Please donate to support our work is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt public charity organization. Learn more »

19 thoughts on “Texans Killed by Pit Bulls in 3.5 Year Period (2006-2009)

Please review our comment policy.

  1. Also, Lillian Stiles was killed in November of 2005 by a loose pack of Pit/Rott mixes.

    Her family pushed for Lillian's Law which passed the Texas Senate of May 17th 2007, Another 8 Texan have been killed by Pit & Rotties since it's passage with only one conviction.

    As of Jan 2009, Jack Smith and Crystal Watson were still free pending appeal.

    Hindsight measures don't appear to be working.

  2. So how long are the dog fighters and dog breeders going to keep running Texas and killing Texas kids?

    Texas looks like a weak teenager when they let the breeders push them around like this.

  3. When Goolsby lost his reelection bid, the Texas AG simply dropped the request to render an opinion on the States Anti-BSL Law. It aint comin!

    Additionally, Bills to remove the States Anti-BSL Provisions have not made it out of Committee over the past two legislative sessions due to pressure from the Dog Lobby.

    I wonder how these people sleep at night?!

  4. Texas should be a case study on how anti-BSL provisions endanger public safety!

    Allowing the Dog Lobby to craft Dangerous Dogs Laws is like allowing pedophiles in committee on Foster Care Laws.

  5. Rep. Tony Goolsby had already lost his re-election when he submitted the request to the AG. If you have a weblink or any verification that shows that the AG truly dropped Goolsby's request, please submit it here.

  6. Could you imagine what would be going on if a serial killer killed these children? or wild animals? Or a defective product? Or a disease?

    But dog fighters and dog breeders kill these kids, hey that's ok in Texas!

  7. Greg Abbott needs to be held accountable for catering to a bunch of criminal, tax cheat dog fighters!

  8. I wouldn't be surprised to find that massive bribes were passing under the table, or that some of the people responsible for these pre-bill committees were either dog fighters themselves or gambled on them. It's huge money, and when something like this trumps public safety, follow the money trail.

  9. The irony here is that a hardcore Pit Breeder can recite breeding lines and champions from memory, but when it comes to knowing who is producing mankillers, they feign cluelessness.

    Time to change the nickname from "Nanny Dogs" to "Closed Casket Dogs".

  10. But the dogfighting problem (specifically breeding dogs for explosive aggression) may not be as present:

    A Recent Review of California Fatal Dog Attacks (2006-2008):

    The State of California also allows for breed-specific laws, at least in the area of sterilization. More and more CA cities are adopting such laws for pit bulls.

  11. San Francisco adopted mandatory spay neuter for pit bulls and pit bull attacks went way down, PLUS greatly reduced the unwanted stray pit bulls and pit bulls in animal control.

    Also more and more counties in CA have adopted mandatory spay neuter, so it is much harder to set up your pit bull breeding factory for the fighting industry. Breeders need to get honest and get licensed with mandatory spay neuter, and the dog fighters and pit bull breeders don't want to do that. (which is why they lobby against mandatory spay neuter)

    Many parts of Ca also decided to get civilized and pass some decent animal control laws (with the exception of some areas like Kern County where some breeders are running animal control for their own devices), so the scumbags weren't taking over.

    I also believe that many more landlords in Ca are NOT allowing pit bulls, because they are getting sued and held accountable for their tenants' dangerous dogs.

    These dog breeders will move to wherever there are lax laws, so they can get away with what they do, which also includes tax cheating, animal abuse, and a whole host of other criminal activities. It's tougher to get away with it in a lot of Ca now. It needs to get better, but it's better than some other states.

    Also with the public conviction and exposure of the Whipples, these breeders know they will face serious public scrutiny if one of their dogs attacks, instead of getting protected by the Texas good ole boy routine, or that of some other states.

  12. I would be curious to know how CA is fairing in this regard. For years it was number one in fatalities overall. And the pit problem there is overwhelming.

  13. Dog owners in Texas need to understand that the AKC is the PRIMARY dog lobbying group that works to keep the anti-BSL measure intact, as well as maintain all "free" breeding rights for owners of aggressive dogs. It's all here in black and white:

    "The American Kennel Club (AKC) is pleased to report the successful completion of Texas' 2009 Legislative Session. This year, many bills threatened the rights of responsible purebred dog breeders and owners in the Lone Start State, including mandatory spay/neuter, breed-specific, unreasonable breeder oversight, and ownership limit legislation."

  14. And yet the AKC makes most of its money from PUPPY MILL REGISTRATIONS

    Any wonder they oppose regulation? They survive on blood money from abusing and killing dogs, with their friends and co-lobbyists the dog fighters.

    They sure as heck don't care about the blood of innocent people!

    (Meanwhile your local AKC kennel club breeeders are not declaring their income and not paying taxes as they should)

  15. 3 more Texans were killed by dogs in 2005!

    1 by Pit Bull
    1 by Rottweilers
    1 by Pit/Rott mixes

    Sensing a trend….The Anti BSL provision is working out great for the breeders!

  16. Tanner Joshua Monk was my nephew. The owners (jack and crystal) of the dogs that killed him are in prison now. They got sentenced like last month. I think they got like 7 years or 20 im not too sure.

  17. Let's cut to the very heart of the problem: The Texas "1-bite" rule. Now, let's destroy it. It's UNconstitutional for at least (2) reasons: (1) It violates due process. All dogs are potentially dangerous. Moses knew that. Placing the burden of proof on a victim to prove that the owner knew his dog was "dangerous" defies common sense. The 2nd reason it's UNconstitutional is that it violates the precise language of the 7th Amendment of the Federal Constitution which guarantees a right to trial-by-jury in cases where damages exceed $20. This is a CIVIL LAWSUIT statute and the threshold is $20. Denying a plaintiff the right to sue where damages exceed $20 is blatantly unconstitutional. It is also a well-settled principle of law that any legislation that attempts to circumvent the constitution is NULLIFIED and carries no legal weight. Therefore, the 1-bite rule in Texas is blatantly UNconstitutional.

Comments are closed.