Vicious Dog At Large.

[poodlefan]

Couldn't of sed it better my self, The media is a joke and lives of people who believe every word they say. these people are usually ignorant and don't have the ability to think for themselves.

That describes the owners of "tough" dogs acquired for image enhancement very nicely.

Has anyone poo pooing the notion of an APBT being involved in one of these incidents actually grasped that it occured in a home and that the dog and owner were known to the victims family? In those circumstances the ID on breed might be considered to be more reliable than a random attack on the street.

We all know it's not the breed that's at fault. Sadly, though the kinds of owner who are attracted to a "tough" dog, for security or image enhancement who think the dog's balls equate to their own and who don't socialise it because it would turn into a pansy are drawn to certain breeds.

As I've said repeatedly, the biggest threat to the ongoing existence of some breeds is the morons who are attracted to them for all the wrong reasons. Every breeder who homes a puppy into the hands of someone who fails to do right by the dog puts another nail in the coffin of their breed. Those who will continue to breed in the face of the prohibtion would do well to carefully consider desexing all pups before rehoming them IMO. Entire young male dogs are massively over represented in dog attacks. Any owner who refuses to take a pet pup without testicles should be considered a red flag as potential owner anyway.

Anyone who thinks ABPT don't harm people needs to go read Fatal Dog Attacks. Focus on the totally predictable kind of OWNER who owns these particular dogs and the mystery as to how APBTs end up getting banned will be solved. The problems sits within the ranks of the owners of the breed. Don't blame the public and the pollies for shrieking and lifting their skirts when you can't keep the dogs out of the hands of morons.

Everytime you puff out your chests about how tough the dogs are, you attract another person to the breed for all the wrong reasons. Dress them in pink, call them Bubbles and Twinkle and make them known as the ultimate kiddy pet and your dogs might be in a better position long term than they are now.

And for pity's sake THINK before you name one after a convicted criminal or a motor cycle.. you're perpetuating the very image you condemn the media for beating up.

Edited August 28, 2009 by poodlefan

[Cordelia]

Now see, here's the thing...

I never said I believed the reports of the breeds involved.. and people ARE harping on about protecting individual dogs who have mauled children (or anyone for that matter).

Accepting a bunch of bullsh*t reporting doesnt make you compassionate it makes you a fool.

It makes one gullible, Lo Pan.. not a fool... and an easy thing to believe when the general public don't know what a Pitbull looks like... A fool would be someone who puts the focus on the 'poor breed' when a child needs reconstructive surgery to their face.

Proving Pitbull owners are often redneck inbreds does nothing for the 'cause'.

[raz]

Accepting a bunch of bullsh*t reporting doesnt make you compassionate it makes you a fool.

It makes one gullible, Lo Pan.. not a fool... and an easy thing to believe when the general public don't know what a Pitbull looks like... A fool would be someone who puts the focus on the 'poor breed' when a child needs reconstructive surgery to their face.

Exactly, Cordy.

And the journos didnt CLAIM the dog was a pitbull. Read the OP, Lo Pan.

[Zhou Xuanyao]

Everytime you puff out your chests about how tough the dogs are, you attract another person to the breed for all the wrong reasons. Dress them in pink, call them Bubbles and Twinkle and make them known as the ultimate kiddy pet and your dogs might be in a better position long term than they are now.

No that is false so I wont take any part in it. I believe in defending the breed based on the facts, the truth and its merits, there a plenty of them.

People that have to resort to lies are people with something to hide. Thats the way to win, telling lies is the way to come undone.

They ARE the ultimate kiddy pet, but they are tough aswell and I wont say there not because that would be untrue.

A fool would be someone who puts the focus on the 'poor breed' when a child needs reconstructive surgery to their face.

Theres alot at stake for our dogs aswell.

Edited August 28, 2009 by Lo Pan

[poodlefan]

Everytime you puff out your chests about how tough the dogs are, you attract another person to the breed for all the wrong reasons. Dress them in pink, call them Bubbles and Twinkle and make them known as the ultimate kiddy pet and your dogs might be in a better position long term than they are now.

No that is false so I wont take any part in it. I believe in defending the breed based on the facts, the truth and its merits, there a plenty of them people that have to resort to lies are people with something to hide. Thats the way to win, telling lies is the way to come undone.

They ARE the ultimate kiddy pet, but they are tough aswell and I wont say there not because that would be untrue.

Yes, it would be. But outside discussion of the injustice of BSL, how many APBT owners do you know who emphasize the "nanny dog" tradition of the breed? If you want to win the public over to support for Pitties, you've got to accentuate the more benign aspects of the dog in both practical and publicity terms. The popular misconception is that they're child killers. :D That's the image that needs to be overturned and it won't be done by dressing dogs in leather and studs and giving them macho names.

And names really do matter Lo Pan. People's reaction to a dog called Chopper and one called Twinkle can be markedly different.

Theres alot at stake for our dogs aswell.

Life or death in fact. But timing is everything and publicly championing the cause of a dog that's put a child in hospital is unwise, regardless of its breed. One accredited pets as therapy APBT in a children's hospital would be the most fantastic PR I could think of.

Edited August 28, 2009 by poodlefan

[WreckitWhippet]

It's very hard for owners to promote the breed and ownership in a positive light.

They can either comply with the restricted breed legislation, which means taking them out muzzled in public and registering the correct breed with the council. Average Joe will see a muzzle, bright collar and assume dangerous dog.

Or they break the law , fail to register and comply and are not responsible dog owners.

I see no one standing up and saying, " this is my American Pit Bull Terrier " whilst complying with current legislation. It seems that they all want to own one and are happy to sprout their breeds name, until it gets down to the nitty gritty and responsible dog ownership.

PF I agree 100% that the breeders of RB's are compounding the breeds image problems further, by placing them in the wrong hands and by also not desexing prior to rehoming.

[Zhou Xuanyao]

Life or death in fact. But timing is everything and publicly championing the cause of a dog that's put a child in hospital is unwise, regardless of its breed.

An APBT probably hasnt put a child in hospital thats the point.

One accredited pets as therapy APBT in a children's hospital would be the most fantastic PR I could think of.

It sure would be

[poodlefan]

Life or death in fact. But timing is everything and publicly championing the cause of a dog that's put a child in hospital is unwise, regardless of its breed.

An APBT probably hasnt put a child in hospital thats the point.

One accredited pets as therapy APBT in a children's hospital would be the most fantastic PR I could think of.

It sure would be

In this case? We don't know for sure either way. But bear in mind this was not an attack by an unknown dog in a public place. It occured in the family home. You've got to choose your battles and the odds are pretty evenly balanced on whether breed ID is correct.

I honestly think we've got to get past the "was it a pitty or wasn't it" arguments because we're doing the same thing discussing these attacks that the media does.. focussing on the breed.

We know that dogs that attack people have a fairly predictible profile of which breed is only one part.

What do we know about?

The dogs origins.. .raised and socialised well as a puppy, not well socialised or recently acquired. My guess is No. 2 or No. 3

Age and sex: profile says young, male and entire... but no reporting on that.

How was dog living? Inside with kids, outside, was it exercised and trained?

And just for my interest.. I wonder what its name was... I bet it was a tough one.

Get the media to focus on the idea of the profile of a dangerous dog (God knows they love it for criminals) and they might just get past breed. We all know such dogs are made, not born. Now to get the media to grab onto that.

And last but not least.. where was the adult supervion? In this case, it sounds like it was there, but not effective. :D

Edited August 28, 2009 by poodlefan

[Quickasyoucan]

Life or death in fact. But timing is everything and publicly championing the cause of a dog that's put a child in hospital is unwise, regardless of its breed.

An APBT probably hasnt put a child in hospital thats the point.

One accredited pets as therapy APBT in a children's hospital would be the most fantastic PR I could think of.

It sure would be

In this case? We don't know for sure either way. But bear in mind this was not an attack by an unknown dog in a public place. It occured in the family home. You've got to choose your battles and the odds are pretty evenly balanced on whether breed ID is correct.

I honestly think we've got to get past the "was it a pitty or wasn't it" arguments because we're doing the same thing discussing these attacks that the media does.. focussing on the breed.

We know that dogs that attack people have a fairly predictible profile of which breed is only one part.

What do we know about?

The dogs origins.. .raised and socialised well as a puppy, not well socialised or recently acquired. My guess is No. 2 or No. 3

Age and sex: profile says young, male and entire... but no reporting on that.

How was dog living? Inside with kids, outside, was it exercised and trained?

And just for my interest.. I wonder what its name was... I bet it was a tough one.

Get the media to focus on the idea of the profile of a dangerous dog (God knows they love it for criminals) and they might just get past breed. We all know such dogs are made, not born. Now to get the media to grab onto that.

And last but not least.. where was the adult supervion? In this case, it sounds like it was there, but not effective. :D

I read the pit bull placebo and it really raised some interesting points in relation to media reporting and how it has changed over the years.

Talked about how reporting in the early 20th century would often actually give some background to the dog, the social situation and even in some cases mention the role of the victim in taunting the dog.

Talks about now how a dog that can be referred to as a "family dog" has on more than one occasion been found to be a half-starved abused chained animal that just happens to "reside" at the same address as the family.

But it also does say that over the decades the bloodhound, the GSD, the rottie and now the pitbull have suffered because the more that a breed gets portrayed as tough, the more it attracts the wrong kind of owners who keep dogs in the kind of conditions that fosters a climate for such attacks.

I would love to see a non-breed specific study done on percentage of serious dog attacks and the relationship with socio economic status, living conditions, criminality and the like.

I believe it has already been ascertained that a very high percentage of fatal dog attacks in USA are by chained dogs.

[Jed]

PF

I believe, from the orignal newspaper report, that the dog involved in the above attack was a rottweiler.

The black dog which cannot be found which perpetrated the attack on the little girl in the street, is the dog which is claimed to be a "pitbull", according to my reading of the articles.

Please feel free to correct if I am wrong.

And I personally believe that we need the dogs to be correctly identified - ie "black dog " rather than misidentified. Once we have over come the "media" pitbull image, we should move on to discussion re motivation for attacks.

It is not the breed which attacks, it is the individual dog, and the reasons for the dog doing that should be identified so steps can be taken to identify the reasons for the attack. While everyone is running around like headless chooks blaming the media pitbull no one has the impetus to do anything effective.

JMHO

[poodlefan]

Nope Jed, dog attack in house was by the "pitbull" which has conveniently "escaped". See news report below:

THE mother of a toddler mauled by a pit bull terrier in Melbourne says she will not rest until the dog is destroyed.

Taneisha Jobe, 17, said the dog, Tyson, has been on the loose after it attacked her daughter Aleaha, two, in Delahey on Sunday morning.

Police said it was not their responsibility to track down the offending dog.

Instead, rangers from Brimbank City Council will attempt to find it.

Mayor Troy Atanasovski confirmed the rangers were on the case.

If the council did not find the dog Ms Jobe said she would "find it myself ".

"Because I feel like the least I can do for (my) daughter is give her a bit of justice," Ms Jobe said.

"She's going to have scars for life. The least I can do is take away that dog's life. I believe that the dog has got into someone's house on the hush. Hopefully someone knows something about where the dog is."

"I can't believe she's been so brave," Ms Jobe said.

"She's coping so well. She will definitely most likely have more surgery and the doctors can't find some saliva vein in her mouth. Because of that, she's bleeding from the eye and her mouth."

Ms Jobe said Aleaha did not really understand what had happened.

"She's just not herself," she said. "Sometimes she can be really unsettled. Sometimes she can be a little bit happy.

"Most of the time she just lies there and sleeps."

Police spoke to the dog's owner, a 24-year-old man from Delahey, at a house in the nearby suburb of Burnside Heights on Sunday.

He told them the dog, which he removed from the house where the attack happened, had escaped.

Aleaha was having a lollipop and patting the dog's back just moments before the attack.

Ms Jobe said Aleaha's father, Mark Briffa, could see the dog was acting "a little bit funny" and told her to come inside. "From coming through the laundry into the hall, the dog just pounced," she said.

And the answer for my personal interest question, was that the dog's name was Tyson. Gee, what a surprise NOT. I certainly wasn't expecting a Cuddles or a Happy.

Edited August 28, 2009 by poodlefan

[raz]

The black dog which cannot be found which perpetrated the attack on the little girl in the street, is the dog which is claimed to be a "pitbull", according to my reading of the articles.

Please feel free to correct if I am wrong. JMHO

OK. The journo does not, at any stage in the original article, CLAIM that the dog is a pitbull.

Edited August 28, 2009 by raz

[WreckitWhippet]

It's easy to blame the "media" for the plight of the breed and make them the scape goat, when reality is, it was an attack by a "restricted breed".

People should be asking the owner, why the dog was not registered and kept as per restricted breed requirements.

EFS

Edited August 28, 2009 by SBT123

[Wazzat Xolo]

J

Coffee time

No.. there were 2 seperate attacks..

And.. regardless of breed, the dogs should be euthanased. Both were very serious attacks... the dogs ARE dangerous if they inflict that level of injury to a human.... these attacks weren't warnings from the dogs.. the dogs should be destroyed.... fine the owners, have them charged with owning a DD, throw the book at the irresponsible bastards....

But have those 2 dogs destroyed at the earliest time so they NEVER get the opportunity to injure anyone else.

Those poor little kids are going to be scarred for life and all half of you can harp about is the protection of the animals who attacked them... No wonder BSL is alive and well in this country when the very people meant to be protecting theses breeds behave like rednecks, crying out in support of 2 dogs who mauled 2 small children!

[raz]

J

Coffee time

Gee that's like...deary me, Wazza.

[Wazzat Xolo]

Some just deserve that!! How are you Raz ? Long time no har? even longer no see!! No FB for a while either!!

J

J

Coffee time

Gee that's like...deary me, Wazza.

[Sheridan]

I find it interesting that whenever a dog attack happens and the media or a witness claims that the dog is a pitbull 'type' (or similar wording), the pitbull advocates come out in force and vilify the reporter and the witnesses and whoever comments on the story (I full expect to be vilified after this post). They say it can't possibly be a pitbill wot done it because pitbulls are nanny dogs and besides, the only people who can positively identify a pitbull are them. No one else can identify a pitbull, no sirreee. Frankly, unless those who deny a pitbull ever attacked anyone were at the scene of every single dog attack ever, including this one, then they're just speculating along with everyone else. They do their breeds no service at all by vilifying people.

[bryan_mannix]

People are not "harping on" about "protecting the animals that attacked them". People know from experience that the times APBT's are INFACT involved in an attack on a human are rare, 9/10 times (atleast) our innocent breed is made the scapegoat.

Obviously as unfortunate as it is that the kids have been attacked supporting the APBT and casting doubt on the reporting of the breed involved doesnt take anything away from what happened. Accepting a bunch of bullsh*t reporting doesnt make you compassionate it makes you a fool. If you reject it doesnt mean you dont care about the people that where attacked.

I don't want to get involved in a heated argument and I certainly don't believe BSL will rid the world of dog attacks. BUT when I read research like this article it would seem some breeds of dogs are more likely than others to be involved in injuring people. Help me out. Is this article nonsense. Are the statistics poorly presented and some breeds misrepresented.

[Cordelia]

Good comeback Xolo.

[Kirty]

Those statistics definitely paint a picture, but we also need to take into account how many people own those dogs. Pitbulls made up a very large number of those attack stats - would it be fair to say however, that they are probably also some of the most commonly owned dogs in America? And we also need to look at WHO is owning these dogs. How many of those dogs were owned by responsible adults? How many were owned by idiots who think its cool to make their dog tough? The druggies, the gangsters, etc. I am not a fan of pitbulls myself however I think if you are going to try to show something with stats, you need the relevant info to back up those stats.