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

18 thoughts on “After Son's Pit Bull Mauls His Mother and Her Boyfriend in Roseville, Felony Charges Authorized

Please review our comment policy.

  1. Some people are as dumb as rocks.

    With the second pit at home, maybe Darwin will finally finish the job.

  2. Bad owner and yes bad dog. Charges needed to be made here.

  3. "The patient has some cuts on his ear and a couple minor abrasions! We better airlift him!" Said no paramedic, ever. The way he downplays the injuries his wretched weaponized dog inflicted is CRAZY.
    Is he trying to be a cliché pit owner? He's either developmentally and intellectually challenged, or he's mind blowingly ignorant and callous. I'm inclined to believe the latter.
    Rationality and compassion does not exist in the pit bull owner's mind.
    Colleen, you and Jeff Borchardt should seriously put together a book with just pit owner/advocate quotes in it. Big shiny pages of pit pictures and their owner's psychotic quotes on one side, and photos of injuries and victims on the other. Title it "Reality Bites." You can use the Rhodes scholar Laughton in there. "Roger had some cuts on his ear." Good grief!!

  4. Oops…I meant "Mike had some cuts on his ear." Apparently my phone decided Roger was a better name.

  5. You just can't make this stuff up. Note that while they balked at the $200 euthanasia fee, he has tattoos. Those aren't cheap.

    Also, note that the date the other dog was registered was 4/26/17, though it was vaccinated about a month earlier. And Is it just me, or does that dog look like it could be related to Bruce?

  6. The son looks about like some of my neighbors – I call them the "more tattoos than teeth bunch." I posted this website in Nextdoor and got out of next door – I had heard from this crowd before. So, since I wasn't there to take their abuse….they poisoned my dogs, two of which are therapy dogs. I say are because thankfully these toothless wonders were too stupid to do it right. My Dalmatian got ahold of it, had some seizures, threw up. Had my two little dogs gotten hold of it, they would have died. I effin' hate pit bull owners that won't open their eyes to the truth.

  7. Yep, I would guess the quick registration and deceptive breed name were in response to Bruce's first attack as an attempt to not draw any more attention to the fact they owned an aggressive pit bull. Wouldn't want to harm the reputation of the breed and contribute to that bad rap!

    The Facebook comments as always are fascinating. Sigh. At least no one died (Robert's two kids pictured on the couch with Bruce may not have fared as well as the adults in an attack).

    K-Hart, the book isn't a bad idea. 🙂 A psychologist really should study these issues; they're a gold mine.

    Rbentrdr, I'm so glad your dogs survived! What a horrible thing for these sickos to do! 🙁 On another note, more tattoos than teeth is hilarious.

  8. What kind of delusion does it take to give a "second chance" to a dog that gives you 30 stitches!?!?! This obviously wasn't a normal dog nip or even a normal dog bite, where a "second chance" may be warranted depending on the situation. 30 stitches is a dog going for a kill, and they gave the dog a "second chance" to achieve it. The mother and/or boyfriend should have had the brains to kick the dog out of their house after the first attack!

  9. Doesn't the son feel any care or concern for his mother or her boyfriend? It would kill me to know that my dog hurt anyone let alone,my mother �� how can a person be so cold about this !

  10. Sorry, but only stupid people who want to feel tough own pit bulls, rottweilers, etc. They are willfully in denial of the facts about those aggressive breeds and always claim that none of the dangers could ever apply to them and their precious snowflake.

    Good job in pointing out that the worst of them are like this a**hole, Laughton, who not only typically claim it's an "owner issue" rather than a breed issue, they then claim that they could never have foreseen an attack coming because they were a "good owner". Ugh. Since we can't euthanize the stupid owners along with their vicious dogs, there should be additional laws prohibiting them from ever owning any dogs again.

  11. Meanwhile, I'm scrolling down a news page, and there's a blurb about a "heart-warming" moment between a pit bull and a baby. It shows a pit bull (complete with facial scar) on its back on a couch, and someone placed a little baby on top.

    That is STUPID to do with any dog, let along a fighting-breed dog that kills more people that any other breed. What infuriated me about that is behaviour like that can get children killed. Pit bulls aren't nanny dogs, and placing your baby on top of one for a photo op is reckless.

  12. I have not heard anyone mention cost to taxpayers from what will probably be indigent or unpaid medical expenses in the hundreds of thousands. Airlift here costs over $25 just for the transport not to mention the rest of the cost, even if insured. Local EMS and hospitals will likely have to be absorb most. $200 is nothing and I am sure had little to do with the decision anyway. My vet puts a big dog down for only a little over $100. I think euthanasia should have been manditory and send the bill to the owner after. Whoever in the legal process that enables dogs to attack again should be liable financially. That would immediately shut down repeat attacks.

  13. There is a lot of money being pumped into the promotion of dogs in general and pit bulls in particular. That's why we see so many heartwarming pictures of babies with pit bulls. And it's why there seems to be no limit on the production of dogs.

    If we dare to speak out against these things, we are accused of not loving dogs. To that, I have this to say: So what? I think that it is high time that we take a closer look at where out of control dog worship has gotten us.

  14. "I have not heard anyone mention cost to taxpayers from what will probably be indigent or unpaid medical expenses in the hundreds of thousands."–this is such a good point. If they couldn't afford $200 to euthanize a dangerous dog, they certainly aren't going to be able to pay the huge and on-going medical expenses associated with this attack. Even after the initial expenses, which I agree will easily be hundreds of thousands of dollars, these people will require physical therapy and probably more plastic surgery in the future. And it will be everyone else, paying as taxpayers and in higher medical bills, that has to pay for their complete callousness. They were given a warning with the first serious attack, and chose to ignore it. If these dogs can't be banned from residential areas, I think owners should be required to have insurance in order to own these dangerous dogs.

    "If we dare to speak out against these things, we are accused of not loving dogs. To that, I have this to say: So what? I think that it is high time that we take a closer look at where out of control dog worship has gotten us."–I am always infuriated when pit bull fetishist's say this because, the opposite is true. In addition to the horrific lost of human life, pitbulls kill thousands of dogs, cats, and other animals each year. People who truly love dogs, do not want pitbulls anywhere around other dogs. Pitbull defenders's do not love dogs in general, they care only about Pitbull's specifically. I don't think it's normal, while lots of people have favorite breeds, I see a huge difference in the level of obsessiveness between most pitbull fans and dog fans of other breeds.

  15. LibertarianThinker, you are so right! Many of us have favorite breeds, but I doubt that any of us show the same level of obsessiveness about them! We don't insist (argue and bully) that they're the best dogs, the only ones we'll ever have, and everyone else should have them, too.

    Someone on here noted that pit bull lovers may be afflicted with the same type of thinking seen in people who fall for a "bad boy" (or girl). They believe they can love them enough and make them better. I also think it's an over-identification with pit bulls because of their branding as social outcasts, as misunderstood and marginalized misfits.

  16. As a father of a four year old who was malled by a pit bull I have taken a great interest in this case. I agree with the other posts in that pit bull owners are wack. The macro evidence is ignored as they defend THEIR WONDERFUL DOGS. Explaining the facts to them is a waste of time. They need severe punishment or this trend will escalate.

Comments are closed.