# Pitbull Attacks a man and Cop Shoots Pitbull



## GregK

What do you think, justifiable?

*Warning - kill shot*. 

Pitbull Attacks a man and Cop Shoots Pitbull in the head! - YouTube


----------



## wildo

Absolutely justified. Nice shot under heavy stress, I'm sure. Good on the cop... I'm sure the Animal Control guy was very thankful.


----------



## TommyB681

He did what he had to do to keep everyone safe. Shame for the dog but good shoot for the cop


----------



## DJEtzel

I watched this about a dozen times tyring to make a decision. Judging by what I saw in that video, no. If I were there in person, maybe. 

The dogs were not attacking from what I saw, the brown one was zooming around and playing with the catch pole because he didn't want to be caught. My Pit Bull (not Pitbull) does the same thing on a nightly basis when we get him riled up. When the AC officer fell he had PLENTY of time to bite and attack. This wasn't an attack, this was an officer having no idea what he was doing, IMO, and a trigger happy cop. The other two dogs just walked away when the gun fired; no attacking Pit Bull would do that.


----------



## MichaelE

And the problem was neither did the Animal Control officer nor the police officer.

They also didn't know the dogs.

I would have _probably_ fired too. I may have waited until the dog had actually grabbed an arm or leg, but then the risk of hitting the one being bitten rises significantly.

I hate to Monday morning quarterback incidences like these. I wasn't there. This dog may have a bite history or could have been the gentlist PB on the planet. You just don't know.


----------



## MiaMoo

Not justified. They didn't look like they were being terribly aggressive, it looked more like some energetic dogs reacting to the man's sporadic movements. The man was panicking and flailing his pole around, of course an animal is going to chase it. None of that looked like the dogs trying to attack the man.

If I were to run around my yard my dog would do the exact same thing. 

Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## gsdsar

Justified. If he had gone down again he could have been seriously injured. The officer had no way of knowing a warning shot would work. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## DJEtzel

gsdsar said:


> Justified. If he had gone down again he could have been seriously injured. The officer had no way of knowing a warning shot would work.
> 
> 
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App


But... He fell because he was running around like a fool and was an idiot, not because of the dogs. lol


----------



## mycobraracr

Justified, I saw three unsure dogs trying to scare off a "threat". I don't see too many dogs playing with hackles up.


----------



## wolfstraum

well - if there were 3 pit bulls circling me - and I fell....I sure would be thankful that the officer was there.

Look at all the videos on the side where the key words are 'pit bull' and 'attack'

Some are very very sad for the owners and their pets who are killed....I cried over the 17 year old cat killed in her own yard and her teen aged owner crying over the cat ....

I don't blame the officer at all....he was protecting the AC officer.

Lee


----------



## JackandMattie

Wow. It really looked like playtime (from the dogs' perspective) to me, as well...

I can't imagine catching _any_ dog, much less one of three amped up dogs, by running around in circles and panicking.

Could have been handled better IMO. I wasn't there, though...


----------



## DJEtzel

mycobraracr said:


> Justified, I saw three unsure dogs trying to scare off a "threat". I don't see too many dogs playing with hackles up.


You don't? I work at a private dog park with over 200 dogs as members and I see my own and other dogs playing with their hackles up on a daily basis. It absolutely is never a 100% sign of aggression.



wolfstraum said:


> well - if there were 3 pit bulls circling me - and I fell....I sure would be thankful that the officer was there.


Why? You would have fallen, gotten back up, and stumbled around a few more times without being bit before the cop actually shot a dog... He fell and got up just fine with no attack happening.


----------



## GSDolch

Sorry but I believe it was justified. Its easy to arm chair quarterback and say "my dog ....." 

Keep in mind that most people on this board who do the "well my dog..." don't let their dogs get into a position where its even a question. 

It was a question here and if I had been in that situation I probably woulda shot to. If anyone on this board had been on a walk and this happened to them, the majority of people on this board would praise them for taking any action to keep themselves safe, so why is it different for the cop?

I say blame the dogs owners, not the cop, or the dog.


----------



## Shaolin

Justified, sadly. You just never know with ANY dog, from a Pit Bull down to a Pomeranian and everything in between. LEOs and most AC people are not animal behaviorists or trainers, so what we see as playing or strictly defensive actions, to another inexperienced person can be seen as an attack or an animal about to attack.

It sucks, but it was a clean shoot.


----------



## gsdsar

Sorry. I have now watched this video multiple times. The brown dog was going in for a bite when shot. Yes the officer was all over the place, he was fending off dogs from all sides. They were not playing. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## DJEtzel

I kind of want to take my Pit Bull into the backyard when I get home with a 6' pvc pole that we have of 1" diameter, tape a loop of string the end, and record what he does when I stick it at him. I can almost guarantee he would look just like these dogs did.

Is it a good idea to use caution in a situation like this? Absolutely. A warning shot in the air would have been a good place to start, imo. Or, waiting until there was actually an ATTACK, you know... Maybe a competent officer would help, as well.

eta; I think these questions on a GSD board are kind of silly, as well. Many people here dislike Pit Bulls and terriers in general, and have no experience with them, what do you think they're going to say?


----------



## wildo

DJEtzel said:


> A warning shot in the air would have been a good place to start, imo.


Absolutely not! The officer made a smart choice in being aware of where that bullet was going to go. Right through the dog and into a very big hill side. Warning shot _in the air_ is how people die.


----------



## DJEtzel

wildo said:


> Absolutely not! The officer made a smart choice in being aware of where that bullet was going to go. Right through the dog and into a very big hill side. Warning shot _in the air_ is how people die.


I guess I don't agree. Either know that you're shooting something that is going to hurt something or don't shoot, then. I bet slamming a car door would have done the trick, as well. Again, uneducated people taking care of dogs. I don't blame the cop as much as I do the animal control officer, but still.

Heck, cops carry mace.. He could have walked up and sprayed at the dog and the situation could have been avoided.


----------



## MichaelE

And just where does the 'warning shot' land? You are accountable for any shots fired.

Top of a bystanders head, a little kids bedroom maybe? Warning shots are never a good idea. If you have to draw a weapon you better be ready to use it as intended on the target.


----------



## DJEtzel

MichaelE said:


> And just where does the 'warning shot' land? You are accountable for any shots fired.
> 
> Top of a bystanders head, a little kids bedroom maybe? Warning shots are never a good idea. If you have to draw a weapon you better be ready to use it as intended on the target.


I am not a cop, and that is not the point. He could have just as easily fired into the hill without the dog present if he was going to decide he needed to fire.


----------



## wildo

MichaelE said:


> And just where does the 'warning shot' land? You are accountable for any shots fired.
> 
> Top of a bystanders head, a little kids bedroom maybe? Warning shots are never a good idea. If you have to draw a weapon you better be ready to use it as intended on the target.


Exactly. Jeff Cooper's Firearm saftey rules.

*RULE I: ALL GUNS ARE ALWAYS LOADED
RULE II: NEVER LET THE MUZZLE COVER ANYTHING YOU ARE NOT WILLING TO DESTROY 
RULE III: KEEP YOUR FINGER OFF THE TRIGGER UNTIL YOUR SIGHTS ARE ON THE TARGET
RULE IV: BE SURE OF YOUR TARGET
*


----------



## DJEtzel

gsdsar said:


> Sorry. I have now watched this video multiple times. The brown dog was going in for a bite when shot. Yes the officer was all over the place, he was fending off dogs from all sides. They were not playing.
> 
> 
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App


Did you slow it down and freeze it? I went back and did this just now because I didn't see that. The dog was dodging the catch pole and moving towards the concrete barrier while flinching, it appears, as the cop shot him. He was not moving towards the AC officer.


----------



## GSDolch

DJEtzel said:


> Absolutely. A warning shot in the air would have been a good place to start, imo.



In all seriousness I hope you don't own a gun.

This is one very BIG no no rule in shooting/owning guns. That bullet has to come down somewhere, and you have now just put anyone outside at risk of having it come down on them.


----------



## GregK

The shot wasn't justified at that particular time. I'll explain later - gotta run. Keep it civil so it stays open.


----------



## DJEtzel

GSDolch said:


> In all seriousness I hope you don't own a gun.
> 
> This is one very BIG no no rule in shooting/owning guns. That bullet has to come down somewhere, and you have no just put anyone outside at risk of having it come down on them.


I own numerous guns. I wouldn't be drawing a gun in any sort of situation like this though. As I said, he didn't have to shoot in the air, I'm saying a warning shot (into the dirt) would have sufficed. Shooting towards a human at a very quick dog was a terrible idea, in my mind. He's lucky that it ended as well as it did.

eta; I'm looking forward to hearing your response, Greg.


----------



## Sunflowers

DJEtzel said:


> Is it a good idea to use caution in a situation like this? Absolutely. A warning shot in the air would have been a good place to start, imo. Or, waiting until there was actually an ATTACK, you know...





DJEtzel said:


> I own numerous guns..



And you thought_ shooting in the air _would be a good idea? Or waiting until the chaos of an attack would have occurred?
Perhaps a gun safety course might be in order?


----------



## GSDolch

DJEtzel said:


> I own numerous guns. I wouldn't be drawing a gun in any sort of situation like this though. As I said, he didn't have to shoot in the air, I'm saying a warning shot (into the dirt) would have sufficed. Shooting towards a human at a very quick dog was a terrible idea, in my mind. He's lucky that it ended as well as it did.



Advocating shooting up in the air in any situation (which you did ) or any "warning shot" not at the intended target is irresponsible gun ownership. There is already the chance that shooting at the intended target could go wrong..your advice just increases that chance.

I'm not going to continue with the gun debate, but if I've learned anything, is that just because someone owns a gun doesn't make them responsible.

I also find your "uneducated people dealing with dogs" comment amusing, considering educated people who deal with dogs are agreeing with the dog being shot.


----------



## DJEtzel

Sunflowers said:


> And you thought_ shooting in the air _would be a good idea?
> Perhaps a gun safety course might be in order?


I have taken three gun saftey courses in my life and I'm taking a concealed weapons class soon. 

As I said, I retracted that after the fact, my point was a warning shot, I don't know why I included in the air. It is obviously a terrible idea. That wasn't the point I was getting at though so I was not paying attention.


----------



## wildo

KOAU30- that sort of language is not allowed on this forum.

*KOAU30's post was removed for obvious reasons. Thank you. ADMIN*


----------



## Liesje

Can't comment on the video, don't know the circumstances (why was AC called out, what's the dog's previous history, etc) but I'd be in a rage if I knew cops were firing shots as warnings. IMO you don't draw a gun unless you intend to shoot and you don't shoot unless you are prepared to kill so if you aren't prepared or justified in killing then you don't draw the weapon, period. If he was justified in drawing his weapon, then based on the video he used it appropriately. A few years ago a loose bullet missed my left temple by 4 inches (two different state police agencies were involved) so I'm pretty hot and bothered about people firing weapons when they aren't serious. Almost having your head blown open by accident will change one's attitude.


----------



## DJEtzel

GSDolch said:


> I also find your "uneducated people dealing with dogs" comment amusing, considering educated people who deal with dogs are agreeing with the dog being shot.


But I'm also an educated person that works with dogs disagreeing. Obviously there is no wrong or right, it is an opinion. And none of us were there so theirs are not right over mine. The Animal Control officer was very obviously not in the position to be doing what he was doing and had no idea how to act in the situation, which was extremely unsafe and I think that the dog in question died becuase of his actions. Plain and simple.

Did I mis-type and word something the wrong way? Yes, but that doesn't mean that I haven't had the education or skill to own or fire a weapon. I was in a rage typing about something else and was not paying attention. I tend to pay a lot more attention to something I'm actually seeing or holding than typing about.


----------



## Mrs.K

DJEtzel said:


> I kind of want to take my Pit Bull into the backyard when I get home with a 6' pvc pole that we have of 1" diameter, tape a loop of string the end, and record what he does when I stick it at him. I can almost guarantee he would look just like these dogs did.
> 
> Is it a good idea to use caution in a situation like this? Absolutely. A warning shot in the air would have been a good place to start, imo. Or, waiting until there was actually an ATTACK, you know... Maybe a competent officer would help, as well.
> 
> eta; I think these questions on a GSD board are kind of silly, as well. Many people here dislike Pit Bulls and terriers in general, and have no experience with them, what do you think they're going to say?


THIS IS YOU, with a flirtpole. It's not a bunch of strangers posing a threat. 

You don't know what your dog is going to do unless your dog finds himself in that situation. 

The shot was absolutely justified!


----------



## Sunflowers

DJEtzel said:


> I have taken three gun saftey courses in my life and I'm taking a concealed weapons class soon.
> 
> As I said, I retracted that after the fact, my point was a warning shot, I don't know why I included in the air. It is obviously a terrible idea. That wasn't the point I was getting at though so I was not paying attention.


Then surely you know that warning shots can get you prison time.
Good for you for a taking a concealed weapons class soon.


----------



## DJEtzel

Mrs.K said:


> THIS IS YOU, with a flirtpole. It's not a bunch of strangers posing a threat.
> 
> You don't know what your dog is going to do unless your dog finds himself in that situation.
> 
> The shot was absolutely justified!


So my dog is going to look the exact same way and react the exact same way that those dogs did, but mine is playing and those aren't? :crazy:

I'm not talking about a flirtpole. I'm talking about a catch pole.

Honestly, these are all biased opinions as far as I am concerned.


----------



## Kaiser2012

Warning shots get cops fired. The use of a gun is for deadly force scenarios only. You pull the trigger, that muzzle had better be pointed at the threat, and that threat had better be endangering your or someone else's life. Not the air. Not the ground. Dogs have been shown to continue to fight through pepper spray. I would need to know more about this scenario...what happened before the video began, history of the dogs (or whatever info a.c. and le had...ultimately it's too hard to judge from this video without being there or having the aforementioned information. I've seen worse dog attacks, and I've seen horribly unjustified shootings. 

Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## DJEtzel

Sunflowers said:


> Then surely you know that warning shots can get you prison time.
> Good for you for a taking a concealed weapons class soon.


I honestly would not care if I were in this situation. I wouldn't fire into the air, but if I had no other means of calming the situation as this guy, I would fire a warning shot at something to try to difuse the situation, because I'm not shooting a dog that isn't a threat, plain and simple. 

BUT, since I know a thing or two about dogs, it wouldn't come down to that and I would either shoot and kill that dog or control the situation without a weapon. I'm not saying what *I* would do, but what that officer could have done differently. Luckily, I will never be in his position.


----------



## Sunflowers

DJEtzel said:


> Did I mis-type and word something the wrong way? Yes, but that doesn't mean that I haven't had the education or skill to own or fire a weapon. I was in a rage typing about something else and was not paying attention. I tend to pay a lot more attention to something I'm actually seeing or holding than typing about.


I mean this in the nicest possible way.
The fact that you even typed this, and are a gun owner, is worrisome.
Why? 
Because when you actually have to use one, you don't have time to think, and you just may be scared out of your mind, or in a rage. 
If you own a gun, you are responsible for using it properly. You need to pay attention.
Every. Single. Time.
You need to practice handling it, and knowing the laws by heart regarding what you can and can't do with it, until is as second nature as driving a car or riding a bike.
There is no second chance to take back a shot, when you actually fire one, and you own that shot, from start to finish.


----------



## DJEtzel

Kaiser2012 said:


> Warning shots get cops fired. The use of a gun is for deadly force scenarios only. You pull the trigger, that muzzle had better be pointed at the threat, and that threat had better be endangering your or someone else's life. Not the air. Not the ground. Dogs have been shown to continue to fight through pepper spray. I would need to know more about this scenario...what happened before the video began, history of the dogs (or whatever info a.c. and le had...ultimately it's too hard to judge from this video without being there or having the aforementioned information. I've seen worse dog attacks, and I've seen horribly unjustified shootings.
> 
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App


But dogs WEREN'T fighting. No one was bit, no dogs were fighting, those dogs were not set on aggression or they would have engaged RIGHT away.


----------



## wildo

DJEtzel said:


> Honestly, these are all biased opinions as far as I am concerned.


I volunteer with our local pit bull advocacy group. I support their cause. I have no bias _against_ pitties (I do have bias _towards_ other breeds though). This dog didn't die because some animal control officer messed up. The dog died as a result of indiscriminate breeding practices, over population, and pathetic lack of responsibility from ownership. Neither the AC officer nor the police officer failed this dog.


----------



## Sunflowers

DJEtzel said:


> I honestly would not care if I were in this situation. I wouldn't fire into the air, but if I had no other means of calming the situation as this guy, I would fire a warning shot at something to try to difuse the situation, .


A woman here got 20 years for a warning shot.
You need to care, I think.


----------



## DJEtzel

Sunflowers said:


> I mean this in the nicest possible way.
> The fact that you even typed this, and are a gun owner, is worrisome.
> Why?
> Because when you actually have to use one, you don't have time to think, and you just may be scared out of your mind, or in a rage.
> If you own a gun, you are responsible for using it properly. You need to pay attention.
> Every. Single. Time.
> You need to practice handling it, and knowing the laws by heart regarding what you can and can't do with it, until is as second nature as driving a car or riding a bike.
> There is no second chance to take back a shot, when you actually fire one, and you own that shot, from start to finish.


As I said, when I am actually handling a gun, I pay attention. I am not worried about what I'm typing on a forum to care that much and pay that close of attention. If you think I'm nuts, irrseponsible, whatever, that's fine. That wasn't what I was worried about getting across so I don't care.


----------



## GSDolch

wildo said:


> KOAU30- that sort of language is not allowed on this forum.



I find it interesting that this is the first post they decided to make. I reported them, lol.


----------



## DJEtzel

Sunflowers said:


> A woman here got 20 years for a warning shot.
> You need to care, I think.


 Again, if I were that guy, which I will thankfully NEVER be, and absolutely felt the need to do SOMETHING, I would choose that over killing a dog that isn't harming anyone, sorry.


----------



## GSDolch

Sunflowers said:


> I mean this in the nicest possible way.
> The fact that you even typed this, and are a gun owner, is worrisome.
> Why?
> Because when you actually have to use one, you don't have time to think, and you just may be scared out of your mind, or in a rage.
> If you own a gun, you are responsible for using it properly. You need to pay attention.
> Every. Single. Time.
> You need to practice handling it, and knowing the laws by heart regarding what you can and can't do with it, until is as second nature as driving a car or riding a bike.
> There is no second chance to take back a shot, when you actually fire one, and you own that shot, from start to finish.




:thumbup:


----------



## Mrs.K

Honestly, I've spoken out against shooting dogs. 

But when exactly is it justified to shoot one? Should he have been on the ground getting mauled first? 

In this case, I'd say absolutely justified. To me it looked like he was going after the leg right before he was shot.

We can go about this all day long. Stop the video, go back and forth and disect ever single second. In that moment, they didn't have that time. They can't stop a video and go back to look what the dog is doing. There were three dogs. The brown one looked like he was just going after the guys leg. The cop shot! Justified.


----------



## DJEtzel

My point stands. This guy had no idea what he was doing and KILLED something. That is beyond rage to me. Felony or not, he would have better served the situation to not do anything or shoot somewhere else.


----------



## wildo

DJEtzel said:


> This guy had no idea what he was doing and KILLED something.


I think exactly the opposite. I think he knew exactly what he was doing and killed something.

And Mrs.K- *NO* he should not have to be on the ground getting mauled before the dog is dispatched.


----------



## DJEtzel

Mrs.K said:


> Honestly, I've spoken out against shooting dogs.
> 
> But when exactly is it justified to shoot one? Should he have been on the ground getting mauled first?
> 
> In this case, I'd say absolutely justified. To me it looked like he was going after the leg right before he was shot.
> 
> We can go about this all day long. Stop the video, go back and forth and disect ever single second. In that moment, they didn't have that time. They can't stop a video and go back to look what the dog is doing. There were three dogs. The brown one looked like he was just going after the guys leg. The cop shot! Justified.


This is the thing though; to an untrained eye, a terrier playing the way it does looks like it's about to attack someone. My terrier looks like he is going to kill my boyfriend on a daily basis but has absolutely no intent to. When STRANGERS get him riled up and play with him, he looks the same way. It's how they play. That doesn't make it justified.


----------



## Mrs.K

Well, maybe you should have been there instead then.


----------



## JackandMattie

Well, this has been on my mind and I watched again and thought about it while I was taking a break, and as confident as I am with dogs, I probably would have been running in circles and panicky as well...I just pray I am never in that situation.

Maybe they tried corralling the dogs differently, we don't know. We only see a few seconds at the end of the situation where things look all willy nilly.

As it stands, I do need to state that the police officer reacted very well, and that was a *great* shot.

And I completely agree that while it's sad to lose a dog's life, human life prevails. And it's not the AC officer or the police officer at fault here... even if they screwed up royally before the vid started, which we will probably never know. It's the dog _owner's_ fault that the dog was put down, period.


----------



## wildo

Cops shouldn't have to be animal behaviorists in order to do their job. They don't have to know how certain breeds look when they are playing. The onus is on the OWNER to _contain _the dog _train_ the dog not to run away. It's the police officer's job to ensure the safety of the people- to serve the people. In this case he stopped a potentially dangerous situation from escalating. Blame the owners for their irresponsibility- not the cop for doing his job.

There have been some clear video of unjustified shootings of dogs displayed on these forums. But this one simply isn't one in my mind. When the AC officer went down, the situation escalated like it or not. The cop was fast thinking and made a SAFE, CLEAR shot resolving the situation.


----------



## Mrs.K

wildo said:


> Cops shouldn't have to be animal behaviorists in order to do their job. They don't have to know how certain breeds look when they are playing. The onus is on the OWNER to _contain _the dog _train_ the dog not to run away. It's the police officer's job to ensure the safety of the people- to serve the people. In this case he stopped a potentially dangerous situation from escalating. Blame the owners for their irresponsibility- not the cop for doing his job.
> 
> There have been some clear video of unjustified shootings of dogs displayed on these forums. But this one simply isn't one in my mind. When the AC officer went down, the situation escalated like it or not. The cop was fast thinking and made a SAFE, CLEAR shot resolving the situation.



AGREED!

This one was absolutely justified and in my opinion, this wasn't just play. Those dogs were unsure about themselves. If one had went in to go after that leg, I wouldn't have been surprised if they all had went in to finish him off. 

The officer did what he had to do.


----------



## DJEtzel

You can't ask "was this justified" and expect not to hear blame. I obviously think it wasn't justified, so yes, I think the cop made a huge mistake. 

That doesn't mean I don't blame the owners of the dogs, though... but what if they were stray dogs? Who is to blame, then?

German Shepherds acting this way? Definitely would have been justified. I just see this way too often to have any desire to think this is what an aggressive pit bull looks like. lol.


----------



## DaniFani

DJEtzel said:


> This is the thing though; to an untrained eye, a terrier playing the way it does looks like it's about to attack someone. My terrier looks like he is going to kill my boyfriend on a daily basis but has absolutely no intent to. When STRANGERS get him riled up and play with him, he looks the same way. It's how they play. That doesn't make it justified.


D, something tells me you have never been in a situation where you don't have control and need to make a decision, immediately, with some not-so-pleasant-consequences. Something also tells me that you would not be NEARLY as calm and collected as you think you would be. If you can't keep it together when DISCUSSING what you'd do if you were armed at the scene, I'd hate to see what you'd actually do in a stressful situation, while armed.

Do society a favor, take some more gun safety classes, maybe do a ride along with a local police department, and maybe some temper control therapy(before you even pick up a gun). Your continuous stream of comments regarding what you would do, is extremely disheartening, worrisome, and angers me that people with your mentality are what give responsible gun owners a bad rap. Just because you would go to jail for something, doesn't change the fact that it's ILLEGAL! 

GSD, pittie, rottie, pomeranian...doesn't matter, I think a shot was justifiable. Not the police officers fault, nor the dogs, nor animal control. Over population, completely unregulated breeding practices, and irresponsible/uneducated owners. THAT is who you should direct some of your "rage" at, DJEtzel.


----------



## Shaolin

DJEtzel said:


> This is the thing though; to an untrained eye, a terrier playing the way it does looks like it's about to attack someone. My terrier looks like he is going to kill my boyfriend on a daily basis but has absolutely no intent to. When STRANGERS get him riled up and play with him, he looks the same way. It's how they play. That doesn't make it justified.


It's all in how it looks, sadly. I would not want a LEO to wait until the first bite to shoot, no matter what the breed is. If it were my dog and he was doing the same thing that those dogs were doing, I wouldn't be upset at the LEO, I'd be angry at myself for letting my dog get into such a position. GSDs, just like ASTs are large, powerful dogs known for debilitating and deadly bites.


----------



## DJEtzel

DaniFani said:


> D, something tells me you have never been in a situation where you don't have control and need to make a decision, immediately, with some not-so-pleasant-consequences. Something also tells me that you would not be NEARLY as calm and collected as you think you would be. If you can't keep it together when DISCUSSING what you'd do if you were armed at the scene, I'd hate to see what you'd actually do in a stressful situation, while armed.


I didn't keep it together because of other people's biased opinions, not because of the scene. I've come very close to being attacked by dogs, I've been bit by dogs, and I've broken up dog fights, all without a weapon. I think I am capable of remaining calm when things like this are happening.


----------



## DaniFani

DJEtzel said:


> That doesn't mean I don't blame the owners of the dogs, though... but what if they were stray dogs? Who is to blame, then?
> 
> German Shepherds acting this way? Definitely would have been justified. I just see this way too often to have any desire to think this is what an aggressive pit bull looks like. lol.


Huh? Do you really want to play the blame game in that scenario...unregulated breeding practices (ie the government), puppies came from owners of a bitch at some point, so I would STILL blame some owner along the line....who would you blame? Let me guess...the police?  It's easy to blame the people who have to take care of the problem, when the people who caused the problem aren't right in front of you. Think outside your box, sometimes the blame lies in someone who isn't there....


----------



## DJEtzel

You can only blame so far back.


----------



## Mrs.K

Dj, everytime it's something about pit bulls, they just can't do wrong in your eyes. 

Warning, this is VERY graphic. I've watched numerous videos where pit bulls attacked someone and right before the attack it all looked like play.
I've boarded Pit Bulls and with the cropped ears, you can barely see any ear play at all and it's not easy to read those dogs. 

GRAPHIC WARNING GRAPHIC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3n7nsFAB-o&feature=youtu.be
Lots of blood, dog wagging his tail. Just looks like it's a game to the dog, playing tug of war but he's bitten a human, holding onto the arm. The guy lost so much blood by the end of the video, it's ridiculous. He's very calm and probably in shock. 

So is that FINALLY a justifiable killing of the dog? They don't show how the dog is killed but halfway through, the dog is dead and the guy treated. 

With a GSD you can absolutely and always tell when it's no longer a game. With Pits on the other hand, it's a very fine line. Some are easier to read than others but most of the time, it looked just like in the video from the OP. Except when they were sent out to attack someone. Like this video:


----------



## lhczth

Can we please keep the discussion about the incident and leave out any discussions about actual gun usage, CCL, etc? You can talk about shooting/gun usage in the context of the topic, but not as a separate topic.

Thank you. ADMIN Lisa


----------



## DaniFani

DJEtzel said:


> You can only blame so far back.


You're losing me here, D. This is such an obtuse, silly, cop-out...(haha, like my pun??). Of COURSE I can blame back, I can blame back to where the problem started...because THAT's where the problem started. It's ignorant (imo) to pick and choose what you want to look at....the whole picture ALWAYS needs to be taken into account...this video is a moment in time. 

I agree with PP, it isn't the cops job to be an animal behaviorist...**** I know a lot of VETERINARIANS who don't know jack about animal behavior when it comes to play vs aggression...and to then expect them to know it by breed...nope. 

The LE and animal control are RESPONDERS, they respond and make sure everyone is safe. If it comes down to animal vs human, human wins every time.

And I know a lot of LE, almost everyone likes animals more (they get a little jaded when dealing with the scum of the scum and the judgemental ***** who like to tell them how to do their job but have never stepped foot on their side of the street) than people...but their JOB is to protect PEOPLE first and foremost.

Little tangent side story...my husband, years ago, was responding to a hit and run of a dog. Got there and this dog was snarling and snapping, obviously very broken up, couldn't walk/move it's legs. A couple bystanders were there, animal control was taking too long, the bystanders told my husband he should just shoot the dog, put it down, take it out of it's misery. My husband wrapped a towel around the dogs head, put it in his cruiser, got bit a few times, blood everywhere, and drove lights and sirens, to the nearest animal hospital. He was so beat up over that dang dog. 

I would bet that the officer in this video didn't like or want to shoot the dog, I would bet he waited as long as he could, possibly too long, before finally shooting...or maybe I'm just an optimistic sap...I'll tell you one thing D, it isn't what they show you on the news or in Hollywood. Seriously, go on a ride along. That's what we tell all our "know it all" friends to do. They are always a little shaken up by what they see happening in ,"their town" and are at least a LITTLE less 'know it all" when they hear about LE making hard decisions and calls.


----------



## Mrs.K

Is this just play? It is the EXACT same behavior like in the video from the OP. 








Or what about this? PLAY? Now, here it is very apparent that it is an attack


----------



## TrickyShepherd

** comments removed by ADMIN. See request above**

As of the video...

I love dogs like everyone on here.... Obviously, I'm an active member of a dog forum . I love all animals. But in NO way, NO situation, is an animal EVER worth a human's life. I do believe this cop was justified (from what I can see, and from the facts I can take from this video.. no assuming). This is not about how much experience the AC officer has.... he went to help the best he could, it was a LOT to deal with... and we have no idea why he was called out. Maybe earlier that day the dog bit a child.. or they attacked and killed a neighbor's dog... we have no clue. So we can't assume that these dogs were just innocent little pups in their yard... nor can we assume they were man eaters. There's no information or facts on that. All we can say is.... the dogs got riled up... playing or not.... and the AC officer went down, at that moment the dog went for the leg (whether to actually bite, or just nip in play... Who knows).... and at that point the officer's job is to protect and serve the people first. He did so. And I have to say... that was a dang good shot. Clean, precise, and right on target with the most responsible place to shot into. The dog died instantly it looked like. That to me, does not show a trigger happy cop, or an uneducated one. He did his job the best he could in a fast paced, stressful situation that could turn very ugly, very fast.

We can't compare these dogs to ours. We know our dogs well, their every movement, their every mood... etc. I KNOW when my dogs are playing, or being aggressive. But that's because they are mine.. I live with them 24/7, I train them, I feed them, I care for them. These are a group of LEOs and ACOs called onto a scene with dogs they do NOT know, never have seen... You can NEVER drop your guard when dealing with strange dogs. That goes without saying and without knowing why they were called in. A dog can go from playing to aggression in a split second. Why wait until someone is hospitalized to protect them? Sometimes, you have to make a fast decision that may not be pleasant.. It happens. I feel terrible for the dog, but this is exactly why you don't allow your dogs to go running around on the street, terrorizing the neighbors. Play or not, people have the right to feel safe when they open their door and walk outside. The owner is the blame, and the ACO and LEO were doing their jobs. 

Without being in the situation, you can't make assumptions about what you would have done. You weren't there. When you are in that situation, THEN you can pick it apart and make comments on what should have happened.


----------



## DaniFani

lhczth said:


> Can we please keep the discussion about the incident and leave out any discussions about actual gun usage, CCL, etc? You can talk about shooting/gun usage in the context of the topic, but not as a separate topic.
> 
> Thank you. ADMIN Lisa


*** message deleted by Admin.** *

*Sorry, you do not get the last word when I have said to stay on topic. Next time you will receive a formal warning. ADMIN Lisa*


----------



## DJEtzel

Mrs.K said:


> Dj, everytime it's something about pit bulls, they just can't do wrong in your eyes.


That's not true at all. I evaluate pit bulls for foster placement and turn them down on a regular basis because they are not safe dogs. I do the same with GSD mixes and Labrador Mixes. I almost had to put my foster puppy to sleep because he was too aggressive, and I am refraining from fostering a young pup who will be put to sleep because he is too aggressive. I met him this weekend at 8 weeks old and the first thing he did was latch onto my arm and draw blood. I don't believe I have the skills to make him safe from that point at that age. I am lucky to have been able to make progress with my current puppy and place him up for adoption. 

I have given warnings to owners of Pit Bulls at our dog park before we enacted a ban because their dogs were not behaving properly. I am realistic when it comes to the breed and what they can do and how they do it and I would never say that ANY dog whom attacked a person shouldn't be killed, regardless of the manner it was done it. 

They are not all safe dogs, just as all GSDs aren't, but when they ARE being safe and misunderstood or there is fear mongering, I'm going to say something about it. But, the arguements that get started here about pit bulls are often jaded, biased, or lacking information, as is the majority of this forum, because they are herding breed owners, not terrier owners, and the media distorts the facts about Pit breeds. 

I watched both videos and I'm not sure what you want me to say? It's obvious both Pit Bulls hurt humans intentionally and should be euthanized for that. I have no idea what happened in the first video that you want me to comment on, because the video doesn't start until the man is half mangled and there's a pool of blood.


----------



## DJEtzel

Mrs.K said:


> Is this just play? It is the EXACT same behavior like in the video from the OP.
> 
> 
> Pitbull Attack Caught on Tape! - YouTube
> 
> 
> Or what about this? PLAY? Now, here it is very apparent that it is an attack
> Graphic Content: Nampa police release video of dogs attacking officer prior to shooting - YouTube


The first video is extremely over exposed and shakey and I can barely see what is going on in most of it. I would be willing to bet if people weren't chasing and running from the dog, it wouldn't have gone into prey mode and even made contact with a human, but it doesn't look like he attacked anyone? I can barely make out the dog grabbing the kid's pant leg, and afterwards he gets up and walks away just fine and neither him nor his mom are paying any attention to his leg. Likewise, the dog was shot once? And walks away afterwards? If he were trying to kill anyone, he wouldn't have stopped until he were dead, like the second video which is obviously completely warranted. That said, I think the officer of the first made a reasonable call because there was hysteria and the dog made contact. HE doesn't know if the dog is playing tug or attacking. AND I am happy that no one died. BUT, that doesn't mean that it wasn't still play with contact only intitiated by running, and not in an aggressive manner. Can't say because again, I wasn't there and can barely see the dog in most of the video.

Again, it's the way these dogs play and when dogs like this exist, it's up to the people responsible for them to keep them from looking like they are attacking. The dogs in the first video, imo, don't even LOOK like they're about to attack. The one here, yes, the dog LOOKS like it to anyone on the street so I don't blame the officer, but he very well may not have. My Pit Bull has fantastic impulse control and will grab our hands when we're playing and bite just hard enough to hold on so that we can throw him around, will pull us by the pants or jump at us while we're standing etc. And we can call him off at any point and make him stop, but I bet our neighbors think he's killing us sometimes when looking through our windows into our living room.


----------



## DaniFani

And on a completely different side not, D, your Fraggle Rock Collars are ADORABLE!! I love love love the dinosaur one, super cute!


----------



## DJEtzel

DaniFani said:


> And on a completely different side not, D, your Fraggle Rock Collars are ADORABLE!! I love love love the dinosaur one, super cute!


Thank you.


----------



## sitstay

It was justified. The tan dog sure looked like it meant business when the guy slipped and fell. 
Sheilah


----------



## Anubis_Star

The dogs hackles were clearly raised. Low movements, actively nipping at legs. An outright attack? Not exacty but 3 dogs trying to warn off for sure. That would of easily led to an outright attack.

Man moving around like an idiot? Im sorry but 3 large dogs of any breed actively coming at you in an aggressive manner, as they were, and its just human nature to avoid.

Its easy to sit and judge from behind the safety of our computer screen but if you were in that position its 100% different. Not the fault of AC or PD but of the owners or handlers that could not properly contain 3 large powerful dogs.

Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Syaoransbear

He shot after the man got up, so I don't really see the point of shooting the pitbull. The pitbull even jumped back when he fell. I don't think any of them were going to bite, they just seemed pretty amped up. I don't really have an opinion about whether or not this was justified, but from watching the AC dude run around among the dogs... I don't think this was handled as well as it could have been.


----------



## DJEtzel

Anubis_Star said:


> The dogs hackles were clearly raised.


What does that indicate, to you?


----------



## arycrest

DJEtzel said:


> I watched this about a dozen times tyring to make a decision. Judging by what I saw in that video, no. If I were there in person, maybe.
> 
> The dogs were not attacking from what I saw, the brown one was zooming around and playing with the catch pole because he didn't want to be caught. My Pit Bull (not Pitbull) does the same thing on a nightly basis when we get him riled up. When the AC officer fell he had PLENTY of time to bite and attack. This wasn't an attack, this was an officer having no idea what he was doing, IMO, and a trigger happy cop. The other two dogs just walked away when the gun fired; no attacking Pit Bull would do that.


The cop didn't have the luxury of watching the scenario "about a dozen times trying to make a decision" ... he had seconds to react. It was a dangerous situation and IMHO, sad as it seems, I feel the cop was justified in shooting the dog.


----------



## Anubis_Star

Well that almost proves a point. You said warning shot in the air because it was an instant thought that popped into your mind. You retracted it a few seconds later but if you were there that instant thought could of been an instant action that ended with someone being hurt, not able to be retracted later.

Why cant the same be said for the officer? I still thinks it justifiable but you had to watch the video a dozen times before you said you could make a clear decision as to if it was justifiable or not, at which time you said no it was play. 

No offense but I find it almost ridiculous that you have to re-watch and freeze frame it so you can so "nope not attack it was play, shouldnt of shot!" That officer doesn't have that option available. It is watch the events as they unfold in real time and make instant decisions that could save a life or cause the AC officer to be seriously injured or killed. 

If you had to watch that video even twice to decided if it was attack or play then you have no right to say the dog shouldnt of been shot. It was obviously close enough to agression to warrant the action.

It would SUCK if one of my dogs was killed because of a situation like this. But it would be MY fault and MY fault alone. If the cop didnt shoot and that man was seriously injured it would of all been blamed on the officers for not doing enough. I know cops get trigger happy with dogs but this is not one of those times. I hate to say it but I would rather a family lose their pet than a kid lose their father.

Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## DJEtzel

arycrest said:


> The cop didn't have the luxury of watching the scenario "about a dozen times trying to make a decision" ... he had seconds to react. It was a dangerous situation and IMHO, sad as it seems, I feel the cop was justified in shooting the dog.


No, but the cop was THERE and saw the events leading up to this and what was actually happening. He didn't need to see it numerous times, obviously. Because he made his decision and he will have to live with it and the judgement surrounding it.


----------



## DJEtzel

Anubis_Star said:


> Well that almost proves a point. You said warning shot in the air because it was an instant thought that popped into your mind. You retracted it a few seconds later but if you were there that instant thought could of been an instant action that ended with someone being hurt, not able to be retracted later.
> 
> Why cant the same be said for the officer? I still thinks it justifiable but you had to watch the video a dozen times before you said you could make a clear decision as to if it was justifiable or not, at which time you said no it was play.
> 
> No offense but I find it almost ridiculous that you have to re-watch and freeze frame it so you can so "nope not attack it was play, shouldnt of shot!" That officer doesn't have that option available. It is watch the events as they unfold in real time and make instant decisions that could save a life or cause the AC officer to be seriously injured or killed.
> 
> If you had to watch that video even twice to decided if it was attack or play then you have no right to say the dog shouldnt of been shot. It was obviously close enough to agression to warrant the action.
> 
> It would SUCK if one of my dogs was killed because of a situation like this. But it would be MY fault and MY fault alone. If the cop didnt shoot and that man was seriously injured it would of all been blamed on the officers for not doing enough. I know cops get trigger happy with dogs but this is not one of those times. I hate to say it but I would rather a family lose their pet than a kid lose their father.
> 
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App


No, I had to watch it numerous times to decide if it was _justifiable_ or not. Another video linked my Mrs. K I think was complete play, but the officer in that video _was justified_ imo in shooting the dog, regardless. Because he made contact. The officer there could see what was happening from a completely different angle and could see the dog not making contact a lot easier than we could.


----------



## DJEtzel

Anubis_Star said:


> Well that almost proves a point. You said warning shot in the air because it was an instant thought that popped into your mind. You retracted it a few seconds later but if you were there that instant thought could of been an instant action that ended with someone being hurt, not able to be retracted later.


I'm not a police officer. I don't have to protect anyone except myself and the only time I'm doing that is if my life is in danger. Not if there's a stray pit bull running around some guy on the street.


----------



## arycrest

DJEtzel said:


> No, but the cop was THERE and saw the events leading up to this and what was actually happening. He didn't need to see it numerous times, obviously. Because he made his decision and he will have to live with it and the judgement surrounding it.


You're right, the cop was there in real time and he saw what looked like an attack in real time. Why is it okay for you to need to see the tape over and over before making a judgment, yet it's not okay for a cop to make a split second decision to shoot what appears to be an aggressive pack of dogs going after an A/C officer?


----------



## Anubis_Star

You're right it could indicate play. I have videos of the dogs playing in the back yard with hackles raised. Quick movement after the rabies pole could indicate play. The dog DID nip at his legs. My legs are black and blue from berlin nipping at them.

Difference, I know my dogs. You know your dogs. You and I both probably know dog behavior better. But these are 3 strange large dogs acting in a highly reactive manner. My 10 week old puppy bit my leg up playing. I would hate to think what a full grown pit would do to a leg, even in play.

Its easy to judge until you are being chased by 3 dogs. And like others said we dont know the story. Maybe they just attacked someone and injured them?

One of the techs was in a run unhooking a 9 month old puppy, some kind of newfie mix, from it's iv line while the vet stood at the door waiting. The dog suddenly turned around and snapped, the tech climbed up the run side and was hanging half over, leaving the doctor completely unprotected. As a technician it is our job to always restrain and have control. And she is without a doubt the best and most experienced technician in our clinic. But fight or flight is a deeply rooted instinct. 

Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## DJEtzel

I've been chased, cornered, bitten, and broken up more fights than I care to remember. And I react based on the dog, not how well I know it. It's very easy to judge and blame anyone. And that's what I'm doing because that was the point of the thread. To decide if that guy should have shot that dog or not. And my opinion is no!


----------



## Lauri & The Gang

The two black dogs were not as threatening as the brown one.

You should never shoot "into something" unless it's the object you mean to shoot. Bullets ricochet and could hit an innocent bystander.

Waiting until the dog bites is IMO very foolish. Once a dog is attached to a human the chances of getting a clean shot are much lower.

I am upset a dog had to die but the fault does not lie with the officer. It lies with the owners of the dogs.


----------



## martemchik

DJEtzel said:


> I've been chased, cornered, bitten, and broken up more fights than I care to remember. And I react based on the dog, not how well I know it. It's very easy to judge and blame anyone. And that's what I'm doing because that was the point of the thread. To decide if that guy should have shot that dog or not. And my opinion is no!


You're a bigger person than me...

If a strange dog bit me, it's losing its life (not at my hands but at the proper authorities). If a strange dog tried to bite me and the only reason I didn't get bit was because I reacted in time, same story. If I'm cornered or surrounded by a dog, and there is a police officer there, he better be pulling a trigger as the chances are I could probably sue the police department for not properly reacting if that dog does bite me.

Also wanted to add to the earlier discussion...my GSD could turn the switch and bite within seconds...he could be playing and all the sudden hit the switch and bite down harder than just his play bite. Truthfully...no difference in his demeanor. I find it interesting that most SchH dogs are wagging their tails like no tomorrow when they're engaged in a bite (let me know how friendly that type of play is).


----------



## Mrs.K

DJEtzel said:


> No, I had to watch it numerous times to decide if it was _justifiable_ or not. *Another video linked my Mrs. K I think was complete play, but the officer in that video was justified imo in shooting the dog*, regardless. Because he made contact. The officer there could see what was happening from a completely different angle and could see the dog not making contact a lot easier than we could.


That dog, going after those kids, taking the kid down and getting hooked on the leg was play for you? If no one had been there, that kid would have probably died. 







That was my whole point. It looks like play but it's not! It isn't play! IT IS PREY! That boy was PREY for the dog. 

Just like that other video with dog latched onto the arm of the guy. That guy would have died from the blood loss. 

Dog is wagging his tail, looks just like a game of tug but it's not. It's not a game. There is blood in the game and that kid would have just died, without any adults being there. They would have mauled him to death! Dog didn't even have enough AFTER he was shot and approached again. 

So I'm not sure WHERE you see a game in all this. IT ISN'T A GAME!


----------



## mycobraracr

Uneducated people and biased opinions huh? Well this uneducated person decoys/trains protection dogs 5 days a week. I have owned and currently own PB's. Actually I'm competing with one in a couple weeks. I have fostered PB's, so yeah I feel I have an understanding of how they operate. As far as weapons and tactics training, I probably have more hours doing that than most of you combined. So I feel I can make a decent decision. 

I look at it like this. LE's job is to de-escalate situations. Well, I would say after he shot the situation was pretty well de-escalated don't you? Fact is, the AC and LEO did not put the dog in that situation. The owners did. So I don't feel bad at all.


----------



## Courtney

mycobraracr said:


> Uneducated people and biased opinions huh? Well this uneducated person decoys/trains protection dogs 5 days a week. I have owned and currently own PB's. Actually I'm competing with one in a couple weeks. I have fostered PB's, so yeah I feel I have an understanding of how they operate. As far as weapons and tactics training, I probably have more hours doing that than most of you combined. So I feel I can make a decent decision.
> 
> I look at it like this. LE's job is to de-escalate situations. Well, I would say after he shot the situation was pretty well de-escalated don't you? Fact is, the AC and LEO did not put the dog in that situation. The owners did. So I don't feel bad at all.


A round of applause for you my friend. Very well stated.

This thread has been shocking with some of the suggestions & thoughts.

It's very hard for most people, especially me to see a dog or any animal injured or killed. This was justified.


----------



## DaniFani

I don't understand why it matters if any of the dogs in any of these videos are playing, preying, defending, or attacking.... Bottom line, whatever it is, it can hurt someone. It's like those people that keep exotic pets and they attack, usually it's just play, but a African lion, pawing you.... Well, it's going to kill you... So, why does it matter? Some of the SchH dogs I've seen train are pretty happy in that play-prey bite, but man is that grip harder than heck.


----------



## KZoppa

I've watched this video several times trying to see as much as I can before commenting. I've watched each individual dog. I've watched the people involved. Going off the video, I would say this was justified. Of the three dogs, one of the black ones is pretty consistent in staying by the house and just barking. The other black dog lunges and backs off and lunges again but doesn't appear to me to actually intend anything other than to scare off this intruder. The brown dog, the one the officer shot, to me, was clearly intent on finding an opening to land a bite. He was the one consistently closest to the AC officer. The dogs physical movements to me indicate he was moving to bite. The dogs natural instinct when something comes at it is to move so when the ACO slid, it was in the dogs direction. The dog moved away but went right back in immediately. 

The LEO made a quick clean shot to the dog BEFORE the dog could land a bite. Had the dog managed to successfully land a bite, this not only would have made the LEO's shot far more difficult to manage relatively safely, but dogs in a pack mentality often feed off the lead dog. In this case, the lead dog is the brown dog. Had he landed a bite, the other two dogs very easily could have charged in escalating an attack and making the situation worse. Once the LEO fired the gun, the other two dogs ran. The one who stayed furthest from the "action" ran onto the porch while the 2nd black dog remained on the sidewalk but kept his distance. 

The LEO quickly diffused what could have been an even worse situation. They never want to make the call to shoot someone's dog but as someone already stated, LEO's jobs are to protect the people. ACO is to protect the animals. HOWEVER, as an ACO, they're job is to also protect the people. Well, being that the ACO was the one in the most potential trouble here, the LEO did what was necessary in the moment. 

So yes, I believe this was justified. Painfully so but the result is because of a lack of care on the owners part. Had these dogs been properly contained, this very well could have been prevented. Sad to see a dog lost his life.


----------



## trcy

I will start with the pit bull breed is not my favorite. I have broken up many of their fights with a garden hose. They do not like water. However, when our pit/golden mix attacked his father we could not get him off. If I had a gun I may have used it. It took 4 people to drag that dog off the golden retriever and the first time he got away and sprung right back on the golden retriever's face. It was terrible and required many stitches. Unfortunately this happened in the garage and there was no hose within reach.


----------



## selzer

If people want to have a breed of dog that has a reputation like our dogs have, or worse, the reputation of pit bulls, then they need to contain them properly. 

I know I sound like a broken record. There is nine pages of this thread which I read. But the people we should be angry with is the owner of the pits. If they were strays, then why have a cow? The dog that is attacking is obviously not a dog that should make it out of a shelter and into a home. So being shot in the head isn't any worse then getting the purple juice. 

I think the idea that people should wait around for a dog to latch on to a human being before shooting is preposterous. Why should the police officers refrain from shooting when the dogs' owners did not bother to keep them safe?

People who own these dogs know that they have a nasty repuation. And when there are more than one of them packing up, things can escalate so fast. It isn't rocket science. If you want to own a pit bull, then you have to keep it under control, contained. If you let it run around loose, then there is a possibility that it will be killed. And the owner of the dog is to blame, not the motorist, not the hunter or farmer or police officer that ended up shooting it. 

I think that when the cops have to shoot your dog, you should get a fat fine on top of it, for not containing your dog. 

As for shooting in the air or shooting into the hill -- that is really bad thinking. My uncle went to prison for shooting into a pile of rubble. Unfortunately the bullet ricocheted, and a child was shot. That could have happened here, and all because people were squeamish about shooting a dog that is attacking whose owners didn't bother to keep contained -- Big fat fine, $1000 or more. The vid was only a few seconds long, and the cop was supposed to read the body language of all three dogs and determine whether or not to shoot the dog before someone was seriously injured, maybe he should have used his precious seconds to reach for mace or some other non-lethal method of containing dogs that people ought to keep contained. Personally, I think it was justified. 

As for the hackles thing, most dogs bite when they are fearful, not confident. Hackles raised means a dog is closer to biting than I want them to be, it also suggests that it is beyond play. 

We have GSDs. We need to keep our dogs safe from whatever stupid things they may do too. The attitude that dogs will be dogs, accidents happen, dogs get loose, is simply a bad way to look at owning a GSD or a pit bull. If we have less tolerance for accidents, fewer accidents would happen.


----------



## Rallhaus

The video is not the whole story. 

Why was the ACO called in the first place?


----------



## Sunflowers

Here we go, more info.

Pit bull attacks Humane Society director | www.springfieldnewssun.com


----------



## KZoppa

Sunflowers said:


> Here we go, the whole story. There had been eight previous complaints about this dog.
> 
> Pit bull attacks Humane Society director | www.springfieldnewssun.com


 
thank you. 

I'm glad the ACO isn't against pits, just against bad owners. Smart guy doesn't blame the dog.


----------



## Sunflowers

I think I read it wrong. The eight complaints were about another dog.


----------



## doggiedad

i think the ac man should have backed off and called for help.
to me the dog didn't seem like he was attacking him when he fell.


----------



## Dainerra

*** Post removed by ADMIN**

As said earlier in this thread there will be NO discussions relating to guns except as they relate to the topic. *


----------



## Loz

I am not an expert on Pitbulls or guns but it seems to me, if that many police and animal control were there it was for a reason and good guess would be that the reason related to the dogs. Which sort of says to me the dogs had a reputation. I would certainly be thanking the cop - as much as I love dogs. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## wolfstraum

Unfortunately, there are always people who will not accept that PBs can turn aggressive in a heartbeat with no provocation.

Last night I spoke to a friend. She has a very very close friend who is a professional horse trainer, who I know as well. This trainer got a shelter dog awhile back who was said to be a 'boxer mix'. My friend saw the dog and said it was a pit bull....the owner is from Europe, and a horse person and somewhat oblivious. She had been warned about the potential of the dog mauling a horse or foal as it would run the paddock barking.

Her neighbors had taken care of this dog numerous times when she was off at horse shows. Their child (age unknown) has played with this dog many times. 

She was schooling a horse, the dog loose. The dog jumped a fence and attacked and mauled teh child with no provocation. The dog was taken afterwards to a vet school in the area to be euthanized and the vet student argued that the dog should be evaluated and placed through a rescue. ARGUED that a dog who had just mauled a child (who was in the ER at the time!) should NOT be euthanized. The dog must, of course, be quarantined for 10 days and then will be euthanized. 

The cop is absolutely justified. The dog was running and circling the man, the man went down. The fight/bite instinct kicks in with no warning, and these dogs were stimulated. He could not wait until the dog grabbed the guy to act. He was there because of the possiblity of an attack and to prevent same.

We talk about drive all the time on this forum. We all have an idea of what drive is. The PB has it's own sets of drives. I really get frustrated when people deny this because they have either not seen it to date, or do not want to admit that these drives are there and can be triggered.

Lee


----------



## GSDolch

Sunflowers said:


> Here we go, more info.
> 
> Pit bull attacks Humane Society director | www.springfieldnewssun.com



Thank for the link. Kinda makes the "its play" thinking go out the window IMO.


----------



## wildo

Sunflowers said:


> Here we go, more info.
> 
> Pit bull attacks Humane Society director | www.springfieldnewssun.com


Wow... what brilliant reporting in that story. 90% of the article wasn't even about the event! And to think someone got paid for that... 

That said, I'm not sure there is any more to this story than what was reported:

"One lunged. I jumped to get out of the way .... and I slipped and fell. One came up to attack me. Officers shot it."


----------



## GSDolch

wildo said:


> Wow... what brilliant reporting in that story. 90% of the article wasn't even about the event! And to think someone got paid for that...
> 
> That said, I'm not sure there is any more to this story than what was reported:
> 
> "One lunged. I jumped to get out of the way .... and I slipped and fell. One came up to attack me. Officers shot it."



It wasn't about the event with the dogs, your right, it was about the ACO officer.


----------



## Mrs.K

wolfstraum said:


> Unfortunately, there are always people who will not accept that PBs can turn aggressive in a heartbeat with no provocation.
> 
> Last night I spoke to a friend. She has a very very close friend who is a professional horse trainer, who I know as well. This trainer got a shelter dog awhile back who was said to be a 'boxer mix'. My friend saw the dog and said it was a pit bull....the owner is from Europe, and a horse person and somewhat oblivious. She had been warned about the potential of the dog mauling a horse or foal as it would run the paddock barking.
> 
> Her neighbors had taken care of this dog numerous times when she was off at horse shows. Their child (age unknown) has played with this dog many times.
> 
> She was schooling a horse, the dog loose. The dog jumped a fence and attacked and mauled teh child with no provocation. The dog was taken afterwards to a vet school in the area to be euthanized and the vet student argued that the dog should be evaluated and placed through a rescue. ARGUED that a dog who had just mauled a child (who was in the ER at the time!) should NOT be euthanized. The dog must, of course, be quarantined for 10 days and then will be euthanized.
> 
> The cop is absolutely justified. The dog was running and circling the man, the man went down. The fight/bite instinct kicks in with no warning, and these dogs were stimulated. He could not wait until the dog grabbed the guy to act. He was there because of the possiblity of an attack and to prevent same.
> 
> We talk about drive all the time on this forum. We all have an idea of what drive is. The PB has it's own sets of drives. I really get frustrated when people deny this because they have either not seen it to date, or do not want to admit that these drives are there and can be triggered.
> 
> Lee


:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## wildo

GSDolch said:


> It wasn't about the event with the dogs, your right, it was about the ACO officer.


You're totally right; it wasn't about the event with the dogs. Not that one would assume that or anything with a title like:
*Pit bull attacks Humane Society director; officer shoots, kills dog*


----------



## DJEtzel

So the article is titled about an attack; that right there makes everything said in the article, along with the typos, go completely out the window for me. There was NO attack, and to say that there WAS to justify shooting a dog sounds like an easy way to cover it all up and feel better about themselves. *shakeshead*


----------



## wolfstraum

so you think the cop should wait for the dog to attack the guy THEN shoot? Lets put you out in the field with 3 PBs who have been reported for other incidents running circles around you and see if you feel the same way. The dogs ARE stimulated. They are circling the guy. It would be irresponsible of the officer to let the dog approach the ACO when he went down and was scrambling. The bottom line is that these dogs were already probably slated for euthanasia due to the history of them running loose and an irresponsible owner. 

Go to youtube, look at the dozens of videos of PB attacks, go to your own city newspaper and do a search - in mine over 300 reports with PB attacks come up...1 with GSD and that one was attacked by a PB....

Almost every one says the attack was unprovoked. These three dogs ARE STIMULATED. 

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck - pretty good chance it is a duck.

Lee


----------



## lhczth

*As said earlier in this thread there will be NO discussions relating to guns except as they relate to the topic. This is an official warning. Anymore posts of this type will result in a suspension of the member for 1 week. 

Thank you, ADMIN Lisa
*


----------



## DJEtzel

I don't have a course of action for the Leo. I don't care if the dogs had complaints in the past or were stimulated. It was NOT a dog attack, and that is how the media is portraying it, so that the cops intentions appear warranted. That's not ok, because this WASN'T an attack, and no one can say for certain that it would have turned into one. It doesn't matter how stimulated the dogs are. Every dog has a different threshold. Just so happens my GSD has a lower threshold than my Pit Bull. Yes, a lot of Pit bulls DO have low thresholds and redirect their energy when they get wound up, but many others breeds do as well and there are plenty of Pits who CAN get over the top stimulated like these dogs without redirecting.


----------



## Capone22

The pit bull talk here is just as ignorant as the pit bull talk on tv. A pit should have ZERO fight/aggression when it comes to people or children. Just as our beloved GSD should not have aggression to children. A pit is NOT a ticking time bomb. With other dogs, animals, sure. but not people. 

and that humane society guy was an idiot. You would think you would stop and assess the situation to consider calling for back up before getting out there with a pole and three dogs and jumping around like a rabbit.


----------



## arycrest

Capone22 said:


> The pit bull talk here is just as ignorant as the pit bull talk on tv. A pit should have ZERO fight/aggression when it comes to people or children. Just as our beloved GSD should not have aggression to children. A pit is NOT a ticking time bomb. With other dogs, animals, sure. but not people.
> 
> and that humane society guy was an idiot. You would think you would stop and assess the situation to consider calling for back up before getting out there with a pole and three dogs and jumping around like a rabbit.


 Since the cops were on site it looks to me like he (or someone) probably had called for some type of back up? Usually you don't see a bunch of cops hovering around an A/C officer going about his/her normal business.


----------



## arycrest

DJEtzel said:


> I don't have a course of action for the Leo. I don't care if the dogs had complaints in the past or were stimulated. It was NOT a dog attack, and that is how the media is portraying it, so that the cops intentions appear warranted. That's not ok, because this WASN'T an attack, and no one can say for certain that it would have turned into one. It doesn't matter how stimulated the dogs are. Every dog has a different threshold. Just so happens my GSD has a lower threshold than my Pit Bull. Yes, a lot of Pit bulls DO have low thresholds and redirect their energy when they get wound up, but many others breeds do as well and there are plenty of Pits who CAN get over the top stimulated like these dogs without redirecting.


 Not everyone is a self proclaimed expert on canine behavior, the "average" person without this ability which takes watching the video dozens of times to determine if it was an attack or not, would perceive it as an attack, and in fact did see it that way. It was the officer's split second judgment that the A/C officer was in danger of being attacked by the dog. 

I guess I'm confused, are you implying that an A/C officer should sustain a bite or mauling before deadly force can be used by a cop against an apparently aggressive animal, or in this case a pack of animals which give all appearances to the untrained eye as being dangerous?


----------



## gsdlover91

Oh come on, how is that NOT justified?! Those dogs are NOT playing. I read through all this thread, and this is quite ridiculous. I dont care what type of dog it was, GSD, pit bull, heck even a fox terrier, it was justified. The brown one was obviously lunging and ready to bite. If thats PLAY, I dont know how you justify that type of play being safe around children, and people in general. I have seen pitbulls play, I have grown up around them...the ones I have known don't play like that. 

I dont know how you can say someone is better off being attacked/mauled first, and then the dog be shot.


----------



## sitstay

Yes, a well bred Pit Bull should have zero human aggression. That was an attribute bred into them. Who wanted to climb into a fight and have an amped dog redirect onto the owner/handler? Nobody. So they bred for a very, very, very user friendly dog.

But who can look at those dogs, in this video, and say with any certainty that they are well bred and therefore pose no threat or risk to anyone? There are crappy Pit Bulls out there, just like there are crappy GSDs out there. 

And it sure looks like the ACO had already called for back up. I have never seen ACOs routinely travel with police escorts. The police were there because back up had already been requested. 
Sheilah


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Pitties are the poor man's (or drug dealers) 'attack' dog these days.

In urban areas especially they are breeding them for human aggression. Those dogs end up in shelters, adopted by people who think they are just 'cuddle bugs' and bam you get the..."but he's never attacked anyone before" line.

I think like wolfstraum said, people need to get real about these dogs, they are not 'baby sitters'.

Shooting was justified IMO.


----------



## DJEtzel

Gwenhwyfair said:


> I think like wolfstraum said, people need to get real about these dogs, they are not 'baby sitters'.


The thing is, plenty of them ARE, and you and wolfstraum saying that they all AREN'T is just as detrimental as saying that they all ARE.


----------



## GSDolch

As a parents I believe its very irresponsible and wrong to say _any_ dog is a "baby sitter"

Dogs are not baby sitters, not anymore. Depending on a childs age and the dog in question, it might be acceptable for them to go tramping off together without an adult around, but using the term "baby sitter" for the average pet owner gives the implication that they are something they are not.


----------



## Mrs.K

GSDolch said:


> As a parents I believe its very irresponsible and wrong to say _any_ dog is a "baby sitter"
> 
> Dogs are not baby sitters, not anymore. Depending on a childs age and the dog in question, it might be acceptable for them to go tramping off together without an adult around, but using the term "baby sitter" for the average pet owner gives the implication that they are something they are not.


This!

@DJEtzel, you are not getting what Lee has actually said. The best and safest way to go about it, to go about it with any dog, is to assume they are NOT Babysitters. 

I trust my dogs a hundred percent but they are NOT Babysitters, PERIOD! 
If I want a Babysitter, I will get one but I won't let my dogs do the job. 
Would I let an 8 yo play with any of my dogs? Absolutely. But there is a difference between expecting a dog to be a Babysitter and a dog playing or running around with a kid.


----------



## DJEtzel

Mrs.K said:


> This!
> 
> @DJEtzel, you are not getting what Lee has actually said. The best and safest way to go about it, to go about it with any dog, is to assume they are NOT Babysitters.
> 
> I trust my dogs a hundred percent but they are NOT Babysitters, PERIOD!
> If I want a Babysitter, I will get one but I won't let my dogs do the job.
> Would I let an 8 yo play with any of my dogs? Absolutely. But there is a difference between expecting a dog to be a Babysitter and a dog playing or running around with a kid.


I'm not being literal telling people to leave their dogs with their kids. Telling people to "get real" about a breed signifies that they are something to be afraid of. That's not the case anymore than saying that they should all be left with kids, is what I'm saying.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Ya know, the problem is, especially around urban areas (you are near/in Chicago yes) there is a great deal of overbreeding. We talk about the problem of back yard breeders for German Shepherds .... pitties are by far MUCH worse. So we're talking a statistical reality here.

We have two groups on my side of town that rescue GSDs you almost have to race them to pull a dog if you want to get it yourself.

We've got more pittie rescue groups and they can't keep up with the dogs in our shelters.

So you combine the two problems, over population, poor breeding and frankly breeders who do want human aggressive dogs and yeah there are more problems with pitties. 

Personally the best thing that could happen to pitties is for them to become less popular and less 'over romanticized' ...however I think in the end they'll be the breed that drags us ALL into blanket legislation for 'dangerous' breeds. The pittie folks didn't want 'breed specific' legislation and lawmakers will oblige by making us all pay now...which is something I predicted may happen.

Just had a family whose own pittie killed their child.....and sure enough it's on the GA legislative agenda for all 'dangerous breeds' .






DJEtzel said:


> The thing is, plenty of them ARE, and you and wolfstraum saying that they all AREN'T is just as detrimental as saying that they all ARE.


----------



## Mrs.K

DJEtzel said:


> I'm not being literal telling people to leave their dogs with their kids. Telling people to "get real" about a breed signifies that they are something to be afraid of. That's not the case anymore than saying that they should all be left with kids, is what I'm saying.


No, people should absolutely get real about dogs. Society as a whole should get real about dogs. 

They are not Babies, Children, Kids, Princesses... dogs are dogs. People should get real about what a dog is, what a German Shepherd, Boxer, Doberman, Rottweiler or Pit Bull is. What a Chi, Golden and Lab is. 

Maybe, just maybe, if people would get real about what dogs are, we would have less accidents and more common sense!


----------



## wolfstraum

DJEtzel said:


> The thing is, plenty of them ARE, and you and wolfstraum saying that they all AREN'T is just as detrimental as saying that they all ARE.


I see you have a PB and I am sure you love him and he is a great dog....

BUT you are in denial about this breed. No one is specifically attacking YOUR dog - the breed as a whole - in general - is still a breed whose genetic make up was established as a fighting and killing breed. Terriers kill rats and small game, sighthounds will kill rabbits - this is breed genetic make up.

All anyone has to do is check the news websites in their areas. 

We talk about drive. Drive is genetic. Dogs pop up out of generations of back yard pet nothing specific breeding with traits that the breed is noted to have. We point at the standard and the genetic make up. 

I have a breed whose genetic make up is what I want in a dog. NOT an individual who seems to be not like his breed genetics. 

I am not relying on news articles and youtube. My horse trainer friends dog is NOT THE FIRST PB I have known of within people I actually KNOW to have reverted to genetic behavior. The dog was stimulated and in drive because it was running the fence while she schooled a horse. The dog then made an "unprovoked attack" (HER words) on a known child. IMO the dog was already in drive from the chasing, and redirected on a child. I also think if that one tan PB HAD grabbed the ACO - the other two would have jumped into the fray. Pack mentality and genetics.

This is a discussion board, and not aimed at one person's dog. Having one makes you prejudiced and defensive....which is human nature. 

I still totally agree with the LEO shooting this dog - regardless of breed.

Lee


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

I agree but people who are trying to defend pitties often go to the extreme of calling them the 'baby sitter dog' as though it's a breed trait.






GSDolch said:


> As a parents I believe its very irresponsible and wrong to say _any_ dog is a "baby sitter"
> 
> Dogs are not baby sitters, not anymore. Depending on a childs age and the dog in question, it might be acceptable for them to go tramping off together without an adult around, but using the term "baby sitter" for the average pet owner gives the implication that they are something they are not.


----------



## Jack's Dad

Who cares what breed it was. Dogs do not have the right to harass, chase, circle, threaten, nip, bite etc...human beings while running around loose period. 

The owner is responsible personally and legally. I don't care if the dog is a Peekapoo or anything else.

Humans should feel safe walking down the street.


----------



## Liesje

Jack's Dad said:


> Who cares what breed it was. Dogs do not have the right to harass, chase, circle, threaten, nip, bite etc...human beings while running around loose period.
> 
> The owner is responsible personally and legally. I don't care if the dog is a Peekapoo or anything else.
> 
> Humans should feel safe walking down the street.


dingdingding we have a winner!


----------



## wildo

Liesje said:


> dingdingding we have a winner!


Oh man! There was a prize???


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

Philosophically speaking correct.

Except _in reality_ an occasional peekapoo attack won't trigger more laws being placed on society ....


----------



## Capone22

Jack's Dad said:


> Who cares what breed it was. Dogs do not have the right to harass, chase, circle, threaten, nip, bite etc...human beings while running around loose period.
> 
> The owner is responsible personally and legally. I don't care if the dog is a Peekapoo or anything else.
> 
> Humans should feel safe walking down the street.


Totally agree. And my issue isn't that the dog was shot. I still think the officer should have called for another experienced humane society officer to help catch the dogs. But whatever. It's the talk about all pit bulls that irritates me. 

Whether you like it or not, pit bulls WERE referred to as nanny dogs. Of course we know better now that any dog should not be left alone with kids and yadda yadda. But a well bred pit bull should be bomb proof around kids and humans. Do we have a pit bull byb problem? Yes. And that definitely creates bad dogs. But to say their drive is to kill anything and everything, is wrong. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## GSDolch

Gwenhwyfair said:


> I agree but people who are trying to defend pitties often go to the extreme of calling them the 'baby sitter dog' as though it's a breed trait.



Yup!

This is not something that should be implied as a trait in any dog IMO.


----------



## selzer

I don't even know what a well-bred pit bull looks like. Is it a Staffordshire Bull Terrier, is it a American Staffordshire Terrier? Is it an American Pit Bull Terrier? Is it a bull terrier? 

The breed was a bad idea when it was formed. Taking a dog with the power and courage to stand up to a bull, two thousand pounds of muscle and attitude, and mix that with non-stop terrier, kill attitude. 

And then breed them specifically for fighting -- yes, they were bred for fighting in pits with other dogs, or anything else they wanted to put up against them. As with any competitive sport, you will have people breed, breed, breeding for the extremes. A dog that will go go go, never say quit, super courage, super power. The thing is, that when you breed for extremes, you get it, only you do not always get the extreme that you want. The chances are you are going to breed in instability as you breed for the ultimate fighting dog. 

What _is _a well-bred pitbull? How do you prove their temperament? You can't work them in the venue that they were originally created for, well you can, but you can go to jail doing that. How do you prove that the dog has the proper pit bull temperament in these days? Do you try to breed the fight out of the dog to create a pet? 

First you breed a dog with incredible drives, intelligence, courage, gameness, and then you try to breed the aggression out. *POOF* I can't think of a better way to introduce instability. 

So I don't give a flying fudgcicle if we are talking well-bred pit bulls, or byb pit bulls, or drug-dealer pit bulls. If you choose to own one of this breed, or if you choose to own a GSD, or if you choose to own a Rotty or a cane corso, or a Doberman, or a Presa Canario or any other formidable breed, then you have to keep them under wraps because they aren't going to get the second or third chances that an ankle biter or bird dog will get. 

No one who owns one of these types of dogs has any right complaining if someone shoots them while the dogs are uncontrolled and running loose. 

And the owners of these breeds, of our breed, should be furious with the owners of the dogs that do the terrible things, because they put all of our dogs into danger by being such total idiots. 

Like it or not, Danielle, the breed you love DOES show an awful lot of human aggression. Human aggression to the extent that it makes the news. The reason you do not here about labs or yorkies or beagles attacking people every day is because even when they do bite someone, it simply does not cause the damage that these breeds do.


----------



## DJEtzel

Gwenhwyfair said:


> Ya know, the problem is, especially around urban areas (you are near/in Chicago yes) there is a great deal of overbreeding. We talk about the problem of back yard breeders for German Shepherds .... pitties are by far MUCH worse. So we're talking a statistical reality here.
> 
> We have two groups on my side of town that rescue GSDs you almost have to race them to pull a dog if you want to get it yourself.
> 
> We've got more pittie rescue groups and they can't keep up with the dogs in our shelters.
> 
> So you combine the two problems, over population, poor breeding and frankly breeders who do want human aggressive dogs and yeah there are more problems with pitties.
> 
> Personally the best thing that could happen to pitties is for them to become less popular and less 'over romanticized' ...however I think in the end they'll be the breed that drags us ALL into blanket legislation for 'dangerous' breeds. The pittie folks didn't want 'breed specific' legislation and lawmakers will oblige by making us all pay now...which is something I predicted may happen.
> 
> Just had a family whose own pittie killed their child.....and sure enough it's on the GA legislative agenda for all 'dangerous breeds' .


I don't live near Chicago, and I'm not sure what you're trying to get across to me? You're not saying anything that I disagree with or don't already know. 



Mrs.K said:


> No, people should absolutely get real about dogs. Society as a whole should get real about dogs.
> 
> They are not Babies, Children, Kids, Princesses... dogs are dogs. People should get real about what a dog is, what a German Shepherd, Boxer, Doberman, Rottweiler or Pit Bull is. What a Chi, Golden and Lab is.
> 
> Maybe, just maybe, if people would get real about what dogs are, we would have less accidents and more common sense!


That is not what was implied about the term "get real" when used previously. It was used in a derogatory way to imply that people need to get over Pit Bulls ever being nice and expect them all to be man eaters. Which could not be further from the truth. There is a much larger percentage of Pit Bulls on the planet in homes being family dogs than there are killing people. 



wolfstraum said:


> I see you have a PB and I am sure you love him and he is a great dog....
> 
> BUT you are in denial about this breed. No one is specifically attacking YOUR dog - the breed as a whole - in general - is still a breed whose genetic make up was established as a fighting and killing breed. Terriers kill rats and small game, sighthounds will kill rabbits - this is breed genetic make up.


What am I in denial about? I know that no one is attacking my dog... 

Do you think that I don't know that they were bred to fight and kill things? I had every intention of rehoming my dog after adoption because I didn't expect him to co-exist with other dogs. :crazy: 



selzer said:


> Like it or not, Danielle, the breed you love DOES show an awful lot of human aggression. Human aggression to the extent that it makes the news. The reason you do not here about labs or yorkies or beagles attacking people every day is because even when they do bite someone, it simply does not cause the damage that these breeds do.


I never said or claimed that they didn't. Not once, and I don't disagree whatsoever, so I'm not sure why this is directed at me?

There are well bred examples of each breed you listed, btw. It depends which you're talking about. Most "pit bulls" these days are actually american bullies.


----------



## Mrs.K

Labs make it into the news just like other dogs. 


Just get real about any dog and use some common sense and the world will be a much happier place...


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

uggh my bad, it says Kalamazoo MI on your profile.

Your saying not all pitties are bad and I am saying they are presenting more of a problem then other breeds for various reasons. So if you agree with the underlined statement then yes we are on the same page. 





DJEtzel said:


> I don't live near Chicago, and I'm not sure what you're trying to get across to me? You're not saying anything that I disagree with or don't already know.
> 
> 
> 
> That is not what was implied about the term "get real" when used previously. It was used in a derogatory way to imply that people need to get over Pit Bulls ever being nice and expect them all to be man eaters. Which could not be further from the truth. There is a much larger percentage of Pit Bulls on the planet in homes being family dogs than there are killing people.
> 
> 
> 
> What am I in denial about? I know that no one is attacking my dog...
> 
> Do you think that I don't know that they were bred to fight and kill things? I had every intention of rehoming my dog after adoption because I didn't expect him to co-exist with other dogs. :crazy:
> 
> 
> 
> I never said or claimed that they didn't. Not once, and I don't disagree whatsoever, so I'm not sure why this is directed at me?
> 
> There are well bred examples of each breed you listed, btw. It depends which you're talking about. Most "pit bulls" these days are actually american bullies.


----------



## DJEtzel

wolfstraum said:


> We talk about drive. Drive is genetic. Dogs pop up out of generations of back yard pet nothing specific breeding with traits that the breed is noted to have. We point at the standard and the genetic make up.
> 
> I have a breed whose genetic make up is what I want in a dog. NOT an individual who seems to be not like his breed genetics.


This is where you're misunderstanding. My Pit fits his breed standard almost perfectly. Dog aggression IS a genetic trait in some lines of pit bulls because they were bred to fight for so long. But that's not why they were created and it's not their breed standard, nor is it found in every line. It's something that every reputable breeder of American bullies, American pit bull terriers, American Staffordshire terriers, and Staffordshire bull terriers are trying to avoid in their lines.

The pit bulls on the street that are unstable, fight, and kill are the ones that are out of standard.


----------



## DJEtzel

Gwenhwyfair said:


> uggh my bad, it says Kalamazoo MI on your profile.
> 
> Your saying not all pitties are bad and I am saying they are presenting more of a problem then other breeds for various reasons. So if you agree with the underlined statement then yes we are on the same page.


I completely agree as I've mentioned before. There are plenty of pits that I evaluate and pass on because they are not safe, stable dogs, and we have kicked pitties out of our dog park for similar reasons. But putting a blanket statement over a breed like people are doing is not correct either.

Neither extreme that people tend to gravitate toward are accurate.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

There is a truth here, pitties are getting a lot more negative attention so those who feel they must defend pitties are pretty quick to bring up the baby sitting dog 'argument'. 

I think that argument creates an unrealistic perception of this breed (more so then others) which opens the door to more tragic incidents. 

While every cautionary comment could apply to any breed, at this moment in time, pitties are the problem breed. You agree?




GSDolch said:


> Yup!
> 
> This is not something that should be implied as a trait in any dog IMO.


----------



## selzer

Mrs.K said:


> Labs make it into the news just like other dogs.
> 
> 
> Just get real about any dog and use some common sense and the world will be a much happier place...


Yeah, but you took my statement out of context again. I specifically said EVERY DAY. I hear about pit bulls every day. They seem to be in the news every day. That is awful. Labs are biting more because they have been top of the charts in registrations for about 10 years running, and plenty of people are breeding without papers, and not even registering them. They are being over-bred, and subjected to bad breeding, bad owners, no training, no exercise -- there should be a LOT more lab - attacks. This is a high energy hunting dog, a bird dog, but still. People take them and make them live in a crate and do not do anything to relieve the energy requirements, only train them if there are problems, etc, etc, we _should _here about lab attacks all the time. 

But we don't. Have there been labrador attacks? Of course. I think the two dogs that ever charged me in dog classes were both chocolate labs. But the effects of bad breeding and poor management only bring the breed so low because they were never bred specifically for aggression, guarding, fighting, etc.


----------



## Mrs.K

selzer said:


> Yeah, but you took my statement out of context again. I specifically said EVERY DAY. I hear about pit bulls every day. They seem to be in the news every day. That is awful. Labs are biting more because they have been top of the charts in registrations for about 10 years running, and plenty of people are breeding without papers, and not even registering them. They are being over-bred, and subjected to bad breeding, bad owners, no training, no exercise -- there should be a LOT more lab - attacks. This is a high energy hunting dog, a bird dog, but still. People take them and make them live in a crate and do not do anything to relieve the energy requirements, only train them if there are problems, etc, etc, we _should _here about lab attacks all the time.
> 
> But we don't. Have there been labrador attacks? Of course. I think the two dogs that ever charged me in dog classes were both chocolate labs. But the effects of bad breeding and poor management only bring the breed so low because they were never bred specifically for aggression, guarding, fighting, etc.


Don't get me wrong. I was not intending to say that they end up in the news on a daily basis. Absolutely agree with you.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

O.K. 

...with one quibble I think those (not you) who defend pitties to the extreme ARE far more extreme in their POV and opinions.

On another forum a few years back I made a statement similiar to Lee's, about the genetics of the pittie breed and I was called a racist....about a dog breed, that's when I realized some of the pittie supporters are their own worst enemy.





DJEtzel said:


> I completely agree as I've mentioned before. There are plenty of pits that I evaluate and pass on because they are not safe, stable dogs, and we have kicked pitties out of our dog park for similar reasons. But putting a blanket statement over a breed like people are doing is not correct either.
> 
> Neither extreme that people tend to gravitate toward are accurate.


----------



## DJEtzel

Gwenhwyfair said:


> O.K.
> 
> ...with one quibble I think those (not you) who defend pitties to the extreme ARE far more extreme in their POV and opinions.
> 
> On another forum a few years back I made a statement similiar to Lee's, about the genetics of the pittie breed and I was called a racist....about a dog breed, that's when I realized some of the pittie supporters are their own worst enemy.



I couldn't agree more. I HATE most of the pit bull "advocates" that I meet and I delete stupid remarks on Facebook pictures of my dog from them all the time. They are doing as much good as the pit bashers.


----------



## GSDolch

Gwenhwyfair said:


> While every cautionary comment could apply to any breed, at this moment in time, pitties are the problem breed. You agree?



Yes. I wish it weren't true, but like GSDs who had a bad rep in the 60s, now pitties seem to be having their time with it. Sadly though it doesn't look like its going away anytime soon. :/


----------



## sitstay

Gwenhwyfair said:


> On another forum a few years back I made a statement similiar to Lee's, about the genetics of the pittie breed and I was called a racist.....


I was called a "puppy killer" right here on this forum during a pit bull thread a year or two ago. And the same person PM'ed me and said he hoped I "rotted in ****" for what I had done. 

Some people can't remove emotion from a discussion about pit bulls.
Sheilah


----------



## wolfstraum

I am not talking about Staffies or other "bully" breeds. I know several people who own and/or breed/show Staffies....

The "breed" under discussion, the breed that gets all the press for attacks is the plain old "pit bull" - the ones that I see with the huge chain collars and leads when I drive through certain neighborhoods on my way to downtown....not the breeds in the showring, not the taller different headed American bulldog...but the dogs bred for fighting in the "hood"...those are the ones constantly in the news, the ones the shelters in most good sized cities are full of....the dogs that are just ordinary non AKC specific breed pit bull type dogs.

And every single one who attacks someone and is on the news - without fail - says the dog is sweet, it is good with family, it is good with kids, that it has never done anything remotely wrong....

What is infuriating is because of the irresponsibility of people breeding them, fighting them, dumping them and the denial of so many pit owners, that more and more legislation is being proposed that affects so many other breeds and responsible pet owners.

To deny that this happens and say that the LEO was unjustified in shooting this dog because it was not mauling the ACO is why so many other posters are addressing their comments to DJEtzal 

Lee


----------



## Aescleah

I absolutly think the shooting was justified the AC handled that very poorly he was chasing them around like that he might as well have been a rabbit running around like that in my opinion two or three more officers coming at it from different directions to keep people from chasing and getting chased would have been a much better idea 

Ashley


----------



## Aescleah

O and by the way what i see is a person coming forward with a big pole getting them to be defensive but on the other hand the dogs are excited because this person is running around and then falling down any dog could act this way not just pitbulls 

Ashley


----------



## DJEtzel

wolfstraum said:


> To deny that this happens and say that the LEO was unjustified in shooting this dog because it was not mauling the ACO is why so many other posters are addressing their comments to DJEtzal
> 
> Lee


But not I or anyone else denied this happens. I was asked my opinion and gave it. This was not justified because the dog didn't harm anyone and, IMO, could have easily been caught by a knowledgable dog organization.


----------



## julie87

I wouldn't stand there and wait till I get bitten, I would shoot.


----------



## JakodaCD OA

I also think it was justified,,and I also wouldn't stand there waiting to get bit before shooting him.

That dog was circling and just looking to go in for a bite, he was looking to go in for a "sneaky" bite, not face on confrontation.

It's to bad that owners are usually the ones who give a breed a 'bad name' in the end, the dog pays for it with his life because of owner irresponsibility.


----------



## Gwenhwyfair

I was thinking about the dobies in the 70s early 80s too.

Never a good thing for a protective guarding breed to become super popular. Most people just don't want to invest the time, money and energy into picking a good puppy and training. 

I'm not sure if pitties are having a harder time because of their popularity coupled with the increased media exposure. To be clear I am not talking about the fact that media outlets are picking on one breed. Rather that there are so many more media outlets available, 24/7, so we hear about more incidences from other parts of the country, stories that used to just stay local.





GSDolch said:


> Yes. I wish it weren't true, but like GSDs who had a bad rep in the 60s, now pitties seem to be having their time with it. Sadly though it doesn't look like its going away anytime soon. :/


----------



## Jack's Dad

DJEtzel said:


> This was not justified because the dog didn't harm anyone and, IMO, could have easily been caught by a knowledgable dog organization.


So the ACO and the dogs should have just stopped for awhile while everyone in the vicinity googled "knowledgeable dog organizations".


----------



## Mrs.K

This speaks loud and clear. 

8 year statistichttp://www.dogsbite.org/pdf/8-year-dog-bite-fatality-chart-dogsbiteorg.pdf
from 2012http://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-fatalities-2012.php


----------



## DJEtzel

Jack's Dad said:


> So the ACO and the dogs should have just stopped for awhile while everyone in the vicinity googled "knowledgeable dog organizations".


No, the ACO shouldn't have been there at all if he had no idea what he was doing. A capable organization should have been taking care if it.


----------



## DJEtzel

Mrs.K said:


> This speaks loud and clear.
> 
> http://www.dogsbite.org/pdf/8-year-dog-bite-fatality-chart-dogsbiteorg.pdf


It can't even group them into real breeds? That alone causes me to think that people don't know what they're doing when making statistics or identifying breeds. And again, no one is saying pits don't kill people so I'm not sure why you're up on such a high horse about it?


----------



## Mrs.K

Read the second link, for crying out loud, Danielle, you can find EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM in the news. Most of these cases have been posted on this forum. 

It's the same story over and over and amazingly it's mostly Babys or elderly people as well as a few young adults. 

I'm not on a high horse about it. Yeah, Pits kill. And because there are so many people dying from Pit attacks, that dog was shot. Plain and simple! 

Or would you rather adopt the dog out and then see the same dog on the news having killed a newborn?


----------



## lhczth

This discussion has gone about as far as it is going to go. 

ADMIN


----------

