Tuesday, September 24, 2013



posted by   |  permalink  |  13 comments  | iconforum  |icon subscribe  |icon comment rss 

13 comments:

Blogger Jenny Rosenquist  |  9/22/2013 11:03 PM  |  Flag  
Omg not another one!!! Why, why are people so blind? Why do they pimp so many lies and obfuscate the truth as much as possible, knowing that precedent says this will be the end result.

So, how quick, I wonder, will the nutters be to blame the child, the babysitter, blah blah... THIS is the nanny dog at its finest. THIS is pitbull loyalty at its finest. THIS is culled man-biters at its finest.

And while there's a kernel of truth to stating its stupid to try to break up a pit-fight, the fact remains that it's stupid to keep a powerful pet you cannot control. If you risk death and cannot safely wade in to stop the animals violence, you have NO control. Controlling a pitbull is shaky illusion at best.

Why do the nutters constantly spew "it's their fault for breaking up a fight" as if that's acceptable criteria for exonerating the animal of aggression and blaming the victims/owners? To say as much is to loudly illustrate just how uncontrollable pitbulls are.

I suspect they like playing god, given their tendency to imperil others and issue judgement of culpability. There's also a certain degree of a superiority complex--dismiss truth and precedent to believe themselves stronger/smarter than other human beings. To keep such an animal is a declaration of unique power. Something akin to: I can handle this animal where others have failed. I am better than them.

Everyday I'm starting to give the nutters psychological dysfunction correlation more and more credence...

Sincerely,
Wordy verbose typey mctyperson

Blogger Sputnik2009  |  9/23/2013 3:49 AM  |  Flag  
I notice another disturbing thing. Tucson News is apparently giving in to the pit bull lobby's pressure NOT to report the fact when pit bulls are involved in a mauling or killing. Tucson News reported this boy's death as 'four dogs' killing the child. This means their article not only omitted the fact that three pit bull type dogs killed the child, but that the fourth dog (a hound type) declined to participate.

It's disturbing that some news outlets are deciding not to inform the public of crucial facts, which the public needs to know so as to protect its own safety better -- and the safety of children. Shame on Tucson News.

Tucson News HIDES the fact that it was pit bull type dogs:
GILBERT, AZ (CBS5) -
A 2 1/2-year-old boy was killed and a babysitter was injured when they were caught in the middle of a dog attack Sunday morning, Gilbert police said.
"This morning, we had a terrible tragic accident here at this home in Gilbert," said Sgt. Jesse Sanger with Gilbert Police.
The boy was pronounced dead at the hospital. The caregiver suffered lacerations to her legs and feet.
"Three of her dogs that she owns got into some type of a fight between the dogs. She tried to break them up. She sustained some serious injuries. And also a 2 1/2 year old boy that was in the house was also injured. He was transported right here next door to Gilbert Mercy Hospital where, unfortunately, he was pronounced deceased," said Sanger.
The 28-year-old babysitter was watching five children when the attack happened at about 11:30 a.m. at her home in the area of Val Vista and Melrose.
The other children were not harmed. They included two 9-year-old boys and two girls, ages 6 and 7.

http://www.tucsonnewsnow.com/story/23497874/pd-child-killed-babysitter-injured-in-gilbert-dog-attack


Blogger snarky  |  9/23/2013 7:20 AM  |  Flag  
they do say its the owners responsibility to avoid these attacks but then the nutters turn around and blame the victims . my general impression is that these are young and stupid and unreasonable people with little or nothing to lose by endangering others. the very kind of people who should not be allowed the responsibility of taking care of a dangerous dog .

Blogger Decatur AL livin nt to 4 pits  |  9/23/2013 11:56 AM  |  Flag  
So, no one witnessed this attack except the woman and possibly small children. What if - the pit bulls just plain and simple attacked that child ???

Blogger DubV  |  9/23/2013 12:02 PM  |  Flag  
Horrible story.

Piggy backing on what Sputnik wrote about the hound not participating, I wish the following data set existed.

When there is a fatal attack or mauling in a home with multiple dogs present, look at the different breeds in the home and which of the dogs took part.

This information could be used to control for handling/nurture, if the reasonable assumption is made that two dogs in the same home are subjected to the same environment.

A similar analysis could be done over time. Let's say someone owned 5 dogs without incident and then had the 6th dog attack someone. That would not be quite as strong an analysis because people's behavior around dogs can change over time.

OpenID maultalk  |  9/23/2013 12:39 PM  |  Flag  
An excellent conclusion Decatur. A more cynical, and also realistic conclusion, is that the "fight" was the dogs fighting over the child.

Blogger Colleen Lynn  |  9/23/2013 4:00 PM  |  Flag  
"A special needs toddler and his four siblings were being cared for at the babysitter's house..."

Blogger snack sized dog  |  9/23/2013 4:13 PM  |  Flag  
I frankly can't imagine a small child witnessing a pit bull fight break out and not be afraid and attempt to leave, not try to intervene. Sounds like trying to blame the victim.

I recall reading about more than one fatality where another dog of another breed was euthanized with the mauling pits simply because it was present at the time of the attack.

Blogger orangedog  |  9/23/2013 5:19 PM  |  Flag  
I don't believe it. Sounds like a good cover for blame the victim. What little kid would try to break up a dog fight? The nutters will just play blame the victim on this one. Unless one of the other children comes forward and tells the same story, all we have is the babysitter's account and she will be trying to cover her ass from liability.

Blogger vintage  |  9/24/2013 2:53 AM  |  Flag  
Another 2 year old was fatally mauled by pitties in San Bernadino County, CA last night....

President Obama's 99th Pit Bull DBRF victim!

Blogger Sputnik2009  |  9/24/2013 3:26 AM  |  Flag  
To DubV: As Jane Goodall said, a sh*tload of anecdotes equals data. I have single-handedly enough anecdotes of pit types trying to / succeeding at killing another dog at dog parks, in which tens of present normal dogs retire to a distance, usually with tails tucked, because they see something awful and abnormal is going on. I have plenty of anecdotes of some normal dogs trying to intervene to stop the abnormal behavior they saw, but the INSTANT I got the pit's back legs in the air all the NORMAL dogs acting like I hit an 'off' switch...stopped all social discourse and just stood there waiting for what would happen next.

How many anecdotes do you need to build your data set?

To Snarky -- When Tucson News RITUALLY says 'owner responsibility', they're nevertheless declining to facilitate such owner responsibility if they don't report that it was yet again pit bulls doing the killing.

Everyone here is right, by mentioning 'special needs child' news outlets are participating in blaming the victim. Whether a two-year-old is 'special needs' is irrelevant. In fact, all two year olds are 'special needs', in the sense that their brains are as yet for about 70% not yet grown.

Orangedog and Maultalk are (IMO) right. The only witness account we have is a self-serving one by a member of a group we know is prone to pathological narcissism and compulsive lying.

I'm mostly now just hoping they'll put the three pit bulls down without a lot of back and forth about it. I'll be knocked over if this babysitter decides she wants her pit bulls back and animal control agrees.

Blogger Your Quiet Neighbor  |  9/24/2013 10:38 AM  |  Flag  
Wouldn't the child run away from the fight in order to tell the sitter about it? That seems more logical than a toddler running into a pit battle.

Blogger vintage  |  9/25/2013 3:03 AM  |  Flag  
Quiet Neighbor,

It doesn't really matter...Even the Greatest Dogman who ever lived, John P. Colby epically failed at protecting his nephew.

It is folly to expect the average dog owner to be able to protect themselves, their families and their neighbors from these animals.

Post a Comment »

archives: