Mother of mauling victim arrested ( San Francisco )

[Kadie]

Mother of mauling victim arrested
Jaxon Van Derbeken, Chronicle Staff Writer

Thursday, June 23, 2005

The mother of 12-year-old San Francisco boy killed by the family’s two pit bulls earlier this month was arrested today on a warrant charging her with felony child endangerment causing death.

The charges against Maureen Faibish, 39, could lead to a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison if she is convicted. Eileen Hirst of the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department confirmed that Faibish had been booked into the county jail and was being held on $75,000 bail.

snip...
Maureen Faibish told The Chronicle in an interview the day after the attack that she had left Nicholas in the basement, given him snacks and video games and propped a shovel against the door to keep the pit bulls from getting in.

She said she had been worried about the male dog, Rex, because he had been acting possessively toward the other pit bull, Ella, who was in heat.

“I told him (Nicholas): ‘Stay down there until I come back,’.” she said in the interview. "Typical Nicky, he wouldn’t listen to me.”

more...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/06/23/MNdogs23.DTL

[Isere]

1. I hope

she spends a long, long time behind bars. What a sociopath!

[knowbody0]

2. thanks for posting this

i have been thinking about that family. they have another child i believe.

[LisaL]

9. She got two other children.

I would say, it's about time this woman got arrested!
I hope they trow a book at her!

[DRoseDARs]

3. Good. n/t

[Sugarbleus]

4. I don't quite know what to think of the mother....

This story has been discussed to death here in Calif. I live just south of SF.

I don't think the woman was purposefully endangering her child, plus she will have to live with her stupidity forever; she DID try to keep the child away from the dogs. BUT, putting the kid in the basement while she went away is pretty weird. Why didn't she chain up the dogs or put the dogs in the basement instead??

My foremost position on this is to BAN THE BREED. NO more breeding of Pit Bulls (there are a couple other unusual breeds to ban also, their names escape me now).

I've been watching the Animal Planet Channel for several nights. Some people are breeding the most unusual animals for pets and/or for sale. I think that is wrong and so do most conservationists. Any animal that is unstable via the breeding process OR any exotic animals like tigers and other big cats should NOT be reproduced. There are animal preserves who do some breeding only for the purpose of keeping a species alive for the future.

Let natural wild species of animals stay natural and free. Disallow pets (dogs in this case) that are not bred for working or house pets. Pit bulls are not a good breed for a house pet.

[LisaL]

10. It was reported that she locked the boy in a basement because

the dog already bit him that day. If that is not endangering a child, I don't know what is.
:eyes:

[rocktivity]

20. DING DING DING! Lizzy, you're our grand prize winner!

...she locked the boy in a basement because the dog already bit him that day.
But she had no problem with letting the dogs continue to run free? Guilty as charged, then--I'd convict her on that alone.

:grr:
rocknation

[Coexist]

23. lock the boy in the basement, not the dogs????!

WTF?

[BR_Parkway]

39. Less mess to clean up, it was the lazy solution.

[MountainLaurel]

27. The other reason

Was that they were planning to move, and there were bags of clothing in the basement, and she was worried the dogs would tear up the clothes.

:eyes:

[Sugarbleus]

47. OMG...

Honestly, this proves my contention that parents should get a license, have psych eval, and go through parenting classes before they are allowed to have children.

Of course we could recommend that avenue for voters and juries too eh? :)

[Caria]

59. OMG

Yes, this woman's lack of "basic common sense" astounds and horrifies me.

We had to be evaluated and attend parenting classes in order to adopt. I remember thinking at the time, "ALL parents should be taking this class..."

[Sugarbleus]

46. Yes, I heard more of the event since yesterday...seems like

a pretty numbskull parent alright. She ran an errand and left the child in the BASEMENT??????????????

Again, why not put the DOGS in the basement and take the kid with her?

Unbelievable!

Still, it's a very tragic and sad event all around.

[Bridget Burke]

13. Your rule would disallow dogs bred for hunting--like Retrievers.

Labrador or Golden. How about Irish Wolfhounds?

Good breeding practices & sensible training have more to do with how dogs will behave than their breed alone. Of course, in most cases, overbreeding just leads to neurotic behavior & skeletal problems that can be so expensive to fix that early euthanasia is often performed.

If I ever had time & the yard to raise a dog, I'd go to the pound. Unless one actually needs to herd sheep or fish birds out of the water, why condemn a perfectly good animal to death for racial reasons?

[Sugarbleus]

45. No,no I wouldn't count that at all...

There are countless breeds that do well in a family stucture. As I was saying, I watched a program from the point of view of the animal rights/protection/conservationists. The program made me very sad in that some people breed dogs and other animals like it was a game. The program gave weight to the wisdom in spaying and neutering your pets so there's not such a huge population of unwanted critters all over the place.

I watched a particular segment that suggested that when people (preferably adopt) dogs, that they understand the breed they pick; understand it's original nature. Like Border Collies are FANTASTIC at herding sheep and other similar tasks. That this breed LOVES TO WORK. That doesn't mean the breed wouldn't be happy in a loving family that is active with the dog--the same would apply to all the working dogs: huskies, bloodhounds, Setters etc etc..

It's just a shame that certain larger dogs with special talents are kept in tiny apts or chained to a small pen where their nature is stiffled. Sad and criminal also when these larger dogs are treated cruelly or deliberately trained to kill/attack people. It's one thing to have a guard dog who will bite or corner an intruder; it's quite another thing to have a breed that is trained to, or by nature, MAUL human beings to death.

Finally, with a very small variety of dogs; perhaps just three with Pit Bulls being the major player, I'd still say STOP breeding that one. It has a nature that is likely to freak out unexpectedly even after years of "normal" behavior. I don't think it is wise to allow Wild Wolves or Big Cats, Bears, or Pit Bulls et al as pets in the general population. I think owning (as pets) such unpredictable animals is simply playing with fire.

[reprobate]

62. I'd go to the pound. We did recently.

We have two schnauzers (miniature) and always had cats too, until the last couple of years when our two cats ages 16&19 passed.

We went to the pound to see what was available and could not leave without adopting two kittens. Fascinating story, they were taken from an elderly woman's home who had 37 cats and couldn't care for them. These two are brother and sister and have almost exactly the same markings except one is long hair and one short.

The fun part of course is watching their personalities develop. The male is turning out to be Mr. laid back just like our older male schnauzer, while the female is crazy and hyper as the young female dog, Mazy, who was named to rhyme with "crazy". Mazy has now decided to start a new sub breed of schnauzer, the Cat-herder. She's also adopted both kittens, playing mama and it's not unusual to find a kitten on the floor on it's back with the dog cleaning it with her tongue. Anyone else had a dog adopt cats? I wonder if this is unusual behavior.

IMHO, anyone who does not raise animals is missing some of the most instructive things we can do as humans. And anyone who raises a breed for anything other than domestic pet is missing something in his or her personality.

[TankLV]

85. Until such time as there are no dogs available in shelters, I'd ban

ALL breeding AND pet shops, too.

Tax the hell out of them. There are too many unwanted animals killed unnecessarily.

And, you can find plenty of pure-breds of all types in shelters, for those that want one.

[shanti]

38. presa canario

the dogs who killed the woman in sf. this breed should be banned too, imo.

[Sugarbleus]

44. Yeah, that was one..though I don't know enough about

the breed, to be honest..but that was one I do remember..

[MisterP]

102. evidently, that was the only killing

and with an ARYAN NATIONS commando breeding them from maximum security using two deranged homophobes for the hands-on work, I'm not surprised

[Atalanta]

70. WOW - Ban the breed?

Dogs are a responsibilty - like children are. How they are raised trained and treated dictates how they behave and react. Some people should not have dogs - just as some people should not have children. No dog, simply because of it's breed, is inherently evil, bad, or dangerous.

Compare - should certain classifications of people be banned from existing because they show up in the news alot in violent circumstances. Let's start with men. Men commit more crimes of violence - should they be banned from existing?

For every report of a pitbull or a doberman (remember them? they were the 'pitbulls' of the 70s) or a rottweiler attacking anyone there are thousands of these breeds of dogs who have not and never do.

I consider this type of response to be a 'knee-jerk' reaction very similar to the way many americans treated people of middle-eastern decent and of muslim faith after 9/11 - kill them all!

The mother is responsible for endangering her children, but no punishment the state could impose could be worse than what the mother is already enduring - the loss of her child.

Tell me - all you parents out there - how would you feel if you were responsible for your child's death especially via something you never considered could happen. Really - take the time to consider this - feel the feelings, the pain, the self-hatred. And then realize that this mother is is feeling all of this a millions times more intensly.

[jasop]

84. Absolutely incorrect.. does bred to maim and kill are dangerous...

you can lie and say all kinds of pathetic excuses but pit bulls are PIT bulls because they were bred to fight and kill other dogs in a fighting PIT. that is an absolute fact and can never be argued.

[TankLV]

86. You are very correct. We adopted a senior pit bull on her "last day"

She was such a sweetie - got her all trimmed up with a good diet to where she could stand up on her hind legs with ease again (we thought she had severe arthritis or something).

She got along great with our 2 goldens and our cat, too - was very protective and loving of the neighborhood kids.

She eventually died in her sleep one morning - just didn't wake up - we let her "sleep" that day because she seemed so peaceful - until after a couple hours when she didn't move and we touched her to wake her up and she was very cold. She had a wonderful 6 months with us.

It's how the humans raise and treat the dogs that is the main problem. I belong to the local golden retriever rescue group - have fostered many in a few years time - and even a couple goldens were raised badly and we could not adopt them out due to possible risk (they were sent to one of the golden "ranches" in nearby California to spend the rest of their days with other goldens (imagine going up to the entrance and being greated by hundreds of goldens all wagging their tails!) Turned out that they eventually mellowed and ended up passing the rest of their lives happily and well mannered.

[AlCzervik]

5. Good! those dogs didn't just get mean on their own, they were raised

that way and WTF was she doing locking her kid in the basement and not the dog. REX nad ELLA-that also happens to be the name of End timer Jack Van Impes wife, coincidence.......i dont think so. Mean and abusive people could make any dog a danger.

[LisaL]

11. Oh please! Why ignore genetics when it comes to pit bulls?

It's pretty obvious that some breeds are inherently more dangerous than others, due to their genes, no matter who raises them.

[B3Nut]

14. And the bigotry spews forth....

Bullshit. Have you ever worked with American Pit Bull Terriers? Shown? Done humane ed? Done rescue? Are you going to say my male Deuce (a Canine Good Citizen and humane education dog) is dangerous? Have you met my dog? Have you watched him and his CGC'd pit-rottie X sidekick Weezee perform for elementary school students? Only thing dangerous about him is his slimy tongue, and his gassy rear end! Have you taken the time to actually get to know true specimens of the breed or have you run with MSM sensationalizations of poorly-bred junk specimens? Any over-popular breed will end up having defective dogs crop up. If you eliminate one breed a different one will become the latest fad and the cycle will repeat all over again, which is a principal reason why breed-specific bans etc. do not work. My wife and I currently have 5 of our own plus 3 foster dogs awaiting forever homes.

Have some good reading: www.workingpitbull.com

Todd in Beerbratistan
Wisconsin Independent Pit Bull Rescue
wipbr.freeservers.com

[LisaL]

18. Oh please! This woman also claimed her dogs were the

sweetest things! Never mind one of them killed her son.
:eyes:

[B3Nut]

25. They were clearly unsound

irrespective of what she claimed. She is not someone whose word I would put any trust in whatsoever, having demonstrated a complete lack of proper parental concern and common sense.

TP

[TX-RAT]

19. Only one problem

At least in the area i live. You speak for a small minority of pit owners. Not many take the time and trouble to work, train, and understand the breed. Most if not all in this area just chain them up in the back or front yards, feed and water, and thats it. We had some residents that had as many as 26 pits chained outside the house. Pits are the dog of choice for people who deal in drugs, they'll have a ring of them around the house, to protect them from getting ripped off or busted by Law Enforcement. It's these dogs that seem to do the most damage, they'll get off the chain and start rampaging the neighborhood's, I had 1 call where the dogs ( 2 pits ) killed 6 cats, 1 small terrier and ran a homeowner into her house. This was over a period of of about 1 hour and 15 minutes. When i questioned the owner of the dogs, they assured me the dogs had never done anything like that before. Well he may have been right, may also have been the first time those dogs had ever gotten lose.

We finally went to a no tether ordinance in our community, ( none breed specific ) Basically it made it a crime to chain or tether your dog permanently to a fixed position. It also required you maintain a proper fence or enclosure for the dogs. Enclosures had to meet a minimum of 100 sq-ft per dog, had to have a fence or wall tall enough to assure the dog could not escape. Fence hight was the same way.
Last part of the ordinance made the owner of the dogs completely responsible for actions of the dog. It allows for the plaintiff to collect monetary value for all damages and loss of their own pets. First violation is 1000.00 dollars, second could go to as much as 10,000.00, and jail time if negligence is proved This mostly involve injury's)
This has pretty much solved our problem with large and dangerous dogs roaming and terrorizing neighborhood's. It's also made it a little more difficult for gangs and drug dealers to operate.

I wish i could have posted the ordinance as it's written, but was unable. Just tried to give a quick run down from what i remembered.

[B3Nut]

24. That's actually quite sensible.

They are indeed popular with the wrong sorts of people, and in SF in particular every gangbanger and their mother's brother's uncle's pet moose is cranking out puppies. But take the pits away and they'll find some other "bad" breed to overbreed and wreck. Personally, I'd like to see mandatory spay/neuter for all pet dogs that aren't demonstrably shown or worked in obedience or other work - there's no reason for Tom Dick or Harry down the street to be cranking out a litter of anything. All these excess dogs end up crowding shelters (and not just APBT's...Labs are prevalent as well as these damned "designer mutts" profit-hungry morons cook up).

That ordinance sounds quite level-headed...especially holding people responsible for their animals' actions. Good on your community. :)

Here's a really interesting article that got posted over at pitbullforum.com : http://www.koit.com/new_fall/pet_column.cfm

Todd in Beerbratistan

[TX-RAT]

29. 20,000.00 A Year?

Thats incredible, and i just thought we had a problem.

[chalky]

72. Banning Pits...where have I heard that before?

Oh, yeah:
Circa 1970: "Those German Shepherds should be banned. They're too dangerous..."
Circa 1975: "Those Chows should be banned. They're too dangerous..."
Circa 1980: "Those Dobermans should be banned. They're too dangerous..."
Circa 1985: Those Rottweilers should be banned. They're too dangerous..."

Thugs are just as vulnerable to trends as the rest of us, and Pit Bulls are just the latest in a long string of breeds that, because of a specific characteristic, are considered the "dog of choice".

Now, I was just as wary of Pit Bulls as the next walking chew-toy, but I have two acquaintances that have Pits and both are incredibly sweet. Definitely made me rethink this whole "born to kill" reputation that they've been saddled with.

So which breed is next on the "Most Wanted" list?

The Jack Russell Terriers that I've encountered are pretty mean little mofos (TM Governor Goodhair). Strap a studded black leather collar on the little bastards and watch them fend off all comers.
But may I recommend the Chihuahua? To this day I hate Chihuahuas (one in particular, may his tiny black heart rot in hell), mainly because that's the only breed that's ever bitten me.

[MisterP]

101. oh! oh! I know! Great Danes! "Marmaduke" is blinding us to the terror

they cause, just like "Good Dog, Carl!" did for rotties (that was actually said after a boy was killed)
Heil GATTACA!

[ernstbass]

36. Good for you and your community!!

I applaud you for banning the tethering of dogs and having space specifications for pens. Chaining animals is a barbaric practice and I hope other communities follow your example. As the owner of multiple dogs, I also agree with holding the owner responsible for any damages. Your ordianance protects dogs and the public.:yourock:

[Bridget Burke]

22. I once knew two pit bulls that belonged to a neighbor of relatives.

They ran free & often trotted over for a visit. Biggest danger: their wagging tails were so hard that they would almost raise bruises on my legs. And their tails were always wagging.

A few years ago, a woman in San Francisco was mauled to death by two Presa Canarios. Her partner sued & the dog owners were revealed to be dangerous nutcases. And dogs that size should probably NOT be kept in an apartment house.

[Megahurtz]

34. Oh God, here we go again....

:eyes:........Pitbulls are a dangerous breed. That's a fact.

And by the way, how does your oh-so-friendly pit bull act towards the Mailman, huh? :eyes:

Hmmmmmm.....just as I suspected.

[Coventina]

21. I saw a pit bull get attacked by two dogs the other day

He was on a leash being walked by his owner.

Two other dogs that were chained to a bench jumped on him and bit him as he walked by. He gave them a mildly interested glance as he continued walking on by. Completely calm, no violent reaction at all.

How does that fit your stereotype?

I don't know what breed the two attackers were, but they were definitely NOT pit bulls, they had long shaggy coats.

Face it, ALL dogs are bred to be "killers". It's in all of their genetics. They are descended from wolves, after all. Any dog is potentially dangerous. Banning one breed is ignorant. What we need is more punishment for bad owners.

[AngryAmish]

51. Maybe that dog just wasn't really game

Exceptions to every rule.

[AlCzervik]

26. Thats bs and you know and if you don't you should

[Atalanta]

71. Hmm.. does your theory apply to people too

Why ignore genetics in humans - men are more prone to violence than women. More men than women commit acts of violence. Their tendency toward violence is why we send them to war.

What else can you determine through genetics? Also in making that statement - are you a geneticist in the field of dog breeds, or can you provide scientific backing based on sound research for your very generalized statement?

[AngryAmish]

90. No, because humans are more important than animals

Humans in whatever state are many orders of magnitude more important than animals. If you do not believe that than your values system is horribly unsound.

[progressivebydesign]

92. People will always argue that it's not biology but it is..

Pitt Bulls have been bred through the years to have a certain body structure (i.e. thick neck to ward off attacks while they kill their opponent), for certain traits (aggressiveness and tenacity in finishing the job).

I've met some very sweet pitt bulls... but there is no way in hell I'd ever have one around my family. Breeding the dogs for their WORST attributes makes certain that you have no clue when adopting one what the past bloodlines were.. and what type of irresponsible breeding may have occured in the past.

To ignore the basic facts about dog breeding for certain traits is ignorant. They breed herding dogs for PERSONALITY. When I see people here defending the dog breeds that have become vicious, I wonder if they have a clue about breeding for TRAITS. It's not something that can be trained out of a dog.. For anyone on DU with a herding dog as a pet can attest... Herding dogs herd everything.. Fighting dogs fight. One need only drive through the most drug laden neighborhoods to see who owns the pitt bulls, and why.

[Dervill Crow]

106. In the suburbs of Portland four of the pit bulls are owned by me

and my kids. I think between us, the strongest drug use is by me. Klonopin and Prozac. But that's another thread . . .

Actually, one of my daughters does live in a bad neighborhood. I'm glad her dog is there to look scary.

[proud2BlibKansan]

6. Good!

This woman is a lunatic. She said "It was Nicky's time to go"!! As soon as I heard that, I began wishing she would be arrested. Anyone who locks a kid in the basement instead of a dangerous dog doesn't deserve to be a parent.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

30. Good, indeed

I have come to hate this woman. The more I learned about the death of that poor kid, the more I despised her.

Now, to my sadness, I truly hate her.

[loudsue]

81. OOOooo! Now THOSE are some bad eggs!

n/t

:kick:

[Fridays Child]

7. Is this woman just in deep denial or is she a psychopath?

[lateo]

16. Both I imagine...

She did claim it was God's will...

[pinniped]

8. There was another pit bull attack earlier in the day...Santa Rosa, CA.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/06/23/MNGRODDG2S1.DTL

Pit bull attacks girl in her Santa Rosa yard
Third mauling in Bay Area in a month amid calls to crack down on the breed

Jim Doyle, Leslie Fulbright, Chronicle Staff Writers

Thursday, June 23, 2005

A pit bull that escaped from a Santa Rosa home mauled an 8-year-old girl who had been playing next door in her yard on Wednesday, deeply gashing her face, and then turned on the girl's mother when she rushed to help.
====
cntd...

20-year dog attack study article which was under the SF arrest and Santa Rosa mauling articles:

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/06/23/MNGRODDH561.DTL

[Lowell]

31. Why do the crack down on the breed?

Any dog that is treated poorly will get mean. They should crack down on the owners.

Someone earlier mentioned that dogs were killers because they were descendants of wolfs. True they are descendants, but when was the last time you heard of anyone killed by a wolf? Never in the United States. Wolfs are as maligned as pit bulls. It is ultimately their masters who are to blame, not the breed.

[radwriter0555]

35. The dogs weren't treated poorly. They were house dogs that were

raised within a decent family...

Funny how those nice, family raised loving dog's will turn on ya, eh?

[Lowell]

37. I find it hard to believe

If the way she treated her kids in any indication then I am sure she treated her dogs worse. Like the article says she locked the kid in the basement, because she didn't want the dogs to destroy the clothes she had packed there. Besides, who can believe anything this woman says.

[LisaL]

49. She clearly treated these dogs better than she did her kids.

She was going to breed them, so perhaps the big $$$$ were in her mind when she locked up the kid in a basement instead of the dogs.

[ScamUSA.Com]

52. pitbulls in general are not _human_ aggressive

however they are highly _animal_ aggressive.

Usually when children get mauled by pitbulls it is because the dog mistook the child for a small animal and that instinct got triggered.

[radwriter0555]

53. Yep. All the more reason so many countries and provinces have banned

them, and rightfully so.

[ScamUSA.Com]

83. There are no bad dogs.

Only bad owners.

Actually there are a small percentage of dogs that are genetically or defectively vicious, as likely to be a dalmation, poodle, or small breed as a pitbull.

[radwriter0555]

113. Then apparently entire nations are wrong and the small percentage of

viscious and dangerous dogs lovers are right.

And all those animal control agencies are wrong.

And all the kids with scars are wrong.

And all the dead and mauled family pets are wrong.

[Mythsaje]

115. Yes

next question?

[RebelOne]

63. At one time, I had a pit bull who was a real sweetheart

with adults. But I could not trust him around little children. He viewed anything within eye level of him as prey. He was a big dog and weighed 96 pounds. He was not raised to be aggressive, but I guess that is just a pit bull's nature.

[LisaL]

50. You get a purebred dog because you know what the dog

is going to look like. You also know what his behavior is going to be like. It's in his genes. It's not just how you raise the dog. That's why you have different breeds-not just the looks, but character and behavior. Saying that "any dog can get mean" is completely ignoring that the pit bull dogs are wired to be aggressive.
Do you not understand that when you buy a purebred, you can expect a certain character? Not just a certain look?

[Dervill Crow]

66. That's why I have a purebred pit bull instead of a mixed breed.

Daizie is not at all aggressive with humans, although it is in her nature to be aggressive with other animals.

[progressivebydesign]

96. But the problem is dogs cannot separate human kids from animals..

therein lies the problem. Dogs confuse kids with other dogs. That's why there is often injuries to kids with many family dogs that would never seem to be aggressive with adults. Dogs who are animal aggressive, combined with kids poor judgement or bad timing, has led to many injuries and death.

For anyone that doesn't realize it, it's all about the Alpha. Dogs are often aggressive with other animals because they are trying to establish superiority. Dogs rarely, if ever, can feel subordinate to children (unless the dog has a genetically submissive personality).

I would never allow an animal aggressive dog around anyone under 14 or 15, or anyone that the dog might view as either a subordinate or a challenger.

[Dervill Crow]

105. It's all about controlling the situation.

Actually, my Daizie has never started a fight, but I know she won't back down. My pit bull's predecessor was extremely aggressive with other animals but any child of any age could do absolutely ANYTHING to her; in fact when we brought our Amstaff into the household as a puppy it was a miracle that it worked out. She was a wonderful mentor for Daizie. She got along with Daizie for a couple of years. We actually thought that we would be losing Trixie before Daizie reached adulthood, but they were best buddies and Trixie was rejuvenated. After the first argument between the dogs, we turned the house into a series of baby gates and locked doors (picture the opening of Get Smart) until we lost Trixie at the age of 14. I should add that the reason we brought Daizie into the household was that my daughter's pit bull Brandi had an unplanned pregnancy (courtesy of a dog owned by a friend of her boyfriend), and I figured this sweet little Amstaff Daizie would be one less pit bull out there possibly ending up owned by the wrong people and getting into trouble.

Daizie has been around babies and many kids and our cats with no problems, and she knows that she is NOT the alpha. We've been careful to train her that way. She sleeps on my bed, but at night she has to wait until I get my spot first. She weasels her way up to the pillow by morning, but she doesn't start out there. She doesn't go through doors ahead of a human, and she doesn't get fed or a treat until she earns it. Because we didn't socialize her with very young kids (my youngest was 9 or 10) when she was a pup, we keep her locked up when we have company with small children. If she had an opportunity to go into "chase" mode I can't guarantee her behavior with 100% certainty, so we make sure that doesn't happen. I've known dogs of other breeds that I don't consider nearly as trustworthy as Daizie, but because she is a pit bull I am extremely cautious.

[shanti]

40. oh my lord

what a horrifying photo:-( poor child...

[Solly Mack]

12. I'm sure she thinks her arrest was God's will too.

She'd have to, right?
If her son's death was(by her own words)...surely her arrest was too.

[dchill]

60. God's will is bad stuff that happens to other people...

Not you. Bad stuff that happens to you is someone else's fault.

[Saphire]

15. Isn't this the woman who said it was "God's will" that her son was

killed by dogs????????? I guess it's "God's will" that she go to jail for it.

[CitrusLib]

17. About time.

[slackmaster]

28. Generally I oppose forced sterilization

In this case I'd consider making an exception.

[redqueen]

32. Thank God.

That woman was SO obviously negligent that she should pay for her part in her son's death. Locking her son up like that... something is very, very wrong with her.

[Megahurtz]

33. "It's Nicky's time to go"?

Well I can see why they arrested her. What a fruitcake.:crazy:

[maxsolomon]

41. here we go again! the pitbull advocates come forth!

can we at least ban things like PRISONERS BREEDING PRESA CANARIOS? pretty please? or is that beyond the pale?

there are tons of irresponsible dog owners. we don't let every bonehead in america buy a fully automatic AK-47, do we? why is that? we should we let every american bonehead buy the AK-47 of dogs?

once again, look to the history of these dogs - what are they FOR? PIT FIGHTING. they're terriers, they've been bred for hundreds of years NOT TO BACK DOWN FROM A FIGHT. even little fox terriers are crazy like that.

i happen to think that Staffordshire Terriers are the coolest looking dogs on the planet. Amstafs, Pits, Bulls, less so, but i understand their appeal. but i don't have one because i need a social dog in a city.

so,
#1: FIX YOUR DAMN DOGS.
#2: don't keep 2 UNFIXED DOGS around children.
#3: FIX YOUR DAMN DOGS.
#4: if you are an american idiot, re-read the above instructions.

[Megahurtz]

42. Hahahahaha!!!

:rofl: Right on!

[RebelOne]

64. I have owned pit bulls and I am not a pit bull advocate.

My dogs were real angels, but in my opinion, the breed should be discontinued as they are very unpredictable. Believe me, I know what I am talking about.

[lastliberalintexas]

67. It's even in the owners' best interests to discontinue the breed

I say this as a parent who can imagine how I would react if it were my child mauled, particularly in my own yard as the little girl upthread was. And my venomous response would most certainly NOT be directed at only the dog.


Hmm, all these years of thinking I was a pacifist...

[Name removed]

88. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mythsaje]

116. Exactly right

#1: FIX YOUR DAMN DOGS.
#2: don't keep 2 UNFIXED DOGS around children.
#3: FIX YOUR DAMN DOGS.
#4: if you are an american idiot, re-read the above instructions.

This woman was asking for trouble.

[tblue37]

43. What errands was she running that day

that precluded bringing along her 12-year-old son rather than leaving him alone with the dogs? And if Nicky "typically" didn't obey orders, why did she assume he would this time?

Maybe she wasn't consciously planning it, but at some level I suspect she had a bit of a death wish for Nicky.

[LisaL]

48. If he was bit by the male dog, as reported, Nicky might have

been in no shape to go anywhere that day. I imagine pit bull bite might have been pretty serious. But instead of getting him medical help, this woman locks him in a basement and goes out on errands?
:mad:

[Pharlo]

54. Canine genetics

aside....What about human genetics?

While I do think the death of a child is a tragedy, I think there is an aspect that the 'canine geneticists' posting here have failed to consider.

The following is based upon the common perception that the woman was an idiot.

1. Nicki was bitten by one of these dogs earlier in the day.

2. Nicki was placed in a room separate from the dogs and told to stay away from them. (Yes, I concur, it ought to have been the dogs locked in the basement, not the kid)

3. Nicki went back into the area of the house where the dogs were kept.

I don't know if there is an age limit to Darwin Awards, but I think we have a nominee here.

I contend that if a specific breed of dog can be banned due to 'breed specific' characteristics, it should follow that human 'idiots' should be banned from reproducing also.


Kids don't listen, dogs don't listen. This woman was irresponsible. She did not take the proper precautions with her dependents (human and canine). Therefore, the dogs must be held accountable. (And, if the dogs are accountable due to genetic inheritence, the kid is correspondingly accountable because he obviously inherited a degree of stupidity from his mother.)

Dogs are socialized in the first four months of their lives - 4 months --- 12 weeks. That is THE crucial development stage in a puppy's life. You can train them after that, but how they interact with humans and other animals will be determined in that 4 month period. Regardless of how a dog may seem/act in a non-threatening environment as an adult, how they react in a perceived 'threatening' situation as adults is hardwired into them by socialization and genetics.

Can canine 'genetic' predispositions be curtailled and avoided?
Yes, but it needs to be done in the first four months - the socialization process.

I like large dogs (Over 100 pounds). I love mutts. I always get puppies (preferable 6 to 8 weeks old - ten weeks maximum). It decreases the amount of friction with the older canine family members; but more importantly, if I am getting an animal which may eventually weigh more than I, I want to socialize the pup.

I really wish people who were going to castigate a particular breed based only upon 'what they know' about a breed would get a six week old puppy of that breed and raise it in a loving, responsible fashion and then see for themselves just how 'vicious' the breed truly is.

Perhaps then, they would realize just how wrong it is to blame an animal (or breed of animals) for a human's studipity - Just as wrong as holding a child (or group children) accountable for an adult's stupidity.

[LisaL]

55. Wrong to hold a child accountable for an adult stupidity?

Didn't you just do it? Blamed the boy for getting out of the basement?

:spank:

[Pharlo]

56. Ah, good -,

you got the analogy.

[LisaL]

57. Please! Nobody is blaming the darn dogs because the dogs

are obviously are what they are. They can not change their nature-it is what it is. But should people be allowed to have such aggressive large dogs, considering a lot of people aren't responsible? I think not!
:eyes:

[Pharlo]

58. There is a much higher incidence

of humans killing humans than dogs killing humans.

Yet, I do not condone banning any specifc group of humans (regardless of how some of us may happen to feel about the Republican Leadership Breed). It's just human nature. Human's are what they are. That's why we have wars.

"Please! Nobody is blaming the darn dogs because the dogs are obviously are what they are. They can not change their nature-it is what it is. But should people be allowed to have such aggressive large dogs, considering a lot of people aren't responsible? I think not!"


Pit Bulls are at best a medium sized dog; average 38 to 44 pounds.

A dogs nature is not "what it is" it is what it is socialized to be.

Aggression in a dog is something which can be addressed by socializing/training.

And, in both instances, a lot of it has to do with how the offender (canine and human) were treated in their formative periods.

I do not believe that banning a specific breed is the answer. Because, in the end, all dogs would need to be banned using the anti Pit Bull arguments. Any dog - or child, for that matter - can be improperly trained (raised, if you prefer in the instance of Republican Leadership Breed). Pit Bull, German Shepherds, Rottweilers, Dobermans, Evangelical Fundamentalists (THE most DANGEROUS BREED I have ever encountered).... Where do we stop? Any dog over 30 pounds? Well, then, what about instances of dogs under 30 pounds who attack infants or toddlers. There will ALWAYS be a canine 'enemy' for these individuals.

In the event that Pits are banned, then Shepherds, then Dobermans, what is your limit?

Should all dogs be banned?

Or, should owners be licensed?

I think that is a reasonable solution. Why aren't dog licenses issued on a person's ability to raise a dog in a responsible manner. I currently have 3 dogs. I pay for annual license - the process is as follows:

"Do you have one or more dogs?"
"Yes."
"How many, and is it/are they spayed/neutered?"
And then they give you a price list per animal and your total.
NOWHERE in the entire process in obtaining an animal license are you requested to show you know how to properly care for/train a puppy. No requisite classes. Nothing.

If general consensus is that the problem is the owner, not the dog, why is the dog - or in this case breed - taking the backlash for the miserable failure of some humans?

Are there people here truly naive enough to believe that if Pit Bulls were eradicated from the face of the Earth today that the problem of bad owners would disappear? Or would the attention turn to another breed of dog?

I'm betting the second.

I have never owned a Pit Bull. I have had German Shepherds and Dobermans. They're rather high on the anti-canine brigade list as well.

How about everyone concentrate on the problem - BAD OWNERS,
not the symptom - IMPROPERLY TRAINED DOGS.

[Trajan]

69. You are ignoring some simple facts ....

Human beings have formed societies and governments, not canines .... canines 'can' be domesticated 'partners' with citizens, but certainly society, as a whole, has a duty and obligation to protect it's citizens from random and arbitrary dangers that might affect them in their day to day existence ....

IF specific canine breeds possess extraordinary genetic traits that make those breeds more lethal than other breeds, than society certainly has an obligation to protect its citizens from such extraordinary breeds.

Comparing canines to homo sapiens is simply a false analogy. Human beings formed societies and governments to provide a haven against the 'state of nature' ... introducing canine breeds to the common areas of the community: breeds which have a demonstrable increased lethality compared to less muscular breeds, can lead to increased danger for fellow citizens who simply wish to pursue life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness in the protection of a safe community, protected by law.

ALL breeds 'can be' taught to be aggressive: yet only a few breeds have such exquisite cranial musculature, as pits and some others, as to take the general aggression, and compound it with an incredibly lethal and genetically established body form.

at the LEAST: Pit Bull owners (and other lethal breeds), KNOWING their animals could cause severe injury to fellow citizens, should be held on assult or murder charges IF their animal injures or kills another human being .... Whether or not your animal was 'taught' to be aggressive is irrelevant: Their inherent lethality is established empirically.

There is no free lunch ....

[Pharlo]

78. On a purely theoretical and philosophical plane

I concur with your argument about the right of a nation-state to defend itself against a perceived threat. The problem with that is how many wars in history have actually been fought on a purely defensive basis?

Historically, the primary cause of war has always been economic. Land, oil, and the real biggie - control of the sea lanes (not so much since the inception of air travel, but human nature being what it is, there is still a residual soft spot for this geopolitical trigger).

"Human beings formed societies and governments to provide a haven against the 'state of nature'."

I am certain there are innumerable people who would disagree with this point - Darfur refugees in Chad, Palestinians in Gaza, Iraqis in Iraq, Africans kidnapped to America in the 18th and 19 centuries, Irish immigrants to America during the potato famine, Native Americans in the way of expansion of European immigration, Jews leaving Europe during Hitler's advance...

We are currently residing in an atmosphere where a draft of our nation's young adults is becoming an increasing possibilty. In defense of our nation? No, in defense of an increasingly apparent politically flawed intelligence analysis.

A society with an epidemic of spousal abuse, child abuse and exploitation, increasing environmental deterioration, increasing medical costs to the point where many can't afford coverage, a decrease in governmental regulations regarding gun ownership while firearm abuse increases....

So, let's do something about the DOG issue?

I agree with you that owner's should be held accountable for their dogs. But, in the case of dogs, you face the same problem you do with guns. People who train and use animals for illegal purposes (drug look outs, dog fighting) have already shown a marked contempt for our legal system.

Having said that, there is a very good possibility that such a law will discourage someone from acquiring an animal they are ill equiped to deal with. And, I am heartily 100 % in favor of that suggestion. It will save the animal from living with someone incapable of handling them in the fashion they need to be cared for.

I also think there are certain breeds (such as Pit Bulls) which should require a handling license - similar to that for keeping a 'wild' animal such as a skunk or racoon. This would allow people who want a specific breed of dog to obtain one if they showed they were capable of caring for it properly.

What I have a problem with is banning a dog breed because of human idiocy. (Many of these people are the same ones that manufacturers of lawn mowers are required to place "Warning: Do not place fingers or other objects in moving blade" signs to protect.)

[AngryAmish]

93. Just because some problems are intractable

does not mean we should do nothing about all problems. This is an easy problem to solve. Locally, within each small body politic, we ban the breed. Then I have no more small girls walking into my office with scars on their face and body that will cost $50k to correct and will never go completely away, just because a neighbor thought that their "sweet" dog would never harm anyone. Or the girl who always wore her bangs in front of her face because the facial wounds left her so traumatized and would not talk to anyone except her sister. People get attached to dogs like freepers are attached to their .50 rifles. It is illogical and dangerous

[Pharlo]

107. This is not an easy problem to solve.

Many people think of their pets as members of their families.

Why should a responsible dog owner be penalized for another persons irresponsible acts?

And, just why, is the dog ALWAYS considered at fault?

I have watched neighbor children interact with dogs. Believe me, based on personal experience, if the kid got bit, it was deserved.

More than once I have had to contact a neighbor and explain EXACTLY what their "Oh, so wonderful" child was doing... standing at the property boundary and yelling at my dogs, throwing sticks - and my dogs weren't even near them. Fortunately, my dogs are not outside if I'm not - I yelled at those kids, and contacted their parents. However, if I had not been there, and had one of those children been bitten, and that "sweet little girl" had wound up in your office, what do you think would have been HER story....

"Well, I was in my yard and the neighbor's large vicious dog attacked me. I don't know why!"

I'm not saying dogs are provoked in all cases, but I believe they are in a lot more instances than the public is informed of.

Ban dogs? How about looking at the issue from another point of view...


Why don't we pass local ordinances making it illegal to allow children outside unsupervised?

Inconvience factor, I suppose.

If ALL canine attacks were performed by a single breed, I would agree with your assessment. But they're not. Does this mean you feel all dogs should be banned?

If your concern is children being attacked, why not pass local ordinances banning children?

If this suggestion seems far fetched to you, I contend that it is in response to your misunderstood suggestion:

"People get attached to dogs like freepers are attached to their .50 rifles. It is illogical and dangerous."

No, people do not get attached to dogs like freepers are attached to their guns.

People get attached to their pets like people are attached to their children. And, when you casually suggest banning their pets, it's comprable to suggesting they give up their children because someone else's child killed or maimed another person.

[LisaL]

75. Yes, we don't ban killers. We lock them up in prison.

Maybe when we will start locking up dog owners when their dogs bite someone, they will think twice before getting an aggressive breed of dogs
:eyes:

[progressivebydesign]

95. You're ignoring the breeding of dogs for certain TRAITS.

Just as people over the years breed dogs for good traits, other dog lines have been destroyed by breeding for bad traits. It's nature not nurture. You can train all you want but if lines of dogs were combined to produce an aggressive trait then you cannot train that out of them... Just as it's impossible to train the herding mentality out of my Aussie and the need to carry things around like my Lab.

Yes... the woman was a moron. Yes, the child should have stayed put. BUT.. to not recognize the reality of those dogs is just as ignorant. They are bred to be vicious by most people. ALl the love in the world in the first four months cannot change a basic genetic trait that has been perpetrated by greedy breeders. Pit Bulls are unfortunately the dog of choice for drug dealers because of their inbred aggressiveness... and some people have no idea when they adopt what the lines really were.

p.s. My mom was attacked by a vicious Akita that lunged over a baby gate that the owner had put up to keep him away from visitors. My Mom took a wrong turn in the hallway and was attacked. She ended up in the hospital ER and has lifelong injuries from it. Does she deserve the Darwin Award, as you put it, because she wandered down the wrong hallway? Or does the woman have the blame for keeping an aggressive dog?

[Pharlo]

108. A baby gate to restrain a dog someone knew was vicious -

is asnine to the point of negligence. An animal as hostile as you describe this one to be ought to have been restrained in a different room with a door between the dog and company with a sign on the door to warn of danger.

Obviously, the owner was at fault. (Re: the Darwin Award: I am assuming your mother got bit by the dog once and didn't attempt to repeat the experience.)


As for your dogs, "it's impossible to train the herding mentality out of my Aussie and the need to carry things around like my Lab."

Did you try at during their first three months to start to train these animals counter to their "nature"?

If it isn't agression, most people aren't willing to apply the effort it takes to overcome a dogs "nature". And the crux of the problem here is that even in the case of agression, many PEOPLE obviously are not willing to put forth the effort. So, let's blame the dogs.

You want difficult - Try a husky who wants to run. It was difficult. Took damn near eight months - Past socialization into training, but eventually, he learned to stay in the yard. (I do NOT use shock collars. I believe that is a lazy person's shortcut and the animal doesn't learn much - just to associate pain with the sound of your voice. )

[Mythsaje]

117. Early socialization is key...

We see it all the time in rescue. A dog that was raised in a puppy mill, kept away from human contact, will almost always be timid around people--or prone to fear biting if cornered.

I have a Shiba Inu, a breed known for its standoffishness. But, partly due to early socialization, my dog is known as one of the friendliest Shibas the various vets and assistants have ever met.

[Arugula Latte]

61. One time my family went to a work-related party

which the boss was throwing for the underlings. The boss obviously did not like children and had little experience with them. She told us that the kids could hang out in the basement where she had put some sodas and chips. Also, we should be careful because one of the dogs was not predictable around children. But guess where she wound up putting the dogs? ... In the basement with the kids. One little girl got nipped.

Some people.

[reprobate]

65. Watch "The Dog Whisperer" on Animal Planet.

Ceasar Milano is a dog psychologist and keeps a pack of about thirty dogs, mostly pits and rotties, each of which gets along with all the others. No squabbling or fighting.

All dogs could be like that if only the owners knew what Ceasar does. Instead most dog owners think that feeding them and petting them is enough to raise a dog. In fact in many homes it is the dog that is the dominant one.

Watch this show, it'll open your eyes.

[Mythsaje]

118. I saw a clip once

and had to laugh.

My initial response to this show was "no shit?"

I think schools should offer a Canine Psych course as an elective, if not a required course. We share our world with them and too many people assume they know something about the animals when they're just ignorant asses making assumptions based on second-hand bullshit from some other idiot.

[gardenista]

68. An interesting tidbit google turned up on Ms. Faibish and clan

http://www.ripoffreport.com/view.asp?id=11440&view=printer

Sounds like she and her husband were interesting neighbors...

[flvegan]

73. "Pit Bulls" are actually very good dogs.

I always enjoy the fracas coming from many folks without a clue as to what they speak of. Not everyone here, but a few.

First off, the girl dog...was in heat. No shock that someone got hurt. All dogs should be spayed or neutered, regardless of how badly you want to breed them, or how wonderful they are. Unsterilized dogs beget aggression, that's a fact.

Secondly, leaving ANY child unattended with ANY dog is a bad idea. Cockers and Dalmations bite more often than any pit bull, it's just usually not lethal, nor does it make for good media. Sounds like many here are buying into the ole MSM for their facts.

Thirdly, yets PBTs were originally "designed" to fight with other dogs. However, they are notorious for being overly friendly with people.

Lastly, I'll leave you with this: The American Temperament Test Society provides temperament testing around the country for dog breeds, and gives a passing score for the entire breed based on the percentage of passed over failed within total number of the particular breed tested. As of December 2003, the American Pit Bull Terrier has a current passing rate of 83.9%, and the American Staffordshire Terrier passes at 83.2%. In comparison, The Golden Retriever passing rate is 83.2%.

But again, "Golden Retriever" doesn't bring to mind the FEAR!!!! that the words "Pit Bull" do. It's a bad rap, accentuated by our bullshit MTV culture that dictates what's cool and popular. If the thugs could afford the bigger, tougher dogs, we'd all be hearing about cane corsos, dogo argentinos and presa canarios.

[LisaL]

76. Yes, pit bulls are nice and sweet. It's too bad they kill so many

people.
:eyes:

[flvegan]

77. You again?

How many people, specifically, do "they" kill, o enlightened Lizzy of the animal hatred? Please compare and contrast, specifically, pit bulls vs. other animals. I can hear the crickets chirping already...

Your generic, broad-brushed painting of these types of issues make me laugh.

[LisaL]

79. Happy now?

"Rottweilers and Pit Bulls were involved in 60 percent of the 27 dog bite fatalities that occurred in 1997 and 1998. Rottweilers were involved in 10 deaths, and Pit Bulls were involved in 6."


http://www.dogbitelegalcenter.com/resources/dogbite-statistics.html

[flvegan]

80. Wow. Good Googling...almost.

See, over the past 30 years, 30 breeds have been found to kill a human, including a Pomeranian (4 pounds of dog, there).

The fact that you've chosen to quote an ambulance-chasing law firm that specializes in dogbites really speaks volumes that I don't need to touch on.

Oh, and most attacks? Yeah, they occur by a dog familiar to the victim (family dog, most common) in the family home.

Heh heh heh...great source, Lizzy. Beautiful!!! Brilliant!!!!

[LisaL]

82. Still not happy? Well, if you can do any better googling, go right ahead.

Never mind that Pit bulls and Rottweilers killed more people than all the other breeds combined. I noticed you didn't provide any links in support of pit bulls being sweet and nice dogs you think they are.
:spank:

[TankLV]

89. Aside from all of the personal testimonials here, aparently.

That's just not good enough for prejudiced and ill-informed people like you.

I'd like to see some unbiased and scientific data for that claim.

So far, you have provided none.

[LisaL]

99. Why don't you provide some to support your opinion?

Maybe cause there aren't any.
:eyes:

[progressivebydesign]

97. You post was well-thought, but when was the last time a Retriever killed?

I mean.. my labrador couldn't hurt a flea. My Aussie is the same. It's not in their nature. We did have an aussie/border collie that was wonderful with us, but fear aggressive with strangers and kids. When we realized it was something that could not be fixed through training, psychology, or even the puppy prozac he was presribed, we found a wonderful ranch for him to live on, where he could work and be isolated from strangers, while receiving lots of love from his new "parents". I miss that dog every day of my life, but was not willing to risk hurting anyone with a dog that had aggressive traits. He was raised exactly the same as my other dogs, and this was apparently something genetic in him. I was wise to see it, and to find the right spot for him, even though it was personally hard for me. The point is.. it's nature vs. nurture, and I say nature wins out. Until irresponsible and criminal breeders stop breeding Pit Bulls for their worst traits, then you cannot be sure what you are getting.. unless you research that dog's lines thoroughly. The dogs have natural traits that unfortunately exploited by drug dealer and criminal types so they could be used to protect their "property". I've known a few sweet pit bulls.. but would never own one. Ever.

[flvegan]

103. Well, in Alabama just last month

2 labs, a dobie and a bulldog attacked a child, sending him to the hospital (3 of those dogs had attacked a child previously).

Also in May, a Golden mauled a 2 year old boy at a bbq, after wandering over and attacking, allegedly unprovoked.

Or the Indianapolis case, also this past May, where a Lab and a Dachsund mauled an elderly woman sitting in her living room.

In March of 2005, a UK girl (3) was attacked by a chocolate lab as she played with a toy in the yard.

Also in March, a Golden mauled his second child.

Also, according to Boulder Animal Control's statistics, labs were responsible for an astonishing 18.9 percent of the 748 dog bites in the city from 1997 to 2003, more than twice as many as the next highest breed (German shepherds, at 8.5 percent).

I probably don't need to go on. Granted, I didn't answer your specific question as to the last time a retrieve killed, but I think that I made my point.

[hyphenate]

74. I wouldn't destroy any specific breed of dog

just because of this attack. My contention has always been that the same people who can't raise a kid should also be banned from raising a pet.

I know some completely and totally benign dogs who come from bull terrier and pit bull heritage. They are lovely pets, and wonderful companions. The secret? The owners are great people, who have taken time to raise the pet lovingly and compassionately.

Pit bulls and bull terriers have the same capacity to be great pets, but they get into trouble because many of those who own them are only out to raise mean animals.

Any and all dogs raised to be mean will come out mean. If they're not petted, loved and treated well, they're going to be aggressive animals, and will act accordingly. It's no secret that many "white trash" (trailer park types who vote Republican!) who deal with drugs own a lot of these animals, but the way the dogs are treated is abyssmal. Often starved for days, they're used to being hurt, being treated like shit, and thus they don't know what compassion is and are just plain contrary. It's NOT THEIR FAULT that their owners are assholes.

One of the traits of a pit bull is their strong jaw. Once they bite into someone or something, it's almost like it's a steel trap. It works well as a "working" dog for such characteristics, because the owners don't have to do anything to keep people from their illegal activities.

I can not blame the dogs for the miserable lives they're getting. ALL dogs raised with good values, regardless of species, will be good companions. I think raising a mutt in many cases is the best way to raise a dog. We have only lived with Heinz 57 dogs since I was a kid, and they're by far the best dogs in the world. I've seen many purebred dogs be highly neurotic, completely wound up and totally unable to deal with their families. I'm mostly a cat person, and have seen breeders using highly questionable methods to breed, and often nasty characteristics come out of them. What was once a beautiful breed often is coming out now with severe handicaps--one only has to look at purebred Persians to see the nasty upper respiratory ailments they often end up with, for example. Disreputable breeders have allowed their love of money to destroy their supposed love of the animal.

I think that we need to monitor owners of some of these breeds rather than disallow them completely. The dog breeders should have to register themselves (sort of like the pedophile directory) and then list all their puppies. When someone adopts one, perhaps something like registering the dog and a class on how to handle the animal, and the reasons they've been adopted. I'm not just talking of pit bulls--there are just as many unscrupulous owners of Dobermans, Rottweillers, German Shepherds, Sharpeis, Chows and other aggressive breeds out there. Once the dog is in the house, perhaps every six months a visit from either animal control, or a voluntary organization seeing to the welfare of the animal. This would discourage many of the people who want to raise a mean watchdog, and that would allow the animals a chance to be treated appropriately.

Why should we condemn an animal for how the humans in its life raised them? It's the owners' fault, and it's the owner who needs to be punished. Once one of these animals has been harshly treated, on the other hand, it might be the best course to euthanize it because there is no way the animal will ever trust a human again.

[Seabiscuit]

87. Guess what? No pit bulls, no mauling. Simple as that.

Anyone with children who is stupid enough to own a pit bull is playing with fire.

Oh, yeah. This thread is turning out to be another flamefest for those owning pit bulls to lash out at anyone who states the obvious about those dogs, but I'm not interested in arguing with them.

Just pointing out something so basic that anyone can agree on: no pit bulls, no mauling.

[TankLV]

91. And pointing out the countless examples that priove you are wrong,

you just cavilarly dismiss outright.

This thread has become another flamebait for those stupid persons to lash out at a subject that they already have formed their prejudices on, and no evidence to the contrary will convince them.

We are not interested in arguing with your type also.

No dogs, no mauling.

But then you're running around with your fingers in your ears.

[Seabiscuit]

100. Huh? So what's your beef with the phrase "No pit bulls, no mauling."???

Stifle the personal attacks.

This wouldn't have happened if this woman never owned pit bulls, n'est-ce pas?

No rants are needed to answer the question. A simple yes or no is all that's appropriate.

[flvegan]

104. In this specific case, it would be proper to suggest "No DOGS, no mauling"

as it's quite possible that ANY dogs this woman had, when placed in this very same situation may well have done the very same thing.

Had she not had any dogs at all, the kid would not have been mauled. That's the one, single point that can be made from your statement. Are you suggesting now a ban on all dogs, hmmmmm? Of course not, at least I don't think (nor would hope) so.

[Seabiscuit]

109. This isn't about any dogs, it's a news story about a pit bull mauling.

So, let me put it to you another way, since you may be the only person on the planet to resist acknowledging the simple truth about this story.

Would this woman's child have just been mauled by pit bulls at home if there were no pit bulls in her home?

Yes or no.

As for "any dogs", that's a subject for another thread. It's argumentative.

[Name removed]

110. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Seabiscuit]

111. Still won't answer the question. Yes or no was all that was needed.

"You're still wrong" is not an answer to a yes or no question.

You said you didn't want to argue.

Yet that's all you're doing here.

Save it for another thread.

Meanwhile, how many children have your pit bulls mauled today? Maybe you should be asking yourself that question every day.

[Name removed]

112. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

114. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MisterP]

94. so I guess they weren't really good, docile dogs on the outside? will the

antis now drop the "everyone thinks they're good until they turn on you" line?

[LisaL]

98. I am not sure WTF are you even talking about?

The woman had said before these dogs were the sweetest things. Their vet said he would not recommend these kind of dogs anymore, but he did before, because these dogs seem fine. So, again, WTF are you talking about?

[Moderator]

119. Lock

This thread has run it's course, and it is also no longer breaking news.