High-five to Kelly O for putting these videos together. I heard them talking about these videos on KOMO radio on the drive home last night. They gave some credit to the Stranger for putting it together, but directed listeners to their own website to view the video. Boo on them.

If I'm following you correctly, owning a pit bull will cause me to set my mother on fire. Ok Stranger, you win. I'm getting a cat.

Pit bulls as "service dogs" have been a joy to contend with in low income housing and elsewhere, in any social services situation, as fucked up street scum insist they have the right to have even the most hyperactive of the beasts with them wherever they go. Hey newcomers to Seattle, we may not be passive-aggressive here at all: Maybe we're just a bunch of dumb ass guilty white liberals who can't tell a shit-head when a killer pooch isn't a "service animal."

The bullet traveled down and to the left. Down and to the left. Down and to the left. Down and to the left.

Pitbully whining in 3...2...1...

We have two Slog tropes in full force!
1. Ecstatic rollings-about in the villainy of villains
2. Pit bull

Find a way to get "youth pastor" in there. You can do it, Slog! Go for the trifecta!

Aren't service dogs prescribed by doctors or rehab professionals? You can't just walk into a pet store and buy a seeing-eye dog, for example. So the local animal-control agency just needs to require that service dogs have a special license, requiring submission of the prescription form and verification by the provider. Dog gets a special color/design tag, owner required to carry license card and show it when requesting entry to a court, store, restaurant, etc., or residency in subsidized housing. Visibility of the tag and/or obvious accessories like a harness, wheelchair, etc. would preclude a need to challenge. No fees for the licenses need be charged. I don't see how that would violate the A.D.A.

Actually there are pit bulls that are certified Service Dogs.

Furthermore, service dogs are supposed to have id stating that they are in fact service dogs (and usually detailing the type of service that they provide) - if they are animals from an accredited source. Delta Society has information on service animals: http://www.deltasociety.org/Page.aspx?pi…

And the guidelines that animal trainers should, at a minimum, follow.

The training world is working on standardizing what is and is not acceptable in dog/animal trainers and in what criteria is required for an animal to work in and 'hold' certain jobs.

in this case, the pit bull is not the problem.

@3, @8 tells you that "guilty white liberals" know when to let it go and not make a fucked up situation worse.

@9 "Actually there are pit bulls that are certified Service Dogs." No question--they're great pullers, like your late beautiful dog (sorry for your loss).

Great to hear that trainers are working on standards, accreditation, etc. But the other side of the equation is local jurisdictions requiring documentation/licensing--without that, no one has the right to request it.

Eli,
That is surreal (Kalebu bringing his pit bull into court). I believe it is his pet not his service animal. Could this tragedy be any more bizarre?

What the pit bull has to do with anything is beyond me but...
It's true. If you bring your dog into a public place. A grocery store, library, courtroom etc. All you have to do is say it's a service dog and no one can ask for proof or tell you to take it out of the building. It's "the law".
Now, can we move on?

I grew up near Elkhart Indiana and they're currently considering outlawing Pit Bulls. I'm pretty amazed they'd do that but it sounds like it might be a good idea: http://www.etruth.com/Know/News/Story.as…

Yay! So..This pit bull is a HERO if I'm not mistaken?

Hope he finds a new home with a non-psychotic owner.

@ 3 "when a killer pooch isn't a "service animal."

You are real shining example of brilliance now, aren't you?

http://www.pitbulllovers.com/training-ar…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNV9BtIwl…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSgEcIOmo…

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25214356/

I could go on...

(Idiot.)

Also, I do not think that monster kalebu should be allowed near the dog, regardless if he was a service animal. He has shown that he is dangerous and a possible threat to people and animals. The dog should be adopted out in my opinion.

Next up - will the pit bull turn State's Evidence at trial?

BTW, there are two distinct skeins of regulation and case law regarding animal companions.

First are "service animals" - which must have specific training to perform specific services. Snakes, ferrets, etc generally will not qualify, nor will the average pet dog or cat.

Second are "comfort animals" a.k.a. "emotional support animals". There is no question they can be powerful stabilizing influences on a wide spectrum of mentally or emotionally disabled individuals. These emo-buddies CAN be animals of all kinds (probably including animatronic, stuffed, and imaginary).

The standards of access are distinct, but conflated and confounded -- necessarily in some contexts, unnecessarily in others, but your average front-line building security dude may not come equipped with the guidance or discretion necessary to apply these distinctions on the spot, especially in unfamiliar boundary cases.

Just as long as the dogs smell ok. There's a woman in a group I belong to who takes her "service" dog (which is pretty obviously a pet and serves no utilitarian purpose) everywhere she goes. I'm certain that dog has not gotten a bath in months.

There was a story here about this issue recently, as apparently San Francisco is the per capita bullshit service animal capitol. The ADA has a lot of legal weight, and no one wants to run the risk of being sued for not allowing someone anxiety relieving python into the library.

Baconcat -- beat your countdown.

Hey, Max Solomon -- you might be right, but that's kind of what I'm talking about. We're always trying to de-escalate situations out of our own fear. OK, maybe there wasn't another solution.

NumberOne -- Lots of people who don't need to use pit bulls as service animals still do and often don't keep them publicly muzzled. Maybe some should be service animals, but there's a lot used as such that shouldn't be. And I fucking hate cats, too. (Poseur.)

Pit Bulls have been proven to be more dangerous than other breeds of dogs in every single litigation over pit bull bans: Safe Cities 100 - Pit Bulls 0!

There is no such thing as any "certification" for a service dog.

The U.S. Federal Court for the Northern District of California has made the only judicial decision on the issue of the conflict between the ADA's granting the disabled the right of access with a service animal versus the right of the public to be protected from dangerous pit bulls. The court concluded that while the ADA may give a disabled person the right to possess a service animal, and that public facilities and accommodations must grant the disabled access with their service animals, the ADA does NOT grant the disabled to have a service animal of the breed of their choice. The pit bull lost.

The Federal Aviation Administration has reviewed this issue in giving training to the Airlines and to Home Land Security for inquiries at airports and boarding aircraft. It is perfectly legal for the security personnel to ask the person what tasks the dog is trained to carry out to assist the possessor and request that a demonstration be provided; however, they can not require the person to reveal the nature of their disability. A "therapy dog" is not a 'service dog', as a "therapy dog" is not recognizable under the ADA, as the slippery slope would allow anyone to take any dog anywhere "because the dog makes them feel better".

According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services:

In 2005, nine (9) Washington State children died as a result of maltreatment (abuse, neglect).

In a single year, 2005, more Washington children died from maltreatment than the total of all children killed by dogs in the state over the past 44 years.

***

Fact is, people in Washington State routinely accept far greater risks from ATVs, bicycles and swimming pools than any that are associated with companion animals.

National Canine Research Council

All living things are born with a set of genetic blueprints. These genes control physical appearance and general temperament. Temperament is not a guarantee of behavior. You could say that a person is "quick-tempered," but if they existed in a vacuum, would they still be short-fused? If nothing exists, what could possibly cause such a person to be angry? Similarly, you could call a dog "friendly," but that dog is friendly because it has people and dogs to act friendly towards; if it had a friendly temperament but was the only living creature on the planet, what "friendly" behaviors could it exhibit?
The "pit bull problem" seems to center around whether aggression is inherent or learned. Let's cut to the chase. Aggression is a behavior. A complex behavior, to be sure, but a behavior nevertheless. And what do we know about behavior? It is influenced by environment and experience.
John Paul Scott is a scientific researcher who was interested in the interplay between genetics and behavior. He did experiments with mice to determine whether highly aggressive mice could be created through breeding.
"The experiments with mice show us that aggression has to be learned. Defensive fighting can be stimulated by the pain of an attack, but aggression, in the strict sense of an unprovoked attack, can only be produced by training... Heredity can enter into the picture only in such ways as lowering or raising the threshold of stimulation, or modifying the physical equipment for fighting... In considering hereditary effects, we must always remember that the environmental situation is also important..." - John Paul Scott, Aggression
Mr. Scott has done all the hard work for us. Aggression is a learned behavior.

"But," shouts a voice in the crowd, "I knew someone who had a dog that was never trained to be aggressive, but it still attacked someone without provocation. Scott is full of it!" This line of reasoning is fallacious because this person assumes that learning only occurs when a dog is formally trained by its owner. This idea is both naive and arrogant. Dogs learn life lessons from a variety of sources, including but not limited to the owner. For example, a dog's play, in which two dogs pounce, growl, and tussle in a playful manner, is actually ritualized aggression. When dogs play, they are practicing aggression.

Regardless of whether or not a dog is temperamentally inclined toward aggression, it is the owner that ultimately determines whether the dog actually has the opportunity to react aggressively and rehearse aggressive behavior. Owners who are responsible and involved do not put their dog in such situations; they do not give their dog the opportunity to practice or escalate aggression.

Over the past 44 years (1965 -present) there have been nine (9) fatal dog attacks in Washington State, an average of one (1) fatality every five (5) years.

At least seven (7) different breeds/types of dogs have been identified as participating in the nine fatalities.

The victims were 2 adults and 7 children.

All the child victims had either been left alone with a dog or had wandered off to the location of the dog.

In 1978, a six-week-old Federal Way infant was killed after he was left unattended with a dog that had just recently been allowed into the home.

In 1990, a six-day-old infant was left unattended on the floor of his grandmother’s Lacey home. The grandmother’s dog attacked and killed him.

In 1999, an elderly woman visiting her daughter in Port Orchard, went out into the backyard. The daughter owned two dogs, a neutered male and a female. For reasons unknown, the male (pictured above) attacked and killed the woman. The female did not participate.

In 2003, a mother visiting the home of an acquaintance in Tacoma, allowed her 3-year-old child to play, unsupervised, in the backyard with three unfamiliar dogs. The two intact males and one intact female were reportedly “being kept at the premises as a favor for a friend.” One of the male dogs (white dog pictured above) attacked the boy. The other two dogs (one of the two non-participating dogs pictured above), although able, did not participate.

According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services:

In 2005, nine (9) Washington State children died as a result of maltreatment (abuse, neglect).

In a single year, 2005, more Washington children died from maltreatment than the total of all children killed by dogs in the state over the past 44 years.

***

Fact is, people in Washington State routinely accept far greater risks from ATVs, bicycles and swimming pools than any that are associated with companion animals.

National Canine Research Council

dogbite.org is like believing Fox News is news.