# This happened in Michigan



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Some crazy woman climbed into a pen with a pit bull and a husky/pit bull puppy -- not hers. She died. 

It was ruled that she committed suicide. What a way to go. But I guess she was unsuccessful several times, so... She had a young baby daughter and her fiancé does not believe she was trying to kill herself. 

She was recently made homeless. 

She walked bare-footed to the place where the dogs were penned and climbed in.

They euthanized the dogs. 

A neighbor was unsuccessful in stopping the attack, but the owner got there and was able to get the dogs off. 

She died in the hospital.

The owner agreed to having the dogs euthanized.

I don't know how I feel about that. 

Our dogs could kill someone, though unlikely. Mostly they will stop before killing. But if someone is old or frail or the dog gets someone in just the right spot...

Evenso,

I guess I would want to see the footage. I mean, what if the lady climbed in there, and then started kicking and teasing the dogs. 

On the other hand, to what point should we protect our dogs. If these dogs were running loose, then I wouldn't feel bad for the owner if his dogs were euthanized and he was thrown in jail for negligent homicide. 

If someone walks into your home and gets a knife out of your drawer and slits their wrists with it, are you responsible? 

Chances are, those dogs would have never killed anyone if someone didn't climb into their pen. How sad.

If someone climbs into a tiger or polar bear pen and gets killed for their efforts, do they kill the tiger or polar bear?


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

selzer said:


> Some crazy woman climbed into a pen with a pit bull and a husky/pit bull puppy -- not hers. She died.
> 
> It was ruled that she committed suicide. What a way to go. But I guess she was unsuccessful several times, so... She had a young baby daughter and her fiancé does not believe she was trying to kill herself.
> 
> ...


It wasn't a pen, it was a poorly fenced in yard that the neighbors stated the Pits always escaped. Pictures of the yard can be seen here: 

http://www.dogsbite.org/img/fenced-area.jpg

I would think the young mother would have had to had reason to think the Pits would kill her in order for the death to be ruled a suicide. Reeks to me.

The young woman had had an argument with her boyfriend and she left the house while waiting for the police to come. They had already been called and were on their way.


----------



## yuriy (Dec 23, 2012)

Insane reaction to put the dogs down in this scenario. 

If someone jumps into the lions' den in the zoo, do the lions get euthanized and zoo keepers held responsible?


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

You can't compare wild animals killing to companion animals killing.


----------



## viking (May 2, 2014)

Reminds me of that nutter who went to live among the Grizzly bears and got himself and his girlfriend killed.


----------



## Nigel (Jul 10, 2012)

viking said:


> Reminds me of that nutter who went to live among the Grizzly bears and got himself and his girlfriend killed.


Timothy Treadwell, lol


----------



## yuriy (Dec 23, 2012)

MineAreWorkingline said:


> You can't compare wild animals killing to companion animals killing.


Of course you can. The only thing that matters is that in both cases the victim intentionally went somewhere dangerous, and paid the price for it. As soon as they made that decision, they forfeited any rights.

If the owner had invited them in, that would be a different story.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

It's one thing if they are running loose and hurt/kill someone, but when they are contained and someone physically goes in and this happens, it's different. What happens with businesses that have trained guard dogs on the premise and someone enters? The dog is trained to guard, does the dog get destroyed for doing its job on its property? The dogs are contained for a reason, what else are the owners suppose to do to protect the dog and themselves?

I would not have agreed to have my dogs put to sleep in this situation.


----------



## Big Brown Eyes (Jan 11, 2015)

1) The story is incomplete if you want a discussion if the dogs should have been put down.
1.a) Did she aggravate the dogs to attack her?
1.b) Did she hurt the dogs?
1.c) Were the dogs naturally ferocious? And attacked her to the extent of killing her with out provocation?

2) Whether I expect my dog to 'kill' some one entering my yard - Straight answer: NO!

Killing is extreme, death is final. If you think any death of any human is justified, then you haven't seen death - especially that of a loved one.

Death is NEVER the answer.

3) Should the dogs have been euthanized - based on what the information is provided, I am assuming she climbed in to the yard and the dogs just attacked her.

In that case: ABSOLUTELY.

No dog should be that aggressive to take a human life - no matter what the provocation.

And in this case the owner was not even there telling the dog to act that aggressively.

Just my 2 cents worth.


----------



## gsdsar (May 21, 2002)

Actually yes. In almost every case where this has happened the zoo animal was euthanized. 

The exceptions I can think of are the Orca.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

gsdsar said:


> Actually yes. In almost every case where this has happened the zoo animal was euthanized.
> 
> The exceptions I can think of are the Orca.


Actually everything I see is they don't euthanize. Most cases it's determined the animal in zoos are acting on normal instincts. If the animal escapes and kills that is different. 

Here is one example of many...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...zoo-worker-in-new-zealand-wont-be-euthanized/


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

The day before she decided to go into that back yard, a young child was snatched from his mothers arms as they walked to school and dragged into a back yard by a dog and was killed by that dog and others in the yard. I wonder if that situation played into the womans decision to go into a yard with agressive dogs. http://www.detroitnews.com/story/ne...t-bulls-deadly-attack-still-custody/76714712/


----------



## Jenny720 (Nov 21, 2014)

That poor mother those dogs were so intent on getting this little boy. How can she get those images out of her head. To many unanswered questions as to why the young woman trespassed in the backyard of those dogs and how the dogs were provoked and what if any were her intentions. Those dogs are capable and did kill someone for the owner to be okay with the dogs being euthanized says alot.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

yuriy said:


> Of course you can. The only thing that matters is that in both cases the victim intentionally went somewhere dangerous, and paid the price for it. As soon as they made that decision, they forfeited any rights.
> 
> If the owner had invited them in, that would be a different story.


Do you really believe that we should expect the same behavior from wild animals that were NOT bred to be companion animals vs dogs which have been genetically selected to be companions and pets, domesticated, for hundreds of years?

Man stoppers are one thing, man killers are a whole other ball game.



onyx'girl said:


> The day before she decided to go into that back yard, a young child was snatched from his mothers arms as they walked to school and dragged into a back yard by a dog and was killed by that dog and others in the yard. I wonder if that situation played into the womans decision to go into a yard with agressive dogs. ?They just ate him,? mom says about dog attack on son


This young woman's fiancé's mother was a rabid Pit Bull advocate as is her fiance. Despite her death, he has been outspoken advocating for Pit Bulls. Pictures have been posted of this young woman fearlessly lounging with multiple Pit Bulls. I can't wrap my head around somebody that spent so much time around Pit Bulls and those that advocate for them choosing death by Pit Bulls as if she knew they would kill her. That just does not make sense. That flies in the face of the logic that she knew, or at least should have.


----------



## yuriy (Dec 23, 2012)

MineAreWorkingline said:


> Do you really believe that we should expect the same behavior from wild animals that were NOT bred to be companion animals vs dogs which have been genetically selected to be companions and pets, domesticated, for hundreds of years?


I believe that if you enter a secured, private property - and clearly against the property owner's will - you relinquish all rights to anything resembling your personal safety. At that point you are an intruder, and absolutely anything that happens to you (from getting mauled by dogs, to getting shot in Texas) is absolutely, non-negotiably your fault. And if you do so knowing that your actions are putting your life at risk, you and your estate should also be liable for any cleanup of your "mess," along with time, material, and emotional expenses for anyone involved. 

People need to take responsibility for their own stupidity.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

While I wouldn't want one of my dogs to kill an intruder, you really cannot tell how frail an individual might be. It may not take much more than a single bite to kill an elderly person, a person with a weak immune system, or a very small child/infant. I would hope my dogs would not bite a small child or infant, but if I am not there and they manage to get through my fence and into my dogs, well, maybe it would be tragic. 

I feel very confident that a 2 year old could not manage to get to my dogs. A large 4 year old, maybe, if they deliberately figured out the latch, which has to be given pressure evenly to unlatch. 

If a large child or an adult goes into my kennels when I am not there, and is injured or killed, that is on them. I would present my case that my dogs have never attacked anyone, and that they were all secure within fenced enclosures, and that the child/adult had no permission to be there. And then a jury of my peers would have to find one way or the other.

But the dogs. Ok, I'll admit it, the only dogs I think likely to bite even an intruder are behind three gates. They would have to go through where Milla is, and then go through the gate on the other side of her area, and then through another gate to get to either of the dogs that I would not be overly surprised if they bit a total stranger. 

But if I had dogs trained to guard, and someone climbed over my fence to get in with them, I think the only reason I might not fight euthanizing the dogs would be, if knowing that they would kill someone, because they did, I no longer wanted the liability.

Sad for the dogs, because prior to this act, and if the act hadn't have happened, maybe they could have been ordinary pets, with a good life. 

Let's say a 90 year old guy with Alzheimer's wanders away from his home in the night and comes across a yard with dogs in it, and he goes in there. Let's say the dogs knock him down, he breaks his hip or pelvis, and by the time he is found he is dead, due to exposure or shock. Do you euthanize the dogs for contributing to the old man's demise? I think not. 

It is awful. The whole story is just awful. And the story of the kid being dragged under the fence -- glad the cops shot those dogs, or all but one. I wonder why they did not shoot them all. Glad they carted the owner off to jail too, and I hope he goes to prison for a long time.


----------



## wolfy dog (Aug 1, 2012)

selzer said:


> glad the cops shot those dogs, or all but one. I wonder why they did not shoot them all.


I seemed to be a female dog. I hope they didn't spare her because of possibly being pregnant.. They must have already had pups out of her, looking at her nipples and the stories will continue.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

selzer said:


> Sad for the dogs, because prior to this act, and if the act hadn't have happened, maybe they could have been ordinary pets, with a good life.


Those dogs have a long history of escaping their yard and being aggressive in the neighborhood.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

MineAreWorkingline said:


> Those dogs have a long history of escaping their yard and being aggressive in the neighborhood.


 I did not see this in the story that I read. Where did you get this information? There are two different stories going on here. The one with the kid from the day previous was a different group of dogs. This one had a husky/pit puppy and a pit.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

selzer said:


> I did not see this in the story that I read. Where did you get this information? There are two different stories going on here. The one with the kid from the day previous was a different group of dogs. This one had a husky/pit puppy and a pit.


There are well over a dozen articles and updates on this story. The information was in the original reports.


----------



## yuriy (Dec 23, 2012)

MineAreWorkingline said:


> Those dogs have a long history of escaping their yard and being aggressive in the neighborhood.


So what? Completely unrelated fact.

If this incident had happened outside the home owner's property I'd be right there with you, putting blame on the dogs and their owner, but that's not what happened. Aggressive or not makes zero difference when a stranger trespassed into the dog's fenced enclosure. The dogs prior behaviour, history, and everything else is simply irrelevant. The only thing that matters is that a stranger willfully entered the dogs' enclosed property. That's it.

And polluting this thread with a separate pitbull incident does not help anyone. Everyone here is well aware of your bias against pitbulls.


----------



## Nikitta (Nov 10, 2011)

I think a lot of the facts have been left out. Selective journalism makes it hard to know the true facts , no matter what breed it is.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

yuriy said:


> So what? Completely unrelated fact.
> 
> If this incident had happened outside the home owner's property I'd be right there with you, putting blame on the dogs and their owner, but that's not what happened. Aggressive or not makes zero difference when a stranger trespassed into the dog's fenced enclosure. The dogs prior behaviour, history, and everything else is simply irrelevant. The only thing that matters is that a stranger willfully entered the dogs' enclosed property. That's it.
> 
> And polluting this thread with a separate pitbull incident does not help anyone. Everyone here is well aware of your bias against pitbulls.


 If the dogs had menaced the neighborhood prior, it does matter, or at least it says that the owner does not necessarily have the ability to properly manage the dogs that definitely require excellent management. 

I think that we can poo poo a lot of behaviors: ran up and nipped a lady, a lady fell down because she was afraid of the dog, grabbed a kid's leg who was bicycling by the dog, chased the Fedx man out of the yard, attacked a small dog, and so forth. But now the dude knows without a shadow of a doubt what his dogs are capable of, and allowing that to hit home, maybe is the real reason he did not fight for the dogs.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

as long as Michigan is being focused on, this happened yesterday. I do hope this dog is NOT euth'd as it was doing its job(so he thought). Although there were two previous bite incidents according to the owner: Dog tasered: Bites good Samaritan, attacks police, paramedics who were helping owner | MLive.com

I am curious to know the pedigree of this dog.


----------



## yuriy (Dec 23, 2012)

selzer said:


> If the dogs had menaced the neighborhood prior, it does matter, or at least it says that the owner does not necessarily have the ability to properly manage the dogs that definitely require excellent management.


It would matter if the incident occurred outside of the owner's property. It did not. The perpetrator willingly entered the property and subjected herself to a known risk. 100% her decision.

If you enter someone's house, break into their gun safe and use their gun to off yourself, would you expect the gun owner to be held responsible and the gun 'euthanized'? Because that's what happened here.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

yuriy said:


> It would matter if the incident occurred outside of the owner's property. It did not. The perpetrator willingly entered the property and subjected herself to a known risk. 100% her decision.
> 
> If you enter someone's house, break into their gun safe and use their gun to off yourself, would you expect the gun owner to be held responsible and the gun 'euthanized'? Because that's what happened here.


 If a child got into my guns and ammunition, and took them to the park where they were playing with them. And then some yayhoo broke into my house and committed suicide with my gun. Then yes, I think they should come and take my gun away as I would be a total idiot, and certainly not keeping a weapon properly. Not sure that would happen, stupidity is not illegal.

I do not think the man should be prosecuted because the dog killed someone who climbed into his yard. But if the dogs were previously roaming around menacing, and now we know the dogs can and will kill someone, then a case can be made for designating the dogs to be dangerous, and requiring special fencing, muzzles in public, and liability insurance. I do not think that the courts should put down a dog that injures or kills a trespasser, but they should take all the animal's known history into consideration when determining whether or not the dog should carry the designation as dangerous. Perhaps just killing a human, any human, would do that anyway.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

yuriy said:


> So what? Completely unrelated fact.
> 
> If this incident had happened outside the home owner's property I'd be right there with you, putting blame on the dogs and their owner, but that's not what happened. Aggressive or not makes zero difference when a stranger trespassed into the dog's fenced enclosure. The dogs prior behaviour, history, and everything else is simply irrelevant. The only thing that matters is that a stranger willfully entered the dogs' enclosed property. That's it.
> 
> And polluting this thread with a separate pitbull incident does not help anyone. Everyone here is well aware of your bias against pitbulls.


Selzer posted: "Sad for the dogs, because prior to this act, and if the act hadn't have happened, maybe they could have been ordinary pets, with a good life. "

So yes, my response was totally appropriate.




yuriy said:


> It would matter if the incident occurred outside of the owner's property. It did not. The perpetrator willingly entered the property and subjected herself to a known risk. 100% her decision.
> 
> If you enter someone's house, break into their gun safe and use their gun to off yourself, would you expect the gun owner to be held responsible and the gun 'euthanized'? Because that's what happened here.


What is critical as per the previously attached photos is that these Pits were ill contained and that seems to be a huge problem not only when Pit Bulls attack but in them endangering the community, just like the boy that was killed by 4 Pit Bulls the day before despite them being fenced in and him being on the outside of the fence.

Also, there are always two sides to every story. With the little boy, one story says all four Pits were in the yard and reached under the fence and pulled him in, the other says one Pit was out, grabbed the child and then the other three pulled the child in. 

In the case of this young mother, some people say she was in the yard, but the young woman's family has spoke out and said she was found in the alley.

So yes, past history of all of these Pits can be critical.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

If a dog kills/mauls it is usually because of pack mentality. A bite incident is often just one dog/no back up. 
And there is that vulnerable position of being on the bottom of the pile if there is a pack...who does that pack go after?


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

onyx'girl said:


> If a dog kills/mauls it is usually because of pack mentality. A bite incident is often just one dog/no back up.
> And there is that vulnerable position of being on the bottom of the pile if there is a pack...who does that pack go after?


What is considered a pack? 2? 3?


----------



## yuriy (Dec 23, 2012)

selzer said:


> If a child got into my guns and ammunition, and took them to the park where they were playing with them. And then some yayhoo broke into my house and committed suicide with my gun. Then yes, I think they should come and take my gun away as I would be a total idiot, and certainly not keeping a weapon properly. Not sure that would happen, stupidity is not illegal.
> 
> I do not think the man should be prosecuted because the dog killed someone who climbed into his yard. But if the dogs were previously roaming around menacing, and now we know the dogs can and will kill someone, then a case can be made for designating the dogs to be dangerous, and requiring special fencing, muzzles in public, and liability insurance. I do not think that the courts should put down a dog that injures or kills a trespasser, but they should take all the animal's known history into consideration when determining whether or not the dog should carry the designation as dangerous. Perhaps just killing a human, any human, would do that anyway.


Except we're not talking about a child that doesn't know better, or one that took something dangerous elsewhere and someone else suffered. We're talking about an ADULT, that killed themselves after climbing into a secured property. Night and day difference.



MineAreWorkingline said:


> Selzer posted: "Sad for the dogs, because prior to this act, and if the act hadn't have happened, maybe they could have been ordinary pets, with a good life. "
> 
> So yes, my response was totally appropriate.
> 
> ...


No. The dogs *were* contained at the time of the incident. The person climbed in to them, not the other way around. That's the start and the end of that story.

And again you're trying to pollute this thread with an unrelated incident about the boy that furthers your hate-filled agenda against pitbulls. Nothing to do with this thread, or the discussion at hand.


----------



## onyx'girl (May 18, 2007)

MineAreWorkingline said:


> What is considered a pack? 2? 3?


I'd say 2... they will feed off each others energy(and even turn on each other if there is more involved) compared to just one dog that has no back up whatosever.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

yuriy said:


> Except we're not talking about a child that doesn't know better, or one that took something dangerous elsewhere and someone else suffered. We're talking about an ADULT, that killed themselves after climbing into a secured property. Night and day difference.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No, the dogs were not contained at the time of the incident. That fence could not contain a Chihuahua. The woman's family said she was found in the alley, do you have some inside information?

And again, you are defending the act simply because the breed is Pit Bulls, like you always do regardless of the facts. You can't conceal your hate filled agenda against Pit Bull victims. With each and every mauling and fatality, there you are defending the breed. Your comments have nothing to do with the fatality or the facts, they only further serve your agenda to promote Pit Bulls regardless of how heinous the act.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Bottom line is, if Sue is correct (don't know the source) the owners agreed to have the dogs euthanized. If that is true, then it doesn't matter whether we think they deserve to be or not. It's not like they were hauled away and euthanized against the owners' wishes before the investigation is completed. Honestly, I don't know if I could live with dogs that *killed* someone just for climbing over my fence.


----------



## yuriy (Dec 23, 2012)

MineAreWorkingline said:


> No, the dogs were not contained at the time of the incident. That fence could not contain a Chihuahua. The woman's family said she was found in the alley, do you have some inside information?
> 
> And again, you are defending the act simply because the breed is Pit Bulls, like you always do regardless of the facts. You can't conceal your hate filled agenda against Pit Bull victims. With each and every mauling and fatality, there you are defending the breed. Your comments have nothing to do with the fatality or the facts, they only further serve your agenda to promote Pit Bulls regardless of how heinous the act.


Michigan woman mauled to death by pitbulls 'killed herself' | Americas | News | The Independent - the first Google result for "michigan pitbull husky woman." Let's not forget that the woman had a history of suicide attempts.

FACT: The dogs were on their property, not in the neighbourhood and not in an alley.
FACT: The woman CLIMBED A FENCE to get to the dogs.
FACT: The medical examiner ruled the death a SUICIDE.

Even the medical examiner stated "These were vicious dogs *in an enclosed space*," but of course, you, the universal deity of all pitbull knowledge know better.

You may not have noticed, but I did not participate in any of the recent pitbull-related discussions, mostly because I did not want to get entangled with your foolishness after having already been subjected to it once.

Plenty of people have provided reasonable arguments for why BSL doesn't work, why generalizing labels to all animals of a specific breed is incorrect, etc. etc. You have no interest in even considering any evidence that disagrees with you. YOU bring up pitbulls in every thread you can, apparently because you have nothing better to do with your time. You intentionally mix up pitbull-related events. You resort to the same foolish attempts to discredit facts and logic in every thread. You re-post the same headlines, the same statistics, the same vile, biased bull every single time without giving so much as a second's thought that perhaps the situation isn't as black and white as a breed and there just _might_ be other factors in play.

Even now, you're making up things about me and stating them as if they were facts - not surprising, unfortunately. My only agenda is to not perpetuate blind stupidity. But I have to give you props for the attempt at a clever response. 

Have you ever noticed that for every ten arguments on this board (regardless of the subject), you're involved in nine of them?


----------



## yuriy (Dec 23, 2012)

Liesje said:


> Bottom line is, if Sue is correct (don't know the source) the owners agreed to have the dogs euthanized. If that is true, then it doesn't matter whether we think they deserve to be or not. It's not like they were hauled away and euthanized against the owners' wishes before the investigation is completed. Honestly, I don't know if I could live with dogs that *killed* someone just for climbing over my fence.


It does sound like the owner made the decision. I can only imagine how stressful this situation was, and the pressure the owners were put under. An unfortunate end for the dogs due to no fault of their own.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

yuriy said:


> It does sound like the owner made the decision. I can only imagine how stressful this situation was, and the pressure the owners were put under. An unfortunate end for the dogs due to no fault of their own.


Quote from medical examiner..
"Dragovic added that Hardy knew the dogs were dangerous and had, in the past, made an effort to avoid them, CBS News reports. "She did climb the fence over and enter that space," Dragovic said. "She did not get through a gate or through the front door of the house – and that clearly is a purposeful act. It's akin to someone jumping into a cage with tigers or lions at a zoo."


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

yuriy said:


> Michigan woman mauled to death by pitbulls 'killed herself' | Americas | News | The Independent - the first Google result for "michigan pitbull husky woman."
> 
> FACT: The dogs were on their property, not in the neighbourhood and not in an alley.
> FACT: The woman CLIMBED A FENCE to get to the dogs.
> ...


My foolishness? It is not me defending Pit Bulls that mauled and killed a young woman, that would be the epitome of foolishness.

Who is discussing BSL? Perhaps you shoot the wrong messenger? 

Geneticists state you should apply expected behavior according to breed, no reasonable argument has ever been presented to negate genetics. Care to post some information proving science false?

You have no interest in any facts that don't promote Pit Bulls in a positive light. 

I am on this forum to talk German Shepherds, the last thing I want to do is listen to your ilk go on singing the never ending praises of how great Pit Bulls Art. As far as I am concerned, as soon as people start pushing Pit Bulls on this forum either with pictures or how great their Pit is, I think the mods should shut it down immediately. There are way too many active Pit Bull forums out there to continually have people shoving Pits down other people's throats on a GSD forum. I know I am far from being the only one on here that feels like this. I get enough emails in support, but is it not my forum, only my 2 cents. If it were only one person, that might be a different story, but it seems to be happening on nearly a daily basis anymore.

I discredit nothing about Pit Bulls, I present the documented facts. Shooting the the messenger because the truth doesn't not support delusions of Pit Bulls being nice dogs is nonsensical. 

I post biased? I post documented facts. Is there an aversion to the truth? Of course I post the same facts, does the truth change on a daily basis? Pit Bulls killed more people this year than all other breeds combined. That is the truth today, that was the truth yesterday, and it most likely will be the truth tomorrow. I am not going to make things up to pacify anybody. 

I mix up events? Two Pit Bull mauling fatalities one day apart in the same state should not be discussed on the same thread? Oh, that's right, mentioning the second horrific fatality makes it that much harder to try to salvage the Pit Bull's tarnished image. 

I am not the one mandating black and white thinking dependent upon one article. The fact is that her family is publicly speaking out and saying different, I mentioned this fact, it just so happens to be a shade of gray of other factors coming in to play. I posted the pictures of the broken down fence which also clearly demonstrates that a Pit Bull would not have any problem leaving that yard at will, yet another shade of gray that looks poorly for the Pit Bulls. False accusations don't make them true.

I made nothing up about you. FACT: I merely pointed out that you never side with the victim, always against them. You accused me of being a Pit Bull hater for telling the truth and documenting it. If there is a thread about a Pit Bull that does not present a Pit Bull as the icon some think it is, there you are not only attacking the facts, the shades of gray, but the person that presented those aspects. I won't stop posting facts because you have an aversion to them.

Have you ever noticed how 9 out of 10 arguments, like this one, are started by you?


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

It appears that the Dragovic has a very dubious reputation, especially when it comes to suicide.

Victim?s family disagrees with medical examiner ruling death a suicide | Alternative

Coroner Assailed in Detroit Beating Trial - NYTimes.com

http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/09a0258p-06.pdf

http://www.crainsdetroit.com/articl...amily-remains-convinced-banker-did-not-commit

Suicides by middle-aged Michigan residents nearly double in last decade


----------



## yuriy (Dec 23, 2012)

As childish as ever.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

Still find the truth and shades of gray offensive?


----------



## Big Brown Eyes (Jan 11, 2015)

Pit Bulls / American Staffordshire terriers are an abomination. They were NOT bred to be companion animals or shepherds or hunters or trackers or guard dogs.

When the intent is evil, only evil is created. 

These dogs were bred for fighting. 

I know pit bull lovers will get upset on reading this post, but I am sorry, that whole God forsaken breed should be wiped off the face of this planet.

Do GSD's get aggressive? Yes, but thats because of breeding mistakes. 
But that is not the case for pit bulls.

Let me draw an analogy here: If I am mixing wheat flour and salt, if the salt is too much the bread is ruined. - Analogy for the GSD bad breeding.

But if I mix chlorine with ammonia, doesn't matter if I pour a tub of Versace blue (my favorite parfum btw  ) in to it, its still going to be poison - Analogy for pit bull breeding.


There can be no breeding mistakes with pitbulls, because there is essentially a killer streak built in to their DNA which no amount of breeding will extinguish.

There is no place for pitbulls in human society. Period.

PS: I just read the article about the detroit boy being killed in front of his mom, and yes I am upset. I lost a kid. If you have bred or brought a pit bull, you have created an accident, which is absolutely 100% certain to happen in the future!!


----------



## cloudpump (Oct 20, 2015)

opcorn:


----------



## yuriy (Dec 23, 2012)

MineAreWorkingline said:


> Still find the truth and shades of gray offensive?


The only things I find offensive are blind stupidity, making up of "facts", inability to think critically or objectively, and blatant superiority complexes. All are items which directly apply to you. You are driven by emotion, irrational responses, and fear mongering - nothing else. In the eternal words of Mr. T, "I pity the fool."


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

yuriy said:


> The only things I find offensive are blind stupidity, making up of "facts", inability to think critically or objectively, and blatant superiority complexes. All are items which directly apply to you. You are driven by emotion, irrational responses, and fear mongering - nothing else. In the eternal words of Mr. T, "I pity the fool."


Stupidity is mistaking your comments for mine.


----------



## Stonevintage (Aug 26, 2014)

yuriy said:


> The only things I find offensive are blind stupidity, making up of "facts", inability to think critically or objectively, and blatant superiority complexes. All are items which directly apply to you. You are driven by emotion, irrational responses, and fear mongering - nothing else. In the eternal words of Mr. T, "I pity the fool."


youriy - there are better boards to post on if you want to support a breed that is very unpopular with MANY here. You're going to get the same results every time.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

Mods, 

This thread has turned into a personal assault and bashing thread based on the truth about Pit Bulls tarnishing the stellar image of Pit Bulls that some people carry in their minds about Pit Bulls.

There are false accusations being made for the sole purpose of starting a fight. I have been accussed of adding the Detroit child mauling when it was OnyxGirl who added that to this thread, all this just so one person can launch an all consuming, hate filled tirade at me because I refuse to worship at the altar of Pit Bulls as he does. Some people take facts personal and want to shoot the messenger that presents any that don't agree with what he wants other people to believe. Some people don't want the facts presented, or other viewpoints, but that defeats the purpose of a forum.

Most people are here to discuss German Shepherds and other topics, including current events, as this thread posted by Selzer, not to hail Pit Bulls.


----------



## glowingtoadfly (Feb 28, 2014)

The reason there are so many pit bull aggression cases is that they are terribly overbred, so there are more pit bulls than any other kind of dog. It is terrible in my city. Animal control will only adopt out pitbulls. That being said, there are many pitties much sweeter than my own work in progress, fear aggressive GSD.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

glowingtoadfly said:


> The reason there are so many pit bull aggression cases is that they are terribly overbred, so there are more pit bulls than any other kind of dog. It is terrible in my city. Animal control will only adopt out pitbulls. That being said, there are many pitties much sweeter than my own work in progress, fear aggressive GSD.


Pit Bulls are a mere 3% of total dogs owned, 6% if derivatives and mixes are included in the US. Source, ASPCA

Alternatively, they are the most popular breed in shelters, this year alone they account for over 80% of human fatalities, although being only 6%, at best, of dog population, another area where they are overly represented.


----------



## yuriy (Dec 23, 2012)

Stonevintage said:


> youriy - there are better boards to post on if you want to support a breed that is very unpopular with MANY here. You're going to get the same results every time.


I don't "support" the breed. I don't even like pitbulls, and despite the bull MAWL continues to make up, have never said I do. I simply dislike blind stupidity and intentional fear mongering considerably more than I dislike any dogs. MAWL constantly makes up lies and intentionally spreads misinformation every chance she gets, and I don't think many people here realize the cumulative effect such constant postings have on search engine results, and thus on anyone doing research into the subject. 

There are plenty of dogs with genetic pre-disposition towards poor behaviour, including pitbulls and our very own GSDs. That, in and of itself does not mean the entire breed is "evil", or any of the other crap people are continuing to make up and pass off as gospel. There is a huge number of factors involved in every instance of dog aggression, but no one wants to actually use their brain and _think_ things through when it's so easy to blame a breed. 

How would you like it if Google search results suddenly started getting flooded with biased, exaggerated, and made up issues about German Shepherds? How long until you and I are subjected to restrictions in owning/handling GSDs? Fear mongering is not a one-off event, it is a rolling snowball that only gets larger and larger, and in the end, everyone suffers.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

Mods,

This thread is going way off topic, please put it back on track.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

yuriy said:


> I don't "support" the breed. I don't even like pitbulls, and despite the bull MAWL continues to make up, have never said I do. I simply dislike blind stupidity and intentional fear mongering considerably more than I dislike any dogs. MAWL constantly makes up lies and intentionally spreads misinformation every chance she gets, and I don't think many people here realize the cumulative effect such constant postings have on search engine results, and thus on anyone doing research into the subject.
> 
> How would you like it if Google search results suddenly started getting flooded with biased, exaggerated, and made up issues about German Shepherds? How long until you and I are subjected to restrictions in owning/handling GSDs? Fear mongering is not a one-off event, it is a rolling snowball that only gets larger and larger, and in the end, everyone suffers.


You have yet to disprove one single thing I ever posted as wrong, that alone speaks volumes, coupled with your use of personal attacks and insults. I think you said the word was "childish"?

If one were to Google the internet about GSDs, one would find that the same facts, stats, science, genetics and generally accepted knowledge would apply.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

Stonevintage said:


> youriy - there are better boards to post on if you want to support a breed that is very unpopular with MANY here. You're going to get the same results every time.


That's a broad statement. There are about 5 that despise the breed. Others might not like the look of them, but they don't go out of their way to try and get everyone else to agree with BSL. BSL is a very dangerous thing for anyone that owns pit bulls, dobes, GSDs or Rotts. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and we all see the stories about the bad pit bulls, but for every bad story there are 100 good ones. I haven't met a pit bull in 40 yrs that didn't like people. Some might not like other dogs or cats, but that is every breed. Many here own them, have owned them or will own them. I personally will end up with one down the line, they are loyal to a fault, even more so in the right home. The media knows how to grab the attention of people and pit bulls are one way. I've seen stories of a dog mauling and the breed isn't mentioned, people argue and assume pit bull and it ends up being a lab. If anyone really looked at the statistics they would clearly see that less then 1% of the pit bull population have caused harm of death. That is a super low number for the amount of pits that exist.,


----------



## glowingtoadfly (Feb 28, 2014)

MAWL,
Where are you getting these statistics from? Could you cite them please?http://www.realpitbull.com/perspective.html


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

llombardo said:


> That's a broad statement. There are about 5 that despise the breed. Others might not like the look of them, but they don't go out of their way to try and get everyone else to agree with BSL. BSL is a very dangerous thing for anyone that owns pit bulls, dobes, GSDs or Rotts. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and we all see the stories about the bad pit bulls, but for every bad story there are 100 good ones. I haven't met a pit bull in 40 yrs that didn't like people. Some might not like other dogs or cats, but that is every breed. Many here own them, have owned them or will own them. I personally will end up with one down the line, they are loyal to a fault, even more so in the right home. The media knows how to grab the attention of people and pit bulls are one way. I've seen stories of a dog mauling and the breed isn't mentioned, people argue and assume pit bull and it ends up being a lab.


Who is trying to get BSL passed? I have not seen anybody post in favor of BSL but I keep seeing where some people are making broad statements that there are people here that are doing just that.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

glowingtoadfly said:


> MAWL,
> Where are you getting these statistics from? Could you cite them please?A Dose of Reality


Glow,

I already cited the ASPCA as the source for numbers of Pits. There are also numerous reports of the numbers of Pit Bulls in shelters from a variety of sources. 

I did not want to be rude or ignorant, as many that post here have been victims of Pit Bulls or their pets have been, or they know of somebody, but if you want the source for over 80% of fatalities in 2015, it would be the number of dog bite related fatalities, i.e., dead bodies. Do your own google research on this year alone.

I also know that if you want a shortcut to fatalities, that some people use dogbites.org, an all breed organization that promotes stricter all breed dangerous dog laws. Some people state that they are not legit, but the fact remains that there has never been a dog bite related fatality not reported by that site and none of the dog bite related fatalities reported there have ever been proven bogus. Make up your own mind.

The source you cite is a Pit Bull biased site, the sources I cite are all breed, non biased. I prefer to get my information from non biased sources.


----------



## Stonevintage (Aug 26, 2014)

The breed greatly concerns me. This from several personal experiences. I did find about a year ago the site called dogsbite.org. It includes data and resource references on all breeds. It may be the majority of incidents listed there involve mainly one breed but they always include statistics from all breeds. The GSD is always listed but always far down the list as is every other breed numbers wise.

If you want to know more about the statistics or want verification of the numbers being used or want to know the source of the data - chances are - you can find it there. The site seems to be run tracking numbers from a legal background - that is - by people who represent dog attack victims in the court system. Not sure but it certainly isn't breed discriminatory in anything other than dogs that attack or kill people is not being adequately handled by the court systems. 

No one shaped my opinion. My personal experiences with the breed shaped my opinion - including owning an AST for 13 years.


----------



## glowingtoadfly (Feb 28, 2014)

I still contend that bad breeding, not the breed itself, is responsible for the disproportionate numbers. Also, that the ASPCA can't keep track of every backyard breeder of pitbulls. One only has to look at Craigslist to see the number of ads in any city.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

glowingtoadfly said:


> I still contend that bad breeding, not the breed itself, is responsible for the disproportionate numbers. Also, that the ASPCA can't keep track of every backyard breeder of pitbulls. One only has to look at Craigslist to see the number of ads in any city.


Or walk into a shelter


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

glowingtoadfly said:


> I still contend that bad breeding, not the breed itself, is responsible for the disproportionate numbers. Also, that the ASPCA can't keep track of every backyard breeder of pitbulls. One only has to look at Craigslist to see the number of ads in any city.


I agree that Pit Bulls are the number one breed to be dumped, that does not make them most popular of breeds.

Bad breeding, good breeding, does not matter, as all those "breedings" result in the breed as we know it today.


----------



## Stonevintage (Aug 26, 2014)

I considered that the controversy might be hyped up or over inflated by the media. Whenever there is an important topic I want to know more about and to access information outside of the US to get a different view I source other countries articles and statistics on the topic. Often, Canada, Germany, France and Australia. 

What I found is the same in every country. The same experiences and concerns. That confirmed for me that this is a universal problem and not a product of our American Media Hype Machine or forced opinions by any one group politically or in everyday society. It is a global issue and cannot be discounted by any one group of people here influencing their fellow citizens.


----------



## MineAreWorkingline (May 2, 2015)

It is absolutely a global problem!


----------



## Sabis mom (Mar 20, 2014)

We have the same issues in Canada. 

I have said for years now, the single larges issue with PB's is that as a breed they seem to attract the very worst of owners. I would never support a breed ban, of any kind. Sensible folks see that as a slippery slope, we have already seen it in some places.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

Is this law still in effect?
5 Breeds Outlawed – Rottweilers, Pit Bulls, Dobermans, German Shepherds and Bull Mastiffs


----------



## Stonevintage (Aug 26, 2014)

Sabis mom said:


> We have the same issues in Canada.
> 
> I have said for years now, the single larges issue with PB's is that as a breed they seem to attract the very worst of owners. I would never support a breed ban, of any kind. Sensible folks see that as a slippery slope, we have already seen it in some places.


There were some interesting numbers I looked at out of I think it was Quebec. Pre-ban and Post-ban. virtually a 99% elimination of dog bite cases. They're calling it a success, others don't think it's fair. Also interesting was one article that talked about post ban and what the favorite breed of "people who want to own tough outlaw dogs" turned to.... The Boxer!

Because this ban has been in effect since (if I recall correctly) 2010 you would expect to see bites or attacks from Boxers moving up the scale - not - they just don't have it in them to do what the other breed did. The bad guys can't seem to make that breed as "bad" as they want them to be..... Pretty interesting read. The articles are from both sides and the stats are from the Humane Society and of course, just like everywhere else - groups challenge the stat numbers.


----------

