,and i feel that it would be best to just let the breed gradually die out.If there was a "king/queen of the world" type scenario,i would issue a decree to let the Pitbulls currently alive,live out their lives-but no more breeding of them,till the breed becomes obsolete.To be fair,i would also let any blithering idiot like this woman suffer very severe consequences for her stupidity,no matter what breed of dog she owns.And if a case like hers were brought before me,she would be given the given the choice to stand down,or meet madame guillotine,seriously.I am that disgusted by this creature.

As i said,i am not here to make friends,i am here like anyone else to give MY own individualistic opinion/take on things.I know there are numerous responsible,sensible owners of PitBulls out there,who propably would think i'm a moronic asshole for my view on this matter.But these reports in the media,are not sucked out of anyone's thumb,because of some sinister agenda against a particular breed of dog.What i,and you may have read in the papers,on the net or in magazines,seen on tv etc-is not baseless propaganda against a particular breed of dog.It amounts to facts that can be verified.These dogs are a particularly dangerous breed.Out of all the wonderful range of fantastic dog breeds out there,is it too much to ask,that a particularly dangerous breed is allowed to gradually die off? It's not like there are not enough other breeds out there to choose from.

If children,adults and animals regularly got savaged by any number of other breeds-we WOULD know about it.The reason why we keep hearing reports about Pit Bulls savaging people and other animals-is because it's PIT BULLS/PIT BULL X breeds doing the savaging. I'm not saying Rotties,Dobermans,German Shepherds etc are Not dangerous breeds-yet reports of these breeds attacking and/or savaging small children,adults and other animals are not half or even a quarter as prevalent as reports-FACTUAL reports-of PitBull's doing the same.

Crucify me,but that is my take on the whole PitBull matter.

As multiple people have pointed out, attacks attributed to pitbulls are really attacks by multiple breeds and mixed breeds, some of whom have no pitbull in them, lumped into one category. You have conveniently ignored that.

The potential physical threat posed to humans and, let's say, all non-pitbull type breed dogs by pitbulls pales in comparison to the physical threat posed to them by adult human males who have savaged plenty of dogs and children. What do you propose doing about human males as a deterrent? I anticipate that you will exempt them because they're humans. If so, your intent is clearly to single out one species and, of all species, you have selected the most pro-human species of all. Why not focus on putting the blame where it truly lies, with humans?

a reply to: Tangerine

Why on earth would you assume for one second that human males,or females,for that matter,who preyed on the innocent and defenceless,would receive an iota of mercy or clemency from me,if i was the one in charge of this #pit? Seriously,what do you base that assumption on? Perhaps you should read some of my posts,i think you may gain a better understanding of what i'm about.

Fine,if i had to go deeper-ALL breeding with PitBulls,would be forbidden,till only breeds remained that contained no PitBull dna/genes whatsoever.And if Anyone wanted to keep a dangerous breed like Rottweiler,German Shepherds,Dobermans,Boerbulls(a dangerous breed very popular in my country,South Africa) they would have to adhere to Stringent regulations on safety and animal containment integrity on their premises.I don't do things by half-measures,i can assure you,What i postulated was just the start.If a child got mauled by a dangerous breed,or Any dog on my watch i can guarrantee you the consequences for the owner would be such that all dog owners would swiftly adhere to sensible measures.

I have to ask you again,though,just out of curiosity(since You turned the discussion from dogs to humans) what the Hell made you think that humans who visited evil upon others-most especially the innocent,young and defenceless-would not have reason to curse the day they were born,on My watch???