News He Must Have Provoked That Dog Somehow
posted by on August 11 at 11:04 AM
When will people learn. Pit bulls are lovely, lovely dogs—so long as you don’t provoke them by going out in public if you’re elderly, another dog, or a child. Oh, and don’t clap your hands—unless you’re prepared to lose ‘em. And if you don’t have the sense to stay inside if you’re old, a dog, a a kid, or prone to breaking into applause—or if you’re not carrying a gun—you really have no one to blame but yourself for this sort of thing.
A vicious attack by a pit bull that badly injured a 79-year-old man in Notre Dame de Grâce has re-ignited the debate about what to do about aggressive dogs and their owners.The Côte des Neiges/Notre Dame de Grâce borough needs to discuss the issue before doing anything, said Marcel Tremblay, city councillor for the N.D.G. ward. He said he has asked the borough to determine if it’s legal to adopt a bylaw banning certain breeds of dogs. In the meantime, Antonio Nitti, his bloodied arm in a sling, sat at the kitchen table of his son’s home on Oxford Ave., surrounded by family.
The elderly man’s left hand was heavily bandaged after a pit bull bit him several times and tore off a large amount of skin while Nitti was walking his son’s Lhasa Apso, named Gizmo, in a park across the street Thursday. The dog “came at me. It was going like 200 miles an hour,” Nitti said in Italian.
The dog that attacked Nitti, who also lives on Oxford Ave., has a history of violence, neighbourhood residents said. Jim Eden and his wife, Gail, live on Harvard Ave., one block west, and said the same pit bull attacked their dog, a Maltese, about six weeks ago. The pit bull “tore a big chunk of hair off its tail,” Eden said. A week later, Eden added, he was in the park and saw the dog knock down a young child. Luckily, the child was unharmed, Eden said.
Down the street from the Iturbes’ home, the owner of the 2-year-old pit bull and her boyfriend still hadn’t heard a word yesterday about their pet’s fate. The couple, who refused to reveal their names, said their dog, named Sugar, had never attacked humans before and “it wasn’t in her character.”
See? Sugar never attacked before—well, never attacked humans, anyway—until that old man left the house with his dog. Dumb old man.
Injured? Zzzzzz.
Dan, is this pit bull ban of yours gaining any traction at all?
In local pit bull news, an 80 year old woman was attacked by a pit bull down the street from me last week. Her husband managed to beat the dog off with his walking frame. The dog was removed by animal control (and hopefully euthanized).
I only like the stories where someone beats the dog off.
And the wait continues for the endless train of stories about golden retrievers ripping off limbs and eating children whole.
Dogs should be like guns. You own one, and something happens with your gun, you're criminally liable.
#5, here.
http://www.tristate-media.com/articles/2008/04/01/mtcarmelregister/news/news3.txt
http://www.click2houston.com/news/11436816/detail.html
Should I keep going?
Aye, aye, aye - what's Joel Con-Nelly's position on death with dignity for innocent-until-eats-children pit bulls? Or is this only on a need-to-know basis?
Any truth to the rumor that pit bull gangs are tearing tourists apart in China?
Yes, w7ngmanm, you should - unless you consider two "cars" an "endless train".
Set yourself a goal - see if you can match just the total number of stories Dan's posted. We'll be here.
Dan, you should collect Pit Bulls and then build a concentration camp where you have the Pit Bulls eat Youth Pastors!
A couple years old, but an interesting take:
http://gladwell.com/2006/2006_02_06_a_pitbull.html
One golden retriever per year so far. How many years do you have to go back to catch up with the pit bull numbers from 2008?
@17:
That is one of the best articles I've read on this topic ever:
http://gladwell.com/2006/2006_02_06_a_pitbull.html
Thanks so much for posting that link. It'd do Dan good to read it thoroughly.
Dan: read that article thoroughly.
#11, uhm, no thanks. I don't have enough of a psychosis to post endless dog attack/youth pastor molestion/child abuse stories and feel like I'm making a salient point.
I don't know Dan, when will people (like you) learn? How many people have told you "it's not the dogs, it's the owners"? And now you have an article where the dog clearly had a history but the irresponsible OWNERS did not take precautions. Have you learned yet? If existing leash laws/cruelty laws were enforced there would be no need for new legislation.
Also, thanks NOpe! Not just Dan, but everyone who gets smug about banning pit bulls should read that article. And then they should ask themselves how exactly they're going to implement a ban. Will they take loving animals with no history of aggression from the homes of families and kill them?
The gladwell.com article is well written and worth the read. However, I don't see how it can be read as exonerating the Pit Bull breed. The stats certainly don't.
But fine, if people insist on their right to own potentially deadly animals, then I think the following seems fair:
1) Special license to own Pit Bulls (and Rottweilers for that matter) along with rules for their care (leash, fence etc.). If the rules are violated, owners charged with felony and dogs removed.
2) Owners of Pit Bulls are legally liable for the violence of their dogs. If your Pit Bull kills a toddler, you are charged with murder.
@16 - 9.7 for pussying out. I knew you'd do well.
http://gladwell.com/2006/2006_02_06_a_pitbull.html
Just wanted to add my bump for the excellent article. Simple minds favor breed bans. That just results in another breed becoming the "king of mean," and NEVER SOLVES THE PROBLEM.
#20: I'd be in favor of laws that moved any actions of the dog laterally over to the owner.
If the dog rips off someones arm, the owner goes to court and faces criminal charges under the assumption that HE ripped that mans arm to shreds instead.
Might give someone something to think about before buying a breed thats in the newspaper week in and week out for attacking people.
A breed ban would only make people want something they can't have. Make them not want prison time instead.
Wowza - if you won't take w7ngman's point we could play the one-up game all day and I could leave a string of grisly links to stories about labs, shepherds, rotties, etc attacking people. But unless you're going to ban all large breeds what's the point? I own a dachshund, recently found in a study to be the most aggressive breed of dog. Will you ban them too?
If people really want to understand try talking to King County Animal Services about the challenges they face with owner compliance. Or read this http://pitbull.commercialappeal-web.com/status_symbol_leash
and think about whether pit bulls are just the latest victims of our glorification of violence.
Think of how many people and dogs have been injured because of a non-aggressive dog playfully jumping in front of a bike/car/child/another dog? But are people blaming the dogs for acting in their nature?
The solution is to keep all dogs leashed or behind a fence.
Comments Closed
Comments are closed on this post.