# Very upsetting story in the local news



## scannergirl (Feb 17, 2008)

A few streets up from me there was a horrible incident this weekend while we were out of town. It seems that two Pit Bulls were in their yard unattended and they dug under their fence. They jumped the neighbor's fence and attacked their Golden retriever. The dog was aged and a cancer survivor, so he wasn't as quick as he once was, not that it would have mattered.
The Golden has a doggie door that leads to a room set up specially for him and his doggie brother, a Bijon Friese. He ran for his safe place and the dogs followed him and killed him in his own house. Apparently it was pretty gruesome. The neighbors were able to chase the dogs away from the smaller dog, who was being chased around the yard. He was injured but will be OK.
AC and the police came and the dogs were taken to the pound. Later, and this is where the controversy lies, the dogs were released back to their owners because there is no provision for impounding a dog who kills another dog in North Carolina. The owners simply had to claim them and there was nothing that could be done to prevent them from taking the dogs.
I should mention that these dogs have a history of wandering and frightening both people and other animals. Law enforcement has been involved in the past. There was one incident in which a woman was chased back into her house by these dogs. My feeling is it is only a matter of time before they injure or kill a person.
The owners of the Golden are understandably very upset and feel like there should be a provision that the state could remove these dogs. The district attorney has stepped in and ordered the dogs re-seized and they are presently back at animal control under some sort of court order.
I feel like more should have been done long before now. These people should not own these dogs as they have proven they are not able to safely control them.
I know some of you will take issue with the unattended Golden and the doggie door while both people in the house worked. But if the set up were different that might have saved this particular dog but those dogs still would have attacked something else. Those owners were trying their best to give their dog everything he needed- they had traveled to Raleigh for specialty care for his cancer, and I don't think they have any fault here at all. In fact, the dramatic nature of this attack might be the only thing that saves a child down the road.
There is a push to euthanize them. What's your take on this? Do you think that's appropriate? Could they be safely rehomed? Should they?


----------



## marksteven (Aug 2, 2008)

Of all breeds to be unattended , what if they dug out and encountered a child? wonder how safe it would be to rehome. dont know if you can ever walk those dogs with other dogs around.


----------



## scannergirl (Feb 17, 2008)

There are two down another street that I frequently encounter- when I first heard the story I assumed it was them. In fairness I have never seen any aggression from these two, but a child that lives there told me they growl at her baby brother when he climbs in his mother's lap. And they are often out of their yard loose on the street..
What is it about this breed that seems to attract such irresponsible owners? Or is it that the consequences of irresponsibility when you have a pair of Pit Bulls are so much greater?
How BSL gets going......................


----------



## mjbgsd (Jun 29, 2004)

Wow, I feel sorry for the Golden. Those dogs should be put down, the owners can't handle them and something like this happend before. Those dogs are a liability and have already shown to attack another dog. Even if it's not as serious as attacking a human, the dogs have proven that they will bite. It's only a matter of time when they direct their focus on a person. 
IF they were to be rehomed, they would need serious rehabilitation IMO. And with someone who's experienced with this kind of situation. These dogs can never be trusted alone again.


----------



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

Lisa, I hate to say it, but I think after all that I would be the one neighbor to walk around with a gun just looking for them to be out loose again, threatening someone.... 



> Quote:In fact, the dramatic nature of this attack might be the only thing that saves a child down the road.


This is exactly what I would wish to avoid. I think these dogs can be rehomed to a specialized place/owner but definitely not to most situations and probably not to many experienced owners. These dogs are operating in a pack and IMO there are only three solutions: seize them for euthanasia at A/C, rehome them to a "Dog Town" type of situation or see if one of them is more of a follower that can be saved, or shoot to kill when they are again loose and threaten a human. If there is no law to keep the public safe, someone WILL take up that slack.









And in the end, it is usually the dogs that lose the most except when they kill people, and two strong dogs working together could easily kill a child.


----------



## Lauri & The Gang (Jun 28, 2001)

Did someone call the police and AC *EVERY* time the dogs got loose?

If not then the entire neighborhood must share the blame as well.

If someone KNEW the dogs were dangerous and didn't do anything when they saw the dogs loose - they are just as guilty as the owners.

In this day and age just about everyone has a video camera in their cell phones. Video tape the dogs running loose and threatening people or other animals. Send a copy of the video to the police, the AC and the local and BIG network new channels.

And this should go for ANY breed of dog that is allowed to roam loose and threaten others.


----------



## scannergirl (Feb 17, 2008)

I think that the problem is nothing is taken seriously until an incident like this one grabs people's attention. You can only hear, "sorry, ma'am, there's nothing we can do" so many times.
When dogs who do what these dogs did are released back to their owners I am pretty sure it's not the neighbor's fault.


----------



## Timber1 (May 19, 2007)

I tend to agree with your reply. At best the dogs could be re-habbed but only with a person that has worked with similar dogs. 

If my guy, an aggressive GSD, ever killed another animal, I would either have him put down or taken to the best re-hab place I know.


----------



## jake (Sep 11, 2004)

I have hard time mentally with this story -however if any dog killed my dog in his own home might find it hard NOT to want that dog euthanized. Just a quick knee jerk thing but d--- if you AND your dog can't be safe from intruders in your home-how far does understanding/acknowledging (no bad dogs only bad owners) go ???


----------



## daniella5574 (May 2, 2007)

I think they should be euthanized. As much of an animal lover/animal rights person as I am- may God help them if they had killed my dog, in its own home because I would push it until they are pts. I know that there are loving sweet pitt bulls out there... but gees- it just seems this breed has become out of control due to poor breeding and even worse owners.


----------



## weber1b (Nov 30, 2008)

The sad ending to this kind of story is two otherwise good dogs, or whom could have been good dogs, get put down and the morons who ruined them go get a couple more and do it all over again. What needs to happen in cases like this is the morons go to jail and then as part of their probation are prohibited from ever owning a dog again. Penalty for even having a dog would be a trip back to prison. We all know there are no bad dogs, just bad owners who turn dogs bad.


----------



## marksteven (Aug 2, 2008)

The key point is that these dogs had enough drive to enter a strange house to kill another animal. could you imagine the scenario if a child or the homeowner tried to seperate the dogs and got mauled to death in the process?


----------



## marksteven (Aug 2, 2008)

> Originally Posted By: markstevenThe key point is that these dogs had enough drive to enter a strange house to kill another animal. could you imagine the scenario if a child or the homeowner tried to seperate the dogs and got mauled to death in the process?


 guess what i mean is i would be worried about those dogs in my niehborhood


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Problem is that there is no law that allows for anything more than what has been done to the owners of this dog for a dog on dog attack. 

If you want to change the law, then change the law, but there is no way to apply a law that does not exist. 

So, the owners of the dog need to sue the owners of the pit bulls. They will get next to nothing for the dog that is dead, however, they could get punitive damages if they can prove that this has happened before, AND they may be able to get pain and suffering if they can give a good enough image of trying to protect their dog and being forced to witness this attack. IF they can sue for enough money, and settle or go to court and are awarded enough, so that the owners of the dogs have to put a second mortgage on their home, the owners of the dogs will take notice and may euthanize their dogs or keep them contained. I think that this has to be dealt with in civil court. Even if you do not win, they will have to pay and pay and pay for their lawyer. 

If this happened to me, my dad would lend me a gun and both pits would be no more, or the pits would meet up with some antifreeze or something. **** yeah, I would want the dogs dead. That would be my knee jerk reaction. But hopefully, I would wait on my actions until my head cleared enough to punish the owners, not the dogs.


----------



## lcht2 (Jan 8, 2008)

a friend of mine had the exact same thing happen to his boxer. these two pitts that belonged to his neighbor across the street would come over and play with beau, his boxer. well one day things got out of hand and these two pitts killed beau. these two dogs also killed another neighbors lab so this wasnt just a "dog fight." after these two incidents i noticed a lot of fences going up around the houses with dogs and kids, all except the owner of the pitt bulls. seemed like a load up crap that peaple had to invest in pricey fences to keep themselves safe..


----------



## bethk1002 (Jan 25, 2009)

i ddin't know that the laws differed so from state to state. In california the animal(s) would be taken away and put down. the owners would probably be arrested for having a dangerous animal. they're pretty strict out here. thank goodness. 

the owners of the golden should at the very least sue the owners of the pitts. financial repercussions speaks volumes.

maybe this horrible event will get people to to contact the state goverment about changing the laws.

i'm so sorry for that poor golden.


----------



## aubie (Dec 22, 2008)

How horrible! Sadly, it's better for this dogs to be euthinized before citizens take the law in their own hands by something slow and painful like antifreeze or shooting them themselves.

We had people like this that had EIGHT (seriously!) PB's in their house...four of which that just roamed the neighborhood. We live in a neighborhood with a lot of retirees who walk, but became scared. Heck, these dogs almost jumped our fence to get at our two puppers. DH tried to scare them away while I ran for the gun...when I came back, they were gone. 

One day, some walkers saw the dog and called the cops on them. The officer got out of the car and one of the dogs began running at him, teeth bared. The cop did the only thing he could think of, he drew his gun and shot and killed the dog. 

Since the po-po's were involved, all the other dogs were seized and euthinized, the people evicted from the house (it was a rental) after hundreds of phone calls from the neighbors, etc.

Poor Golden!


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

icht2, I am sorry, but I just don't think people should make it a habbit for dogs to go visit one another and play unsupervised if that was the case with the boxer. So that people in the neighborhood took notice and started protecting their dogs and children sounds like a good thing in my opinion. Too bad a dog had to die to make that happen though. 

aubie, poisoning would be slow and painful. There is no reason that a dog should suffer longer from a gunshot wound than by being euthanized at the vet. I just had Dubya euthanized. He felt no pain, and died very easy. But waiting for the appointment, lifting him into the car, driving there, lifting him out of the car and carrying him into the vet's, then waiting forever for them to come in and do the deed with the poor boy struggling to go here and there and ever person sad as ****. He would have "suffered" less if I would have had the guts to take him out back in my woods with a gun. Guns look grusome, but a well placed bullet will have a dog dead before he hits the ground.


----------



## aubie (Dec 22, 2008)

selzer, what I meant was if the average person saw the dogs, shot at them and just hit them in the leg, gut, etc. it would be more painful. Not a well aimed shot, but a more realistic shot made by most people at a highly moving target.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

true. 

However it is up to us to protect our children and pets. When the authorities will do NOTHING about dogs roaming and running amok, sometimes one must take matters in their own hands.

You cannot take their dogs to the vet to be euthanized. You can shoot them. What will you get if you do shoot them? a fine probably. No jail time -- even if you shot them on their own property. If you use the proper words, you will get nothing. 

It may be sad and laws are different everywhere and I do not claim to be an expert. Most people do not get jail time for killing their neighbor's dog though.


----------



## aubie (Dec 22, 2008)

All the more the case for dog on dog attack/vicious attack legislation. I guess what I'm saying is there needs to be some sort of law concerning a dog viciously killing another dog instead of leaving the citizens to deal with it.


----------



## lcht2 (Jan 8, 2008)

> Originally Posted By: selzericht2, I am sorry, but I just don't think people should make it a habbit for dogs to go visit one another and play unsupervised if that was the case with the boxer. So that people in the neighborhood took notice and started protecting their dogs and children sounds like a good thing in my opinion. Too bad a dog had to die to make that happen though.


these dogs were never "invited" over, they roamed the area (they live in the country). beau would be outside doing his business and the pitts would come over. but one day things turned ugly and beau paid for it. it was sad because beau was a really cool dog that didnt deserve what happened.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

No dog deserves an untimely death by two dogs rippingit apart. Kool dogs, hot dogs, old dogs, young dogs, smart dogs, stupid dogs, weak dogs, strong dogs, brave dogs, cowardly dogs, alpha dogs, etc. 

Evenso, I do not know that a dog should be euthanized because he was a member of a pack that attacked another dog and that dog died of its wounds. This case seems to be the perfect example where the bad dogs from the bad breed with a bad history with bad owners attack a good dog who is a good breed, who has good owners on the good dog's own property. 

I would imagine that not all cases are so cut and dried. For example, let's say the golden jumped the fence and got himself into the pit-bulls kennel, should the pits still be PTS? I am just worried that with blanket legislation, we could be here in a similar situation lamenting the fate of one of our beloveds.


----------



## Black N Tan (Sep 16, 2008)

I live in a place out in the country of good ole NC. Roaming dogs are normal out here in the country, but if one gets out of line, any neighbor wouldn't hesitate to shoot it. I am sorry to say, but if that happened to my dog and the PBs were out again on the streets, they would be walking targets. My aunt's dog was shot the other day(in the leg), because a farmer's cow was giving birth and the dog was just around. I have never killed a dog, but I am not afraid to put down a dangerous one, when there are so many children in my house and around where I live.


----------



## nysirk (Apr 15, 2008)

That is heartbreaking...... that poor Golden, what a way to go

In New York those pitts would have been PTS IMMEDIATELY

Last summer in my parents neighborhood there was these two Pitts always behind a fence, Right in front of an elementary school. The owners were your typical bad owners who wanted a "tough dogs" doubt those dogs knew anything outside that fence. 

One day they escaped their yard, Our very responsible dog owner, friendly neighbor, Donna was out walking her American Eskimo at the elementary school (it was summer so school was not in session Thank God) 

The two Pitts Charged Donna One jumped on her and knocked her down, The two pitts each grabbed one end of the Eskimo and just tore, Donna had no idea what to do a few passing cars saw the struggle and a man pulled into the school with his two young daughters in the back of his car (witnessing this terror), to started to kick the Pitts and tried pull them off, a police officer had been driving down that street just as this was going on, he Got out his Gun and just Shot it in the air (He didn't want to miss and get the Eskimo) It sacred the Pitts away. Within mins those pitts were in animal control. 
The Amazing part is the American Eskimo "holley" Did survive and is rehabed into pretty darn good shape beside a new found fear of large dogs
My father (Animal lover/ foster parent/ Rescue group/wildlife rehabiltator) was really upset by all this and Started a petition around the neighborhood to have the dogs PTS, The judge saw this case and put it at top priority, It was really like less then a week and those dogs were PTS.
The funny part is here in NY,(at least in my town) Pitts Don't ever get a second chance, they didn't even kill the dog. 

Your towns laws are horrible, I would def think those dogs should be PTS poor golden, Maybe trying out a petition thing and getting your non-pitt owning neighbors to sign it might help, I betcha you can find ALOT of people that would sign it and agree.

I do love pitts, Ive met some great ones, but they really can get nasty, when they have bad owners, and because of all the bad breeding and abuse of the breed. It took me a long time to be able to convince my parents and their neighbor Donna to please not "blame the breed, but blame the deed or more so or less blame the OWNERS!


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

If two GSDs kill a Yorkie, should the GSDs be PTS? If a dog kills another dog, I do not think that should necessarily net a death sentence. A fine, yes; restitution, definitely; putting your dogs down? Unless you go with BSL, then you cannot differentiate between a tiny terrier and a large Golden. A Yorkie can easily be killed accidentally by a GSD puppy. Should the puppy be put down? 

I do not know how you could phrase a law that says the one situation would be to euthanize the dogs and the other not. The alternative is to have the dogs evaluated by animal control and or a private trainer and hash it out in court whether the animals should be put down. That leaves a lot of room for individual prejudice against certain types of dogs. 

dog-dog aggression is not the same as dog-people aggression. 

On the other hand if you own a Rotty, a Pitt, or a GSD, then you need to be extra careful in keeping them under wraps.


----------



## zyppi (Jun 2, 2006)

The owners of the Golden should threaten a lawsuit -- maybe it's scare some sense into the owner of the Pits..

Too bad no one had a gun.


----------



## nysirk (Apr 15, 2008)

> Originally Posted By: selzerIf two GSDs kill a Yorkie, should the GSDs be PTS? If a dog kills another dog, I do not think that should necessarily net a death sentence. A fine, yes; restitution, definitely; putting your dogs down? Unless you go with BSL, then you cannot differentiate between a tiny terrier and a large Golden. A Yorkie can easily be killed accidentally by a GSD puppy. Should the puppy be put down?
> 
> I do not know how you could phrase a law that says the one situation would be to euthanize the dogs and the other not. The alternative is to have the dogs evaluated by animal control and or a private trainer and hash it out in court whether the animals should be put down. That leaves a lot of room for individual prejudice against certain types of dogs.
> 
> ...


I see what your saying and agree, no not all dogs should be put down because of one bad incident. My family has worked with a rescue group for years and I am all about saving dogs and rehabilitation and everything, but there are exceptions. 
Those pitt-owners in both story's honestly just don't deserve to have a dog especially a strong minded dog like a Pitt. They arent keeping them under wraps, why let dumb owners have a second chance? Re-homing is a great option, if the resources are available and the dogs are not too damaged. In the case of Pitt-Bulls attacks here in my town no second chances. 

Saddest thing is those Pitt owners that attacked the Eskimo, brought home a new Pitt-puppy the week following there dogs being PTS.







Wish there was some kind of a Law for Bad Dog Owners

dog-dog aggression is different from dog-people aggression, However you step in save your dog, ever hear of redirected aggression?? What if a child had been walking that dog??? 

If that Golden had been my dog, or that Eskimo could of just as easily been my parents shitzu, I would of been shooting too!


----------



## aubie (Dec 22, 2008)

I think you could write a law to discern "vicious" attacks or mauling. My BFF's young pup was killed while playing with her neighbors lab, it just snapped the pup's neck while playing. No vicious "intent" it just happend while playing too rough. She was understandibly upset, but never thought of any kind of charges.

But that's different from a dog mauling where a dog/dogs rips off a part of another dog or tears it to pieces and kills it. 

I think if a dog came into their yard and mauled or tore apart her puppy that would have been a different story. 

Maybe not a death sentence, but the dogs in question should be taken away to see if they can be rehibilitated instead of just imposing a fine on owners who apparently don't give a flying







anyway.

And sadly, in my state unless your dog who was killed can be proven to be worth money (like a show dog, etc) you can't get squat from a dog/dog death.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

So you sue for mental duress at having witnessed the carnage. Who cares if you win or not, if your lawyer works on a contingency basis, they will be paying through the nose to their lawyers for months on end. The point is a lesson learned. 

But this is one incident in a sea of incidents where irresponsible owners fail to train and socialize and contain their pets. 

If we need ANY kind of legislation, we need a court order disallowing people that are guilty of cruelty, gross neglect of an animal, or lack of containment that caused serious injuries to be barred from owning pets. In most states, you need a license to own a dog, but not until the dog is already in your possession and if you pay the ten spot, you have a license. Hike the price to $20, and run a back ground check on people to see if they have any priors. If they do, if a court found them guilty, they do not get the license and cannot legally own a dog. 

This way you are punishing owners, not dogs. This way you are not singling out breeders. There are laws being concocted which state that breeders should be finger printed. I say, if breeders, why not every dog owner? I guess I just don't like Breeder-specific-legislation.


----------



## HarleyB (Jan 31, 2009)

Wow,
My hick instinct would be kickin in an those 2 would be dead. I am in law enforcement. Where I am that could be considered trespassing if nothing else (not much but its something for the court.) The pd there might have to be nudged on this one but I am sure there is something on the books someplace to put an end to these guys. Unfortunatley, the ones that should be put down are the owners not the dogs, they have allowed this to happen. Go after their insurance company, mortgage holder, landlord etc whatever it takes. keep the pressure on. Someones gonna get hurt on this one.


----------



## IliamnasQuest (Aug 24, 2005)

My opinion is that if a dog attacks another dog and causes injuries that result in death, the attacking dog should be destroyed.

I don't hold much sympathy, I'm afraid. There are too many dogs with good temperaments dying at shelters every day for me to worry much about the dogs that have already learned aggressive behavior to that point (whether it be genetic or not, the aggression is there). There is just no purpose for dog aggression anymore (personally I think there never was, but especially in today's society). Let's not take a chance that the aggressive dog will ever have an opportunity again to kill someone's dog or someone's child. Yes, it is an owner problem but the dog has already developed the behavior - it may or may not ever be rehabilitated and there are other dogs that are more likely to become trustworthy.

And that goes double for dogs that go onto another dog's property and kill it. It doesn't matter to me what breed it is. If two GSDs had jumped that fence and killed the golden I'd feel the same way.

Let's stop encouraging pet people to keep the aggressive dogs when there are better pets out there. Most pet families are not equipped to handle aggressive dogs anyway.

Melanie and the gang in Alaska


----------



## Crabtree (Jan 6, 2006)

If the law won't deal with them then...
IMO they should be euthenized weather it is by needle or bullet the end results are the same. 

How do the owners of the golden get over something like this? Those dogs entered there home? 

I have a cat door so if one of them could squeeze through it they would have access to the whole house. What if I was in a room upstairs and an infant was asleep in it's crib. Would it be my fault for leaving the child unattended in it's own home?

Like I said, how do you recover from such a violent act that occured in your home? It's not like you can just never go back there. You have to relive it every day.

Im not down on Pitty's, in fact I love the breed, it's the idiot owners of the breed. Why in this day and age would they let the two on them be dog aggresive and able to pack together?


----------



## scannergirl (Feb 17, 2008)

The owners of the Golden posted a passionate letter full page in the local paper. If it was on-line I would link to it. They describe the scene in their house and it is horrendous. The first cleaning company refused the job. It took four days to get it cleaned up- the owners were too distraught to do it.
They are considering moving.
The fact that the PB owners should not own dogs is illustrated by the fact they did NOTHING after the other incidents, some of which did involve aggression against humans, although these dogs have yet to actually sucessfully attack a human. She managed to make it into her house, but barely. This was not an isolated incident.
The fact that the dogs were initially released back to the owners after they paid a fine in spite of both the brutality of the attack and that there had been multiple previous incidents with these animals indicates to me that NC law needs to be amended to allow the police and AC to act more forcefully. Kudos to the District attorney for stepping in and getting a court order too re-impound the dogs.
I think the dogs should be put down and there should be better laws in place to punish the owners of animals like this. 
I will look for a link to another paper- I'm sure this story made news in the nearby bigger markets.


----------



## scannergirl (Feb 17, 2008)

Here's a pretty good account of what happened. They did not mention other threatening behavior that the neighbors reported though,
Pit Bull attacks Golden in his own home 
The totally UNBELIEVABLE thing to me is according to this story legally there is NO difference if this had been a child. The visciousness of the attack is irrelevant- just as long as it's the FIRST ONE.
All NC residents need to be concerned about this.


----------



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

Give it a few days after that article. The dogs will die of poisoning, either by chemical or by lead. Just a matter of time before a concerned citizen to take matters into their own hands.


----------



## CWhite (Dec 8, 2004)

I feel sorry for all dogs concerned. 

If I am correct, dogs that are allowed to "roam" establish territory. This is a disaster waiting to happen. 

I hope the pits are evaluated and if they have solid temperaments, re-homed with RESPONSIBLE And EXPERIENCED DOMINANT BREED OWNERS.


----------



## scannergirl (Feb 17, 2008)

Update-got today's paper.
The Pit Bulls were euthanized after the owner relinquished them to SPCA.
The pressure from the public was overwhelming. 
There is a letter in the paper saying that although Jazzy, the Golden died a horrible death he will be responsible for the changing of the law that will probably happen because of this. He's a hero who saved many more lives through his death.
There is a nature preserve near here that I ride my horses in. Dogs are allowed, but only on leash. Horses are allowed as well.
I was riding with a young friend of mine when a pack of labs started chasing us. My horse startled, but my friend's horse (which I also own) spooked and ran into the woods. My friend came off, thankfully was not injured, and we managed to get my other horse without too much trouble after I chased the dogs away on my horse back to their owner. I sent a letter to the agency that manages the reserve describing the incident.
The next week I got a letter from the agency that was sent out to all horse owners in the town talking about the tragedy of allowing horses to poop in the woods. Seriously, this is what they worry about. (for the record I go back and send the droppings into the woods off the path, but they want us to dismount immediately and completely remove it from the reserve. Half the time I don't even know she lets loose because she doesn't stop) We are not breaking any rules by riding there, horse manure is good for the woods, and the dog owners who let their dogs run free ILLEGALLY could kill somebody.
OK, I get it.
Oh, and if my horses get loose, get hit by a car and somebody gets hurt guess what? I'm liable. The VERY FIRST TIME.


----------



## dreamofwrx (Sep 20, 2008)

I think the dogs should have been split up and sent to seperate homes with responsible owners who can handle this type of dog. Too many idiots are going to ruin it for the rest of us. Unfort, bulldog breeds are "in" right now, american bulldogs, amstaffs, pitbulls, cane corso, are the "ego" dog to have. I just hope they lose popularity before it is too late, as I will always have some type of bully breed in my pack. (unless the law says otherwise)


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

In my city the Pits would be deemed 'vicious animals' & ordered pts. Fighting that decision is expensive & rarely happens.

Yrs ago a GSD was deemed vicious after killing a cat on the cat's property & ordered pts. The people fought it vigorously & lost. Too damned bad the jerks didn't train, control & contain their dog while they could. It had previously attacked other animals, aggressed towards people & generally terrorized its neighborhood. The GSD's owners ignored all complaints & made (weak) excuses for their dog which they insisted on allowing to (illegally) roam free.

Their defense when it killed the cat??? That the dog did NOT kill the cat. The cat's owners elected to have it pts! The cat's vet testified the cat was hideously mauled, suffered a broken back in the attack & its injuries were fatal. The owners were advised to have the cat humanely pts rather than suffering a prolonged & painful death. The judge was hugely unimpressed with the dog owner's 'logic'.

Sue, a Husky was ordered pts after it seriously injured a smaller dog(Yorkie) while 'playing' with it. Those owners also fought the situation. I don't know if they ultimately lost or prevailed. Public opinion was largely on the Husky's side. Frankly, I wondered at the time if it wasn't a complete misunderstanding on everyone's part. The Husky was young & playful, but at the age where prey drive would have been developing. I think it could have been the onset of predation kicking in which initially looks (& is) very playful. IF so, the Husky would be dangerous to small pets. Some Sibes prey on small dogs as well as other small animals & for whatever reason, some Sibes (& Malamutes) fail to recognize Yorkies, Maltese & Poodles as dogs.


----------



## scannergirl (Feb 17, 2008)

I find it very sad that the irresponsibility of owners leads to the destruction, however necessary, of animals.


----------



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

> Quote:for whatever reason, some Sibes (& Malamutes) fail to recognize Yorkies, Maltese & Poodles as dogs.


I certainly don't blame them. I'm guilty of that as well.







In all seriousness, they really do look like small, super enticing stuffed tug toys with a HIGHLY functional squeaker.


----------



## Kayos and Havoc (Oct 17, 2002)

I am glad the owners surrendered the dogs and the were PTS. Maybe the first responsible thing this owner has done.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

How many weeks will go by before the owners will bring home another dog, another breed that needs decent leadership? 

Putting the dogs down, however necessary it may be, will not begin to solve the problem.


----------



## scannergirl (Feb 17, 2008)

There was an update in today's paper on the County's efforts to strengthen legislation. The public has flooded the commissioners with phone calls, letters and e-mails.
They are currently leaning towards BSL.








I guess it would be a way to make people feel better without the county having to really DO anything. Like if they developed real solutions, like increasing fines, impounding the dogs permanently, and even jail time for negligent owners.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I used to agree with breed-specific legislation. I have come a long way since then and am totally opposed to that and to breeder-specific legislation. However, I understand how people who are not dog-people would think that this is the answer. 

I think that dog-people, people who not only own dogs but are passionate about everything dog, need to educate the public. Not sure exactly how to go about doing that. Fighting BSL needs to be accompanied by programs that will change people's attitudes and understanding of dogs.


----------



## Riley's Mom (Jun 7, 2007)

I do try really hard to not **** a dog for being out of line in any way without knowing the circumstances that brought on the behavior. 9 x out of 10 it's something the human owner did wrong or didn't do right. The dog winds up paying for the errors and stupidity of the humans. I have no doubt this case is no different.

I have issues within me about Pits. I admit I'm afraid of them and that my fear is due totally to their reputation. Not fair, not right, shame on me. That doesn't make the fear go away. It seems just when I start making a little bit of progress into truly getting into the belief that unless trained to fight etc .. Pits are no different than any other dog breed. I actually saw one not to long ago that I found very attractive and from a distance could see the dog was being friendly. I start to take steps to be a better person and not blame the breed. Then something like this happens and I'm back to Square One at the very least. I might even get into negative numbers at times. 

I feel absolutely HORRIBLE for the golden and it's family! I would have nightmares living in their house and seeing the spot my dog was killed by another every day of my life. I probably couldn't handle it. I hope they do better at that than I could.

Because I believe it's not the dog's fault but human at the bottom line, I would like to see some professional, Cesar Millan type, Dog Town type place take them in. At least if they can't be rehabilitated, they would have a home for the rest of their lives AWAY from the irresponsible owners who created the monsters that killed the dog. 

I shudder to think what might have happened had they come across a child. I'm grateful to the attorney who was able to find a way to re-seize the dogs. At least they can't hurt anyone or anything else.


----------



## middleofnowhere (Dec 20, 2000)

> Originally Posted By: DianaM
> 
> 
> > Quote:for whatever reason, some Sibes (& Malamutes) fail to recognize Yorkies, Maltese & Poodles as dogs.
> ...


Bill Campbell put forth the idea that this may have to do with grooming & the purfuming and dressing of small dogs.


----------



## nathalie1977 (Sep 4, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: IliamnasQuestMy opinion is that if a dog attacks another dog and causes injuries that result in death, the attacking dog should be destroyed.
> 
> I don't hold much sympathy, I'm afraid. There are too many dogs with good temperaments dying at shelters every day for me to worry much about the dogs that have already learned aggressive behavior to that point (whether it be genetic or not, the aggression is there). There is just no purpose for dog aggression anymore (personally I think there never was, but especially in today's society). Let's not take a chance that the aggressive dog will ever have an opportunity again to kill someone's dog or someone's child. Yes, it is an owner problem but the dog has already developed the behavior - it may or may not ever be rehabilitated and there are other dogs that are more likely to become trustworthy.
> 
> ...


I completely agree with this post.

And the owners of such dogs should also be banned from owning dogs for at least a couple of years.


----------

