Dog Community

Are people who love pitties actually helping BSL spread?

Posted : 6/28/2007 12:10:29 PM

eople who do not properly train, control and take care of their pitties and people who encourage human aggression are giving pits a bad reputation....but so is defending a dog with the "blame the victim" response when a dog has clearly gone way beyond self defense.

JQP hearing someone say a mauling is the victim's fault because the victim tried to pet the dog does as much or more damage to the pit's public image than the original incident. Why? Because it sounds like pit owners believe that it is acceptable for a dog to attack someone...and yet on the other hand pit bull owners are trying to convince JQP that pitties are not human aggressive.

You can't have it both ways: If you believe a pit bull is a gentle, loving, people-friendly soul then it CANNOT be acceptable to have one maul someone for trying to pet it on a walk.

BSL is spreading not just because of dog attacks---it is spreading because JQP doesn't trust PB owners because some defend the dog in cases like the one mentioned on another thread. If it seems that PB owners believe that it is an appropriate response for a dog to maul someone for trying to pet it, then the average person will question their judgement about how safe and friendly the breed really is.

I didn't want to hijack that thread, but felt compelled to post something after reading comments that echoed others that I have heard before about similar cases.

This is what I am talking about. Here is the thread [linkhttp://forum.dog.com/asp/tm.asp?m=383279]http://forum.dog.com/asp/tm.asp?m=383279[/link] here is the news story: [linkhttp://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/northfulton/stories/2007/06/22/0622pitbull.html]http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/northfulton/stories/2007/06/22/0622pitbull.html[/link]_ )

Here's my summary::
A[color=#000000] 69 year old woman with limited English was badly attacked when she tried to pet an untrained, poorly socialized dog wearing a collar that didn't fit properly who was being walked by a 12 year old girl who knew her dog was "friendly but didn't like to be touched by other people." [/color]

The girl didn't prevent the woman from getting too close, yell at the woman to back off,

ull the dog back, call the dog to heel and walk away when he growled. Nada. She said "don't pet him" after he growled and when the woman was reaching for him---aka when it was too late. (BTW:The girl heard the dog growl, it didn't say if the 69 year old woman could hear the growl.) The dog backed away, pulled out of his collar, attacked the woman and bit and grabbed her face, head and arm many times before a neighbor pulled him off the woman. Other neighbors used sticks and shovels to fight the dog off. He was eventually shot as he attacked neighbors who came to the woman's aid.

One response on the thread started reasonably enough by saying it was too bad irresponsible owners create problems for others. Then the comment veered off into blaming the elderly woman. No blame for the owners (re-read the blue portion above) or saying anything bad about the dog who clearly went beyond a self-defense warning bite. Instead a poster seemed to think the attacking dog was "murdered."

I am not trying to personally slam anyone who posted. My point is that defending a dog that has mauled someone under circumstances like these is BAD for pitties and GOOD for BSL.

BTW If a Shorthair or Lab attacked that woman I would be angry at the owner and firmly believe that there was something wrong with the dog just as I do in this case. A well-bred and well-raised pit bull should be the last dog on earth to freak out and attack a human---right???

Edited to add PS here's what the owner of the dog said:

The pit bull's owner, Glenda Newell, said her "heart goes out to this person — she's a very, very nice lady," but she should have backed off when Achilles started growling.
"My dog is very friendly, but he doesn't like to be touched by other people," Newell said. "He's not a monster. He was a very loving dog. Maybe she just scared him."

meilani

Posted : 6/28/2007 12:21:09 PM

Whenever I hear of a dog attack, regardless of breed, I always like to find out the details of the attack and a lot of times it's due to human error. In the case you pointed out, we have a 12 year old girl walking an untrained poorly socialized dog who is wearing an ill fitting collar. Human error. We have a grandma who attempted to pet a strange dog although the owner was telling her not to touch the dog, the grandma did not understand English and reached for the dog. Human error. At some point, we need to be responsible for our actions. If we can't expect people to take responsibility for their actions, how can we expect dogs to know better?

Liesje

Posted : 6/28/2007 12:24:23 PM

I am not trying to personally slam anyone who posted. My point is that defending a dog that has mauled someone under circumstances like these is BAD for pitties and GOOD for BSL.

I agree. If my dog had done that, just attacked someone on the street, unless that person really did provoke her, I'd have a really tough decision to make. Same if I had Cocker or a Lab instead of a GSD...

I won't be picketing in front of that woman's house, insisting the dog be put down, but I wouldn't accept any excuse for it either. If my dog did that, I'd apologize, pay for the woman's treatments, accept any leash law fines without a fight, and then have to decide what to do with the dog.

Another thing that sort of goes along with your post....at our shelter I see a lot of people coming in wanting to adopt a pittie because they are sorry for the bad rap. Now I don't have anything against pits at ALL, but I know that they are not the dog for me (in fact, any bully or terrier just isn't the dog for me). People need to be more diligent with determining what they are looking for and what they are not looking for in a dog, before going to the shelter or deciding on a breed. In the past few months, many of the bullies and pits have been brought back because "they pulled on the leash" or "they are too stubborn" or "they just weren't what we were expecting." I'm as uncomfortable with people adopting pit bulls out of pity or like it's some kind of fad as I am people adopting a dog just based on looks.

cyclefiend2000

Posted : 6/28/2007 12:30:38 PM

i agree there were errors on both sides of that particular confrontation. however, no one was willing to be an advocate for the dog or its owner. plenty of people willing to point the finger at them and lay blame though.

lay at least part of the blame where it belongs... the victim. (in this instance at least)

Liesje

Posted : 6/28/2007 12:36:05 PM

lay at least part of the blame where it belongs... the victim. (in this instance at least)

I blame the victim as far as I don't think it's appropriate for ANY person to just pet ANY dog, especially after being asked not to. Hello...common sense?!

rwbeagles

Posted : 6/28/2007 12:44:04 PM

From I read you could have told her plainly not to pet the dog and she might not have understood as English wasn't her first language. But I suppose that'll just bring out another kind of judgement on the woman.

Stacita

Posted : 6/28/2007 12:57:33 PM

I agree with you on this. Petting a strange dog is stupid. But....a dog that reacts to it by slipping its collar, biting the face head and arm many times in reaction should not be in public. If it were my dog I'd have him PTS and feel great remorse for the rest of my life.

cyclefiend2000

Posted : 6/28/2007 1:12:19 PM

ORIGINAL: rwbeagles

From I read you could have told her plainly not to pet the dog and she might not have understood as English wasn't her first language. But I suppose that'll just bring out another kind of judgement on the woman.

regardless of what human language she spoke or understood, i would think a growl and a snarl from the dog would be sufficient communication. every non-dog owning person i know, knows what the intent of a growling dog is or at least understand enough to back away.

sillysally

Posted : 6/28/2007 2:56:15 PM

ORIGINAL: polarexpress

You can't have it both ways: If you believe a pit bull is a gentle, loving, people-friendly soul then it CANNOT be acceptable to have one maul someone for trying to pet it on a walk.

I could not agree with you more. I actually had the same thought as you last night when I was reading that thread but didn't really have the energy to respnd at the time. Pit bulls are NOT supposed to be human aggressive. A pit bull who growls at strangers is most likely an unstable dog that should have been PTS long before sometihng like this happened. I am not one that tolerates human aggression, and honeslty I have never heard of a fearful dog the slips its collar and mauls someone.

Sally has a very high bite inhabition but can be shy around strangers. If she were to become fear aggressive (God forbid) DH and I would have a horrible choice to make.

Bobsk8

Posted : 6/28/2007 3:54:10 PM

ORIGINAL: cyclefiend2000

i agree there were errors on both sides of that particular confrontation. however, no one was willing to be an advocate for the dog or its owner. plenty of people willing to point the finger at them and lay blame though.

lay at least part of the blame where it belongs... the victim. (in this instance at least)

How anyone could read the story, and come to any conclusion other than a very dangerous and potentially life threatening dog, handled by a 12 year old , that was apparently known to be people aggressive, was permitted to attack someone on the street and cause that person severe injuries. If the victim and been a young child, we could be talking about someone being killed by this dog. The dog should have been muzzled anytime it was outside the home, and been under control of someone older than a 12 year old. It is just a miracle that the women that was attacked, wasn't killed....

It was also lucky that someone had a firearm and knew how to use it, other wise the other person trying to help the women under attack, might have also sustained life threatening injuries. I too, agree, that it is this kind of "blame the victim" attitude, that convinces people that a BSL against Pit Bulls is a great idea. They point to the :"It's not my dog's fault" attitude that many PB owners seem to have, when there is an attack by that breed.

Bobsk8

Posted : 6/28/2007 3:58:10 PM

ORIGINAL: sillysally

ORIGINAL: polarexpress

You can't have it both ways: If you believe a pit bull is a gentle, loving, people-friendly soul then it CANNOT be acceptable to have one maul someone for trying to pet it on a walk.

I could not agree with you more. I actually had the same thought as you last night when I was reading that thread but didn't really have the energy to respnd at the time. Pit bulls are NOT supposed to be human aggressive. A pit bull who growls at strangers is most likely an unstable dog that should have been PTS long before sometihng like this happened. I am not one that tolerates human aggression, and honeslty I have never heard of a fearful dog the slips its collar and mauls someone.

Sally has a very high bite inhabition but can be shy around strangers. If she were to become fear aggressive (God forbid) DH and I would have a horrible choice to make.

The other side of the coin that nobody wants to talk about , is that even a dog aggressive PB can be a dangerous problem for people to deal with. There have been several instances in the Atlanta area in the last year, where a PB attacked someones dog while they were walking it on a public street , and the person tried to defend their dog and were severely bitten and and in two cases disfigured by the attack.

Bobsk8

Posted : 6/28/2007 3:59:27 PM

ORIGINAL: Liesje

lay at least part of the blame where it belongs... the victim. (in this instance at least)

I blame the victim as far as I don't think it's appropriate for ANY person to just pet ANY dog, especially after being asked not to. Hello...common sense?!

You can't be serious....

Bobsk8

Posted : 6/28/2007 4:07:25 PM

ORIGINAL: cyclefiend2000

i agree there were errors on both sides of that particular confrontation. however, no one was willing to be an advocate for the dog or its owner. plenty of people willing to point the finger at them and lay blame though.

lay at least part of the blame where it belongs... the victim. (in this instance at least)

The blame should rest squarely on the owner. This dog was clearly a danger to society and should have been handled by a responsible adult when out in public and should have worn a muzzle. Anyone that takes a dog out like that without a muzzle, isn't very bright, in my opinion.

cyclefiend2000

Posted : 6/28/2007 4:12:49 PM

The blame should rest squarely on the owner. This dog was clearly a danger to society and should have been handled by a responsible adult when out in public and should have worn a muzzle. Anyone that takes a dog out like that without a muzzle, isn't very bright, in my opinion.

anyone who approaches a growling dog to pet it is stupid. if they get bit it is out of their own stupidity, and they need to take responsibility for their own actions.

Stacita

Posted : 6/28/2007 4:25:31 PM

anyone who approaches a growling dog to pet it is stupid. if they get bit it is out of their own stupidity, and they need to take responsibility for their own actions.

There are major differences between a nip to the hand which says "get away", still not good, but somewhat more understandable, and an outright attack. This type of attack indicates an extremely unstable dog that may very easily kill the 12 year old child next.