Phoenix, AZ Pitbull Attack - Judge Spares the Dog

[cold blood]

Sure she drinks a little, but who couldn't love that mug?

 

[khil]

Another pitbull attack, surprise surprise. Should it have been any sort of snake, tarantula, or any sort of reptile/invertebrate or even fish it would have been killed without hesitation. But since it's a lovely puppy, how dare you! Amazes me how people fear so many "exotic" pets that are actually a lot more harmless than these animals.

 

[Julia]

Another pitbull attack, surprise surprise. Should it have been any sort of snake, tarantula, or any sort of reptile/invertebrate or even fish it would have been killed without hesitation. But since it's a lovely puppy, how dare you! Amazes me how people fear so many "exotic" pets that are actually a lot more harmless than these animals.

Totally not what this thread is about...

 

[The Snark]

My waste of time opinion. A standard procedure for all dogs caught people munching.

First, immediate removal to a neutral environment. Second, no exposure to any humans the animal had former contact with. Third, casual daily contact with competent professional animal handlers who give affection as appropriate without major displays of emotion.

The animal is kept in this environment, partial isolation with repeated daily contact with handlers for an observation period. Maybe 30 days or more. The handlers are assessing the animal while they enforce appropriate behavior. (Reward enforcement of course). After the isolation period the animal is permitted into greater contact with people, groups for an additional observation period. (From an isolated kennel to the general area where the handlers work)

Only after this period of assessment would a dog be judged as to whether or not it is really antisocial and a hazard to humans, or it was simply reacting to circumstances and improper conduct of humans.

I personally feel that any person who trains an animal to be vicious should be held accountable in conspiracy.

 

[pitbulllady]

My waste of time opinion. A standard procedure for all dogs caught people munching.

First, immediate removal to a neutral environment. Second, no exposure to any humans the animal had former contact with. Third, casual daily contact with competent professional animal handlers who give affection as appropriate without major displays of emotion.

The animal is kept in this environment, partial isolation with repeated daily contact with handlers for an observation period. Maybe 30 days or more. The handlers are assessing the animal while they enforce appropriate behavior. (Reward enforcement of course). After the isolation period the animal is permitted into greater contact with people, groups for an additional observation period. (From an isolated kennel to the general area where the handlers work)

Only after this period of assessment would a dog be judged as to whether or not it is really antisocial and a hazard to humans, or it was simply reacting to circumstances and improper conduct of humans.

I personally feel that any person who trains an animal to be vicious should be held accountable in conspiracy.

Let me add to that, FEED THE DOG!!! NO animal that is starving, literally skin-and-bones starving(and photos of this particular dog are just painful to look at; if you did a cross-section of his torso between the rib cage and sternum, it would be a triangle in shape) is expected to exhibit normal, friendly behavior, especially around food. Food aggression is to be expected. That is the ONLY reason why this dog was spared, because any reasonable person would expect the dog to behave that way under its circumstances. Normally, dogs which are declared "vicious" or "dangerous" are destroyed immediately and no one bothers to even look into WHY they bit or attacked or whatever it was that got them labeled as such in the first place.

And Khil, please stop with the "us against them". Dogs, especially those which fall under the description of "pit bull", are being attacked in the media and the court of public opinion just as badly as reptiles or other "exotic" animals. It's a very, very rare instance in which a dog like this spared an immediate death sentence. I have owned APBT's and dogs which are confused with "pit bulls", as well as reptiles and other exotic animals, and it's just as bad for one as it is the other. Both are being banned right and left, both are being taken away and killed just for existing. The same people who are after "pit bulls" are after "exotic" animals and reptiles. When animal owners take that position, "why don't you go after those OTHER animals instead of mine", basically throwing someone else's animals under the bus, they aren't helping anyone at all. They're just feeding the dragon hoping it will eat them last, but by the time that dragon gets around to them, they have no one left to stand in their defense. THIS is why the AR movement is winning, getting ban after ban put in place, one restriction after another, from the Federal level on down: too many animal owners see just their piece of the puzzle and refuse to stand by those who happen not to own the same kind of animal. It's a classic case of divide and conquer.


pitbulllady

 

[awiec]

THIS is why the AR movement is winning, getting ban after ban put in place, one restriction after another, from the Federal level on down: too many animal owners see just their piece of the puzzle and refuse to stand by those who happen not to own the same kind of animal. It's a classic case of divide and conquer.
pitbulllady

As a lover of all plants (lot of drama for us orchid keepers) and animals, I feel there is a need for more unity in how we classify animals. What I mean is that if someone with no scorp or T experience says "tee hee I'm getting an H.mac, death stalker or maybe a pokie" we will all say "you're out of your league, here are better beginner species". I don't see such a uniform thing for dogs, I know on breed directories they will mention this is strong willed breed better for more experienced owners but its not "tiered" like herps and other exotics. People who want a pit usually are not told "oh you should start with a beginner dog like a lab or something" because we assume since dogs are domesticated that they are all cuddly and can't be *that hard* to train. The reality is much different though, dogs don't see things in our terms and can do way more damage then my pokies ever could and are out in public near children. Of course some people are not meant to be dog people as they just don't have the resolve to have to train basically a 4 legged furry toddler that can run really fast; but they will certainly try and those are the people who have dangerous dogs. If the different pet owner spheres could just accept that others find value in their particular pets and that they all deserve some protection then we could get somewhere. Many people are astonished that tarantulas come in so many colors and after seeing my collection they have a better understanding as to why I keep them. I could care less about my bf's salt water fish but I know it fulfills him in some way and he knows T's do the same thing for me; we consider both of value even though we are not into the same thing.

 

[The Snark]

I was going to type 'feed the dog' goes without saying. Not feeding would go under some law of cruelty to animals. But no, it doesn't. In some states it is there, and some it isn't. And there are loopholes for 'conditioning', 'therapy', 'remedial training', disease treatment and prevention and blah blah blah. It depends on who is arguing the case vs popular opinion.
Blech.

 

[pitbulllady]

As a lover of all plants (lot of drama for us orchid keepers) and animals, I feel there is a need for more unity in how we classify animals. What I mean is that if someone with no scorp or T experience says "tee hee I'm getting an H.mac, death stalker or maybe a pokie" we will all say "you're out of your league, here are better beginner species". I don't see such a uniform thing for dogs, I know on breed directories they will mention this is strong willed breed better for more experienced owners but its not "tiered" like herps and other exotics. People who want a pit usually are not told "oh you should start with a beginner dog like a lab or something" because we assume since dogs are domesticated that they are all cuddly and can't be *that hard* to train. The reality is much different though, dogs don't see things in our terms and can do way more damage then my pokies ever could and are out in public near children. Of course some people are not meant to be dog people as they just don't have the resolve to have to train basically a 4 legged furry toddler that can run really fast; but they will certainly try and those are the people who have dangerous dogs. If the different pet owner spheres could just accept that others find value in their particular pets and that they all deserve some protection then we could get somewhere. Many people are astonished that tarantulas come in so many colors and after seeing my collection they have a better understanding as to why I keep them. I could care less about my bf's salt water fish but I know it fulfills him in some way and he knows T's do the same thing for me; we consider both of value even though we are not into the same thing.

The bad thing is that there are a LOT of people who WANT a vicious, uncontrollable dog. They WANT a dog that attacks people or other animals without provocation because it enhances their own status within certain subcultures. Sadly, this seems to have always been the case, and the only thing that changes is the type of dogs that appeals to such people over the decades. When I was growing up, every dude who wanted everyone to know how bad and lawless he was had to have a German Shepherd. My father, who is about as law-abiding as you can get, happened to also like German Shepherds and bred them, and I can recall hearing countless horror stories from well-meaning friends and neighbors of German Shepherds that "turned on their owners", or killed some kid, or just "went crazy", all trying to convince my father to get rid of his dogs before his own children became a casualty of these killer dogs, which no doubt were that way because "they were half wolf". A lot of the people who had these dogs, though, DID want them because of that image. It was the same way with Dobermans in the '70's, where you had the dregs of human society wanting to have the meanest, craziest dog on the block to show everyone else that they meant business. Starving, beating and giving drugs like meth to dogs is just a short-list of things that their owners do to create the meanest dog possible. Such people are not interested in being educated as to the proper behavior or right sort of household for whatever breed has gotten the "Bad Dog" label. It's not like snakes, for instance, where most potential owners, especially someone looking into one of the more expensive species, is more likely to do their homework and find out the requirements, if it's a beginner, intermediate or advanced species, or not.

pitbulllady

 

[cold blood]

People who want a pit usually are not told "oh you should start with a beginner dog like a lab or something" because we assume since dogs are domesticated that they are all cuddly and can't be *that hard* to train. The reality is much different though

I have my dog with me probably 99% of the time, and I trained dogs for a while, as a result I have had this conversation more times than I could possibly ever recall. I cant tell you how many new or underexperienced dog owners I talked out of pits or other difficult to train breeds in favor of better dog breed fits for them. There's even the few that "knew better" and got one anyway...every one of those went poorly without exception. Experience with dogs, as well as personal lifestyle, go a long way in determining what the right breed is for a person.

A lot of these people see well trained/rounded dogs (as they tend to spend more time in public) with great owners and think "how cool, that looks so easy" or "I want that". I heard it daily when I worked in the public with my last boxer. She was large, super calm and obedient, always off leash, and was allowed in a lot of places most dogs weren't as a result or her impeccable behavior. But I constantly had to explain to people who had no or little dog experience that this isn't typical of the breed (or most dogs) and then I would often try (usually in vain) to explain to them just how much work goes into a dog like this, that it doesn't just happen, its created/nurtured. Dedication is a huge part of dog ownership that a lot of new owners fail to realize. Too many dogs are under-exercised and under stimulated mentally and their owners are baffled as to why they are having issues...this frustration is a big part of why I no longer train dogs.

The problem isn't with the breed, as I mentioned earlier, its about the right people owning them. Pits (or any specific breeds) shouldn't be banned, the municipality down the road from me has banned pitties for years now, and its unfair to the good, experienced owners who love the bully breeds. I think a better way to go about regulation, if they must, would be to require prior ownership and records of good behavioral training. How you do this is another difficulty.

Pits and other powerful breeds are kind of like guns or knives, in the proper hands, and with proper care they can be useful, reliable, beautiful and completely safe (even make you feel and be safer at times), but in the wrong hands, they can easily become a disaster. We don't ban guns or knives, we go after the ones using them dangerously.

Too often, once a new owner realizes he's over his head and he's got a powerful dog that won't listen or starts to get aggressive (because of a lack of socialization all too often), its extremely difficult to undue the damage and in some cases virtually impossible. This difficulty leads to a lot of young dogs put down through no fault of their own, just because the owner got in over his head with his first dog (or powerful dog).My current boxer was rescued from a life (formative weeks 5-12) in a closet, even at 12 weeks of age, and only 7 weeks of neglect it took a monumental effort that most wouldn't or couldn't have had the time or patients to deal with for a full day. I can't imagine how much deeper the damage would have been in another week/month/year. But that's another story, just glad I found her or she could have easily been one of these dogs in the news by now.

 

[The Snark]

We are aware of the problem. People. They have the right to own lots of guns and shoot themselves and their friends or loved ones. Oops. sorry about that. They have the right to act fantastically stupid. They also have the right to create mean animals where the animal could be a friendly loving companions. Understood. Got it.

There is no solution. Stupid isn't a crime and for some, it's a way of life. Suffering from shrinking testicle syndrome and consequently having one or more bad arsed dogs around to bolster the ego is not going to go away.