Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
More In News
Editors' Picks
Popular Articles
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
But yes... WHAT THE FUCK?
Okay, pit lovers, I got you covered. Please STFU on this one.
modern science can give him hormones - won't be all easy and natural
outlaw these dogs
period
It gets worse. She had already lost custody of 2 older children.
It could just as easily have been somebody's pet pelican.
Who are we to play God you might ask? Well someone's got to. To anyone who claims that this is the same as racism or genocide I say by making such an argument you have zero perspective and have already lost the argument. Those who already have them as pets should be allowed to keep them, but when they are gone you might try to adopt a real dog because hopefully pit bulls will no longer exist.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/emilysteed/…
yes, this means the hip pit bull owners who comment on slog, too.
isn't it amazing how our minds work, feverishly rationalizing anything we do or are as right and just. in the case of pit bulls, it's an obvious psychological identification that pit bull owners have with their dogs and their own self image that is at stake in their desperate rationalizations. "I'm alone and misunderstood by society, I will get a pit bull to display this, when you attack pit bulls, you attack ME, must counterattack"
it's all the lymbic system.
maybe we should offer free hugs to any pit bull owners who agree to kill their dogs? we could offer them a hug every week.
Seriously though, what kind of moron leaves a 6-month old child unattended with "two large dogs"?
That said, I am sick of you and your staffs anti-pit bull crusade. Yes, I used that word, crusade, because that is the kind of frothy mouthed fervor I am starting to see in your endless commentary on pit bulls. Aren't there more important causes that are relevant to our quality of life? Dan, during the monorail debacle, The Stranger was the only publication that was consistently rational on the subject, and you, Dan, were one of the few local journalists who stood by the idea, even when "leadership" was fucking it up. Can't you do something to help your readership understand the current regional transit situation, and offer some leadership for some better ideas there? Don't you have a sex positive message to spread? Instead, you are working to earn your "hysterical mothers of America" card and obsessing over a dog breed whose bad publicity (and yes, even a little bit of its nature)seems to encourage the lowest of the low in our society to choose that dog for the wrong reasons.
It gets tiring seeing this effort on your part. Yes, they have really powerful jaws, and many are descended from dogs bred for fighting. But it also seems that the ones who get in trouble aren't owned by the most responsible people in the world either. We haven't heard any stories about Michael Vicks dogs that were adopted out, have we?
OK, if any of the readers who own pitbulls or pit mixes ever find themselves encountering a Stranger staffer, go over, strike up a conversation, and eventually work in what your dog is. These people are earning it!
The kid was alone in a room with two dogs. The fact that they chewed into the kids diaper shows that it was probably full and the dogs wanted to sniff and possible eat the diaper.
Tragic. The kid can get implants and hopefully won't remember that he use to have shit parents.
Breed issues aside, what sort of an idiot leaves an infant/toddler unattended around any dog? This should really be an 'Every child deserves a mother and a father' post.
My point is, do we condemn the whole for the actions of a few? (bigots do that all the time).
And WTF, aren't there bigger evils in the world to write about than a few mean dogs? If you want to save lives, try banning handguns or something.
And of course, breed bans don't work for the same reasons, along with the fact that shitty pet owners looking for an aggressive dog who decide not to flout the ban just move on to another breed which then has the same problems.
There will always be stupid people who raise their children and pets badly and create dangerous situations. Blaming the dogs doesn't address the real underlying problems or help anyone.
* all dog owners have to take a theory course before acquiring a dog, and training course after acquiring one, and pass tests proving that they have the knowledge and ability to care for and handle a dog
* all dogs have to be microchipped or tattooed
* all dogs must have access to human interaction (and interaction with other dogs, if possible) daily
* all dogs kept in an enclosed space with limited play area must be released and permitted to expel energy daily. Chained dogs must have at least 5 hours per day of off-chain time and be kept in pairs with compatible animals
* all dogs kept outdoors must have access to adequate shelter and a constant water supply
* all dogs must be contained and restrained in a way that prevents injury to, or endangerment of, humans and other animals
* harsh physical punishment for the purpose of disciplining dogs is prohibited
* all dogs considered potentially dangerous must be muzzled and/or leashed when in the public’s access
Also, I remember reading once before (but couldn't fit the info today) that owners of large and powerful breeds require a license, and must demonstrate at regular intervals that they continue to be able to properly care for their animals.
German Shepards
Dobermans
Rottweillers
Pit Bulls
Sorry, I've been maxed out on worrying about various breeds of dogs. Plus you carried something about how last year about 35 people were killed by pit bulls. Compared to how many pit bulls there are, that's so tiny I'm not inclined to feel particularly threatened. E. coli are far more of a worry to me in particular, and to the nation in general.
Okay, now get this too. I don't own a pit bull. I've never owned or known someone who owned one while I knew them. My last dog, a bitch, recently deceased, was a mixed breed spitz type dog who never weighed more than 35 pounds. Before her, I had a dachshund. My strong preference for my next dog, if I had a hope in hell of affording one, would be a standard poodle. I can't so I'll go to the pound and find a nice dog. More than half the dogs there ( via petfinder.com) are pits and pit mixes. My guess why people have pits? That's what they can afford. Rescue places are damn near as expensive as a breeder. Yes, I can afford the food and medical care (my bitch, recently deceased? Was rising nineteen.); but several hundred more dollars at once, nah, I need that for vet care.
The five-hour rule seems to apply to dogs on chains, not just any dog kept in a house or yard.
Actually this kid has a bright future as a Democratic Senator.
HUMAN BABIES >>>> DOGS (ANY)
If you're a parent, that's clear. If you're human that's clear.
And you are about to dismiss me as a pit bull defender.
There done. Can you please stop posting all the pitbull stuff. I know it gets the slog hits(and further ad revenue) but stop stocking the fires for your own gain. You guys could care less about kids. Which is why I would be a very small number of slog staffers have them. Move on....or at least post every dog attack by every breed every day.
And really, I'm pretty sure the pit bulls are screwed if you're defending them.
When Dan gets on his high horse like this, it often becomes grating to me. He reminds me of an ex of mine, who would argue issues in such an obnoxious fashion I'd automatically start to oppose him, even if I agreed w/him on the issue. So here, even after reading this story, I'm starting to feel sorry for the dogs.
I've always thought most of the blame goes to people who own animals and don't properly care for them. I loved the regulations Switzerland has that were posted above; wish we'd do that before people have humans as well. Except for the microchipping thing. (though I'm sure the gov't will do that to us anyway w/i another generation).
But get off the dog issue; it's boring.
Pit bulls are more dangerous than other breeds. But from what I've read that is actual STATISTICS (not anecdotes) that takes into account the fact that pit bulls are also more popular than many other breeds... they're not really that much more dangerous than other large breeds (and there may be certain breeds that are actually more likely to attack). So why aren't you just getting on all of those breeds? Why aren't you complaining about Rottweilers and Dobermans and so forth? It isn't because they're so safe and pit bulls are uniquely dangerous among dog breeds.
I don't ever plan on owning a pit bull, but I do find reading the same shit over and over boring, particularly when it's advocating a hysteria-driven, irrational viewpoint. I don't care if you're concerned with irresponsible dog owners and regulations to address people who own dangerous dogs, but at least do something that makes more sense than "OMG PIT BULLS! BAD! PIT BULLS BAD! BAD BAD BAD!"
As part of my preamble, I explained that I have searched online for such a study, but could not find anything. I could only find the CDC study of 2000, which actually states that there is no such evidence. I was hoping that there might be a later study I could read.
Dan's response was
"breed bans have worked in the UK, and they work well in Denver. i don't trust the studies you cite.
all the best,
dan"
Now, I am ecstatic that he did NOT simply tell me off. However, he didn't really answer the question, as he doesn't cite any study in the UK or Denver. So I am left with the conclusion that No, Dan Savage does not base his opinions of breed bans on any scientific evidence.
What I find interesting is that he "doesn't trust the studies [I] cite." I believe there was a study in the UK that also concluded that there is no supporting evidence of the efficacy of breed bans. But he doesn't trust scientific research? What does he trust? His gut?
I find that his response, while deservedly terse, spoke volumes. His opinions on breed bans are simply that: opinions. He is neither more nor less correct than the rest of us. In fact, his opinions can be said to be faith-based, since he chooses to discount evidence that does not agree with his ideas.
Both of whom ought to be sterilized by a pit bull with no anesthesia, in this instance.
Has anyone ever considered that perhaps dogs in general do not belong in homes with children under the age of 5? Most fatal and non-fatal attacks on people are on children under five years. It doesn't matter what the breed is, or hell even the species (a few ferrets have killed babies, though only a few, and don't forget pythons), small humans are susceptible to attack and predation.
I love all animals, and am totally against ridiculous breed ban legislations, but I would support a fine on parents with small children owning pets. My mother never brought a pet home until we were at least 6.
It just seems like common sense, that if you have a small child, any animal that has a predatorial nature, be it reptile or dog, can be a threat.
Still, though, more children are killed by swimming pools.
http://www.accessnorthga.com/detail.php?…
There was also a Pomeranian that killed a baby in 2001, and I had to laugh when the articles cite that Pomeranian articles are "rare". I've seen plenty of Poms in my time that were obnoxious biters--most are fine, but some owners do nothing to discourage biting.
And for all the posters that think pit bulls are the most supernaturally vicious dogs out there, explain this to me:
Why haven't the literally thousands of pit bull type dogs and pit bull mixes killed their entire families yet? I've seen hundreds of pits in my line of work (I've never owned one), how come they haven't set upon me and attacked me? If they are truly evil, are these thousands of dogs defective? I don't doubt pit bulls have killed some people, but if hundreds of thousand more haven't killed anyone, well that leaves a lot of questions to be answered.
And European honey bees kill more people a year than dogs, should beekeeping be banned?
This story sounds equally fishy to me. Downright stinky, and not because of the kid's diapers. I don't know what happened in that apartment, but I'm not ready to condemn the dogs.
There is no reason, ever, EVER that any animal should be left with a small child, alone, for even a short period. This is for cockatiels to dogs [DOGS] to horses.
Really, it doesn't matter the breed. There is no breed that, instinctually, wants to chew your testicles off.
All dogs want to chew your testicles off.
The fact is, DUMB people buy large dogs, like pit bulls, rottweilers, mastiffs, boxers, doberman, etc because they "look tough", then don't actually bother to train them, or properly house them and LEAVE CHILDREN ON THE FLOOR.
Really, I doubt there's any poorly-trained dog allowed to roam around a kitchen with a baby on the floor that wouldn't start poking, chewing, and pawing.
Because dogs in general are evil.
What happened to that child is horrifying but I don't blame the dogs. The parents of that child should not have left him alone with those dogs. Actually, a responsible parent wouldn't leave their child alone ever.
Never trust a dog alone with a child. It's not just pit bulls that are untrustworthy. It's all dogs.
Here's a link to a very similar story. In 2007 another child had his genitals m…
I don't think anyone's blaming the dogs per se. They aren't rational creatures who are acting immoral. "Untrustworthy" is a pretty moralistic term that I'm not sure applies to animals.
What most of us are saying is if we know that all dogs can do unexpected things, and pit bulls are more likely to be deadly when they do unexpected things (and perhaps are more likely to act in unexpected ways*), then why can any schmoe off the street buy one and raise it poorly? Whether the answer is breed bans, forced breed sterilization or licensing required specifically for pitbulls and other dangerous breeds, it seems clear that too many people who own pitbulls perhaps shouldn't.
*From The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
so i'm never gonna leave her in a room with a baby. and she's just a 10lb cat. so whats with the dogs?!!!
http://cbs2chicago.com/local/dog.mutilat…
But a scrotum? And given that this child was only 6 months old, the dogs must have used surgical precision to ONLY bite off his testicles, leaving the penis intact. If the dogs were, for some reason, only after the child’s genitals, why were only the testicles affected? It’s not like they would have been large enough for the dog to easily choose his target.
And lastly, why in the world was this child left alone and unsupervised with two dogs?
My guess is that there is more to this story than what we’ve heard.
I will now sit a wait patiently for hysteria to catch up with facts.
Oh wait.
A dog is as good as their owner. Shitty owners make for shitty dogs. And certainly anybody who has ever visited an animal shelter knows how cruel a human can be. From starving to mutilation to physical abuse and abandonment. And those are the ones that are considered 'rescued'.
I don't think we actually need to ban the breed, I think we need more owner oversight. How about substantial jail time for people who torture their animals a la Michael Vick? 3 years? Make it 15-20. How about actually trying to break up dog fighting circles instead of going after marijuana growers? How about funding rehabilitation centers that can turn a dog (of any breed) from aggressive and fearful into loving and good natured? Perhaps mandatory obedience courses for large breeds or your dog get's taken away?
To get rid of all dog attacks one must get rid of all dogs. Or we can be rational humans and work at controlling the root cause: human attacks on animals. The #1 cause of animal attacks on humans.
A couple weeks ago they ate several of her other pets. She was as responsible a dog owner as I've ever seen, she had ALL the talking points I've heard here in defense of pits.
Ban the breed.