Saturday, March 15, 2008


Donate to DogsBite.org
Please donate to support our work

DogsBite.org is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt public charity organization. Learn more »


posted by   |  permalink  |  12 comments  | email  |icon blog rss  |icon comment rss 

12 comments:

Anonymous Trigger  |  3/15/2008 2:25 AM  |  Flag  
An 87 year old woman having to defend herself from a vicious dog with a trashcan lid -- this really pisses me off!

She's lived at her residence for 50 years! She must have had NO IDEA when the pit bull moved in across the street that it was a seriously dangerous dog with a seriously irresponsible owner.

Anonymous Anonymous  |  3/15/2008 1:48 PM  |  Flag  
Another off property attack by a Bully breed! Most dogs don't want confrontations when the are off their own turf.

Anonymous David  |  3/15/2008 10:43 PM  |  Flag  
Punish the Deed Not the Breed, I don't understand the punish part of this. The only one being punished is someone like this lady. Why does a pit buller feel he is being punished if he has to keep his dog under control. Most animals have some type of restriction on them, the more dangerous, the tighter the restictions. That's the way it should be.
Not just any dumbass with the purchase price should be able to own an animal with the kind of power these dogs have.
It just seems so simple. They should at least have to take them out in the country, like they do horses and cows and many other animals that are not allowed in the city limits.

Anonymous Trigger  |  3/16/2008 3:28 AM  |  Flag  
I can't imagine how frightened she was -- 87 years old and trying to fend off a vicious pit bull as she took out her trash. THESE DOGS HUNT VULNERABLE PEOPLE.

I think of my own grandmother now. Her wounds wouldn't heal like a child's -- our senior citizens are at grave risk to these dogs.

Anonymous Anonymous  |  3/16/2008 4:42 AM  |  Flag  
"Prevent the Deed, Regulate the Breed".....

Anonymous Anonymous  |  3/16/2008 11:46 AM  |  Flag  
David, the problem with allowing them out in country, is that they often attack horses and livestock...even scaling stall doors to kill horses in their own barns. It's a no-win situation; they are animal aggressive and, many times, human aggressive.

I even think that owning them in rural areas is even more dangerous....many, many victims of pit bull attacks are alive today by the Grace of God....a good samaritan, neighbor, or passersby saw the attack and ran to help. In a more remote, rural area the likelihood of another person being there at the time of the attack is questionable. I think folks in rural areas are even more at risk from these dogs.

Anonymous schultz  |  3/16/2008 12:01 PM  |  Flag  
i completely agree with your observations on rural pit bulls. just look at the 2 people who were de-gloved by 4 american bulldogs owned by diane cockrell in rural michigan last year. cheryl harper was literally eaten to death while taking a walk in the country.
there are many more opportunities to attack animals. there are less potential human victims and there are less people to come to your aid. another problem is that there is usually little if any animal control laws or officers to cover a large area.
these dogs pose a much greater danger in a rural setting.

Anonymous Anonymous  |  3/16/2008 1:48 PM  |  Flag  
I agree it's nuts to own one anywhere....However the pit nutter's who play Lion Tamer with a game bred pit bull in an apartment complex really need to be examined by scientists.

Anonymous Karen  |  3/16/2008 2:53 PM  |  Flag  
No large breed of dog or a fighting breed of dog should be allowed in an apartment complex. We should also not allow fighting breeds in rental properties. This could help resolve some of the liability issue. Victims could not only go after the home owner's insurance but also their homes to collect damages.

Anonymous Anonymous  |  3/17/2008 5:53 AM  |  Flag  
The only good thing about Pits on rental properties is that the landlord provides the liability umbrella for the high risk dog owner.

Anonymous Anonymous  |  3/17/2008 9:46 AM  |  Flag  
I honestly can't imagine how anyone renting property today would allow any large guarding or fighting breed of dog in their rental unit. It's just far too risky. I think the way landlords get around the legal liability is by claiming they had no idea the renters had the dog.

That's why I would adivise all neighbors who feel threatened by a tenant's dog to send a certified letter to the landlord stating that you are notifying them that their tenant has an aggressive dog, and that you will hold them legally liable for any damages if the dog attacks.

Anonymous David  |  3/18/2008 10:34 PM  |  Flag  
I see what you mean, some of these people would have died if there had not been help.
In Indiana the landlord is only liable if he knows there is a danger and does nothing to prevent it. His insurance is "Liability Insurance", if he's not liable, his insurance may not have to pay. There is room for doubt. If you point it out the danger to him, then there is no doubt.

Post a Comment »

archives: