11 comments:
by
2/14/2009 3:50 AM |
Flag as abusive
The pit owner was fined $100 dollars. Gee, that ought to teach her a lesson. She's also being evicted. SO HER LANDLORD CANNOT GET SUED? (Nice try, the attack on two innocent people already happened!)
She did not speculate on how the dog got loose. Barkley was not arrested, but received a citation from Kannapolis Police for owning a dangerous dog that caused injuries requiring medical treatment costing more than $100. No other charges were filed.
http://www.salisburypost.com/Area/021409-pit-bull-folo-brother-details-attack
by
2/14/2009 4:13 AM | Flag as abusive
If you ever look at the results from a Canine Weight pulling event you will see that Pits dominate all 30-100lbs weight classes.
It should surprise no one when they snap a chain/leash to get at a kid, dog, horse or other unlucky mammal!
In the 1988 Lockwood study, he pointed out that pit bulls are 14 times more likely to break containment and attack compared to other breeds.
These dogs require superior owners with superior containment infrastructures and superior insurance coverage.
by
2/14/2009 4:48 AM | Flag as abusive
She was watching the dog for a friend who was in jail. How many times do we see the ole "The dog wasn't mine" routine!
Lemme guess.... no renters insurance either!
by
2/14/2009 4:50 AM | Flag as abusive
Note that the attacking dog is never theirs, always 'someone else's".
by
2/14/2009 6:32 AM | Flag as abusive
"Make sure they have a collar, and make sure the kids stay with you."
The dog had a collar on but he just stepped out of it. Something most dogs can do. A collar is no guarantee you're safe.
by
2/14/2009 1:50 PM | Flag as abusive
Yes, I believe her landlord CAN be sued. It has happened to other landlords in cases like this! Sue the landlord on his homeowner's policy.
He is ultimately responsible for maintaining his property and tenants.
This example shows why anti-chaining laws need to get passed and enforced.
These people get these aggressive dogs, they are too aggressive for them to handle in the house, so they throw them out on a chain instead.
Then things like this happen (not to mention the dogs get even crazier out there on a chain all the time)
by
2/14/2009 2:46 PM | Flag as abusive
So true that the attacking dog is often not with its owner at the time of the attack. True, it sounds like an excuse but it also points to the likelihood that dogs with strong prey drives or temperments are more likely to attack when the person they see as their master is not present. This always makes me wonder why dogs with aggression problems or potentail problems are allowed -- even if their master can control them, their master will not always be it them. What then?
by
2/14/2009 5:54 PM | Flag as abusive
Most of these dogs' masters are lying about ownership of the dog to try to escape liability and charges
Pit bulls attack their OWN MASTERS anyway, so it does not matter one bit if the actual master is there or not.
Pit bulls attack even when they are at the end of their owner's leash!
by
2/14/2009 10:53 PM | Flag as abusive
"The dog was dying. I nursed him back to health."
Hmmm. I wonder how you nurse a pit bull back to health when it's on a chain? This must be a chapter within the pit bull owner's Secret Handbook.
by
2/15/2009 7:28 PM | Flag as abusive
One thing about weight pulling, apparently the dogs don't automatically pull that much weight. They have to be built up to it. Why anyone would want a dog that strong is a mystery to me. Another child suffering, was this dog neutered? Mandatory neutering and bans on future breeding would be a great solution.
by
2/16/2009 4:02 AM | Flag as abusive
Perhaps..but their innate power definitely contributes to thier tendency to escape containment and go on an off-property mauling spree.
There are way to many chain breaking, leash snapping, fence and door busting incidents with this breed. They need special containment infrastructures.
Post a Comment »
| 
