Do not taunt happy fun dog

WBZ interviews the owner of the two pit bulls that went berserk in East Boston and says the kid who got bit was taunting the dogs beforehand.

Meanwhile, Mayor Menino and City Councilor Rob Consalvo say they're going to try to figure out how to get around a state law that would overrule a city ordinance that requires pit-bull owners to muzzle their pets and post signs outside their houses.

Neighborhoods: 

Topics: 

    Free tagging: 

    Comments

    I'll never understand how

    I'll never understand how stupid shit like this gets 15 likes. It boggles the mind. Every time a pitbull article shows up, retards start spouting off about how horrible the breed is when (a) in the US at least, "pitbulls" are hardly ever really pitbulls; and (b) asshole owners lead to asshole dogs.

    Not just Labs,

    My Mastiff was attacked by a Golden Retriever! Despite his fierce appearance, he lay there like a Quaker. Mastiffs get a bad rap, but I raised both of mine to be complete wimps.

    Proving to me that there are no bad dogs, just bad owners. People seem to forget that dogs only want to love and be loved. I personally know many pit bulls whose company I prefer to most humans.

    Bad owners

    Many pit bull owners train their dogs to be aggressive, or, at the very least, reward them for any naturally aggressive behavior they may exhibit.

    I have to agree with tape on

    I have to agree with tape on this one! Many many people that have pit bulls do not train their dogs to be aggressive. I rescued my pitbull from a shelter 6 years ago and she is amazing and fun loving. A few years back she was attacked by a lab! A LAB! I yelled at the top of my lungs and instructed my dog to lie down because I knew if that other dog had a scratch on it, my dog would be to blame. My dog sat there and took it. She had a gauge in her leg and a sliced ear once this labs owner dragged her dog off mine (maybe 30 seconds to a minute after it started). I know having her not defend herself put her in a bad spot but i also knew the outcome of the "bad wrap syndrome" that many people have in their heads and also know my dog is muscular and in shape and didn't want to see her strength on this other dog. She was a trooper and pulled through just fine. The labs owner did offer to pay the vet bill and was thankful my dog didn't injure hers. -Mea www.hertrainstories.blogspot.com

    Again, how does one identify a pit bull?

    From the site you pointed us to:

    Q: What is a pit bull type dog?
    A pit bull type dog is a combination of dog breeds that includes the American pit bull terrier, American Staffordshire terrier, Staffordshire bull terrier, American bulldog and any other pure bred or mixed breed dog that is a combination of these dogs. Weight and shape can vary significantly amongst pit bull type dogs, from 35 to 100 plus pounds. (Please see Disguise Breed Name to learn more about the deliberate renaming and mislabeling of pit bulls throughout history.)

    By definition, one can't say "That dog is a pit bull". When it comes to creating a law, you can't say "I know a pit bull when I see one". It just doesn't work.

    Eyeroll

    So, had this kid started kicking a homeless guy who then attacked him, you'd say he was an innocent victim, too?

    Exactly the same

    Yes, there is also no possible reason that a homeless guy would ever attack somebody except that he had been kicked. Any time a homeless guy attacks somebody, that should be the first supposition, and the recipient of the attack is then to be considered guilty of kicking homeless people until proven otherwise.

    Further, if a homeless guy has to jump out a window in order to attack somebody on the street, it is only proof of the high degree of kicking that must have happened first.

    Oldest excuse

    Is the media fear-mongering, and not putting the focus where it's due. Or do you have such a short memory anon? (assuming you're not still living in moms basement)

    IMAGE(http://thesolutionnz.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/bad-dogs.jpg)

    Shitty owners make shitty dogs. Be it a small dog, or a large one.

    Question

    It's still OK for me to mistrust all dogs and dog owners equally, right? Some of us prefer the city because we DON'T like wild animals (or animals that can and will revert to wild at the bounce of a tennis ball)

    Where'd you ever get

    the idea that the city has no wild animals?

    The large and generally well fed populations of rats, mice, snakes, turkeys, birds of prey, raccoons, opossums, skunks, coyotes, ect.

    Boston, being a quaint New England city and with wooded areas as close as 2-3 miles from the city center, Not to mention the tidal plains and grass lands that run along our rivers, is ripe with wildlife. We're not exactly a normal city surrounded by thick development and city like sprawl.

    Maybe I've been lucky

    I see animals all the time, but all those critters and I generally keep a respectful distance. Unlike some dogs, who I try to keep a distance from but they don't always reciprocate. I guess what I mean to say is I prefer wild animals to badly-domesticated ones.

    Yes, of course that's

    Yes, of course that's absolutely OK and I don't think anyone seriously thinks otherwise. The part about reverting to a wild animal blahblahblah is baloney but you go your way and my dogs and I will go ours and no harm done to anyone.

    Identify a pit bull

    Good try Mr. Mayor, but how are you going to define what a pit bull is? How about a mix? Can't do it.

    Instead of coming up with a new law every time something tragic happens, how about using the laws you already have? Or trying to figure out what's best for Boston school children? (and I don't even live there....)

    As much as I understand that

    As much as I understand that its a learned trait. By default these dogs 'have it in them'. Golden Retrievers do not. Yes consistently beat/taunting/neglecting any dog will cause it to snap, but Pit Bulls have a far lower threshold for this than other breeds, which is the problem.

    The other problem these dogs are now 'token' dogs. I am unclear if its a 'hip hop culture' thing but I see more 'urban' folks with pitts than anyone else. Not sure if its a status symbol or what not but.. the issue is, these folks have no idea what they are getting into. They aren't properly training the dog, and I'm sure not properly caring for it either (i.e. Keeping it in a crate all day long, and not giving it attention it wants/needs for proper training). Combine with the nature of a pill bull, its just bad news. People just don't know how to handle these dogs.

    Science, Please

    Pit Bulls have a far lower threshold for this than other breeds, which is the problem

    Please present something beyond "everybody knows" anecdata to demonstrate your assertion. Thank you.

    Nope

    I don't need to. Just LOOK at the number of reports of pit bull attacks in the media and you'll see. This is straight up common sense.

    There's no media bias, just plain cold facts based on reports.

    I'm sure your just asking because you are just one of those people who constantly say "its not the breed". I'm sorry it *IS* the breed.

    Of COURSE it is just the breed...

    Yes, just LOOK at the number of media reports about this! Everyone knows that media bias does not exist, and the media certainly would NEVER try to skew public opinion. After all, they DO report on EVERY dog attack throughout the city. If my fluffy Teacup Poodle bit someone who provoked it, that would be front page news the next day! "Tiny menaces roving city. Owners and provokers not at all to blame- it's just the nature of those fluffy, vicious beasts."
    /s

    Science

    is fun, do use it.

    It has shown that Pitbull attacks are up in correlation with the popularity of the breed. They are NOT up because of some predisposition of the breed to attack more.

    Simply put it, more kuckleheads buy them because they're thought of as the "tough dog", and are then trained to be aggressive on purpose, or outright neglected and left to their own. Go try to play with a stray dog or stray cat born that way, and tell me how well they'll get along with you.

    I do believe bites are up on those little rat dogs people buy as accessories, don't train, and have very ill temperaments. The media doesn't care to report on that though, because tiny, ill tempered dogs biting soccer moms doesn't hit the same nerve. From anecdotal evidence, I do have to say I've seen more negligent owners of these small breeds, than those of the larger ones.

    And yes, retrievers and border collies not trained well are just as aggressive as the pit breeds. They're agile hunting and guard dogs, but have been part of Americana for so long that we now see them as part of the family. That doesn't change their breed or what their purpose was, and in fact shows that it's really the family/pack unit they're a part of that exerts the most influence on their behavior.

    TL;DR, hold bad owners accountable.

    That isn't really science either though is it?

    saying that since the breed is more popular, it might make it ok that more attacks happen? Wouldn't the same thing happen if more people owned lions and tigers?

    The issue here isn't the amount of dog attacks, it is the dangerousness of dog attacks. I would bet no one has been killed (mauled) by a King Charles Spaniel in this country. But people have been killed (mauled) by Pit Bulls, Rotweillers, and American Bulldogs more than other breeds, and there are stats to prove that.

    Here is a study which says that 59% of all fatalaties in a 3 year period were attributed to pit-bull type dogs (with Rottweillers and American Bulldogs making up another 18%).

    http://www.dogsbite.org/reports/dogsbite-report-us...

    And sure, the humans may be more to blame than the dogs, but that isn't the point either. I don't think it is a crazy question to look into who is allowed to own pit bull type dogs, since it is obvious some people don't know how to handle the breed, and probably shouldn't be owning dogs in the first place.

    Again, Pit bulls can and do maul people. Golden Retrievers simply don't.

    No media bias, huh?

    OK let's take the case of Ving Rhames. His caretaker was found dead in the driveway of his LA home. Initial reports blamed it on his Mastiffs, CNN chiefly reporting that he was mauled to death by the dogs.

    Subsequent findings showed that the man died of a heart attack and the dogs were trying to either drag him in the house or wake him up.

    Thinking people should realize that pit bull attacks fall into the "if it bleeds, it leads" school of journalistic thought. Attacks by poodles, beagles, Labs are not sensational enough to warrant the coverage a pit does. Breed discrimination is just as illogical as human discrimination. Raise a human right and it's still susceptible to many of the ills that plague our society. Raise a dog right and you have a bond of trust and love that can't be swayed by any outside forces.

    Anyone remember the movie "Aliens"?

    "You know Burke, I don't know which species is worse. You don't see them fucking each other over for a goddamn percentage."

    People...

    Seems some can't "figure out" what seemingly normal people have pitbulls for. Well, some of 'em go to the shelter, and lo and behold, most of what you'll find there are pit bull or mix breeds. Then, there are actually people that LIKE the breed. Why? Because if you are normal, and don't train the dog to be psycho, you've got yourself one heck of a great dog. Great for what? Well, companionship, and, yes, a "watchdog." You know, so when you leave the house, you can be a little more secure that your property won't be broken into? Or, when you walk or jog around for exercise, if you have your dog with you, you won't be bothered by the other residents of your neighborhood, who might otherwise bother you? Yep, pitbulls are great for that.

    Maybe there's a reason

    "Well, some of 'em go to the shelter, and lo and behold, most of what you'll find there are pit bull or mix breeds."

    Did you ever stop to think that maybe there is a REASON most of the dogs in the shelter are pit bulls? Maybe people obtained pit bulls and then realized they could not handle them. Again, this is a reflection on the owner more than it is the dog. Too many people enter lightly into getting dogs. They are not toys.

    Very True

    I adopted a dog through a Southern dog rescue and nearly EVERY dog they handle has some percentage of pit bull in their bloodline somewhere. Mine has the chest markings and giant paws but she's also knee-high, barrel chested and her personality is about as even and peaceful as any dog I've ever met. She's pretty much Chunk from the Goonies in canine form. If someone were to want her muzzled just because she has some pit bull features, it would be (1) asinine; and (2) completely undeserved. Now, the Boston Terrier that lives below me. . .

    Shelter dogs

    and lo and behold, most of what you'll find there are pit bull or mix breeds.

    I volunteer at a local animal shelter and don't find that statement true at all - not even close. If I were to pick a prevalent breed, I'd say it would be labs and lab mixes. Sure, we get some pits, and like any other dog, their personalities are all over the map, from pussycats to aggressive.

    What if, hypothetically, ALL

    What if, hypothetically, ALL urban pitbull owners valued aggressive, mean dogs. So, hypothetically, when you saw a pitbull you could assume its owner valued it because of its frightening reputation and dangerous behaviour. Would it not make sense then to have laws to prevent these dogs from acting in the aggressive way their owners trained them to act; although the dogs left to their own personalities may not be agressive at all.
    Well as it turns out the hypothetical case is mostly true. And although 100% of urban pitbull owners don't value a vicious dog, enough do to justify pitbull laws for protection of others. And when it becomes fashionable for the pitbull crowd to instead train another breed to be aggressive and vicious then more laws will be needed.
    This we don't have bad dogs only bad dog owners debate is analgous to the debate on gun control. Because as we all know there are no bad guns only bad people.

    Where is the evidence that

    Where is the evidence that proves your hypothesis? In the statement there is no evidence. So your hypothesis is simply proved by stating that it is true. The logic is faulty.

    Have you interviewed every owner of a dog falling under the pitbull category? Do you know what pitbull actually means? Do you know anything about dogs and human society?

    If you are concerned about potentially dangerous dogs then please feel free to address dogs that are allowed to run loose. From East Boston to Dorchester to J.P owners allow their dogs to run loose. When on the streets or in parks dogs are allowed to run loose.

    These are the dogs that the mayor and Councilperson Gonsalvo needs to address. But they don't; instead they focus on one small population of dogs while ignoring the owners who are irresponsible and are the problem.

    The laws concerning pit type dogs have been a farce. Cops have used them to harass law abiding citizens who own pits. The licenses are extortions. Yet plenty of other dogs that defecate anywhere and everywhere or threaten people are allowed to run freely.

    Personal Anecdata here ...

    Dog breeds involved in biting and mauling in my personal experience:

    My SIL's King Charles Cavalier Spaniel - even though she knew this dog had issues with small children, she insisted on bringing this stupid vile fuckard of a dog to family events and letting him run around freely. When he dashed across the room snarling at my toddler, who hadn't been near him, I kicked him out of the way - I don't normally kick dogs unless one is attacking my child.

    My brother was walking his Bichon when a Great Dane escaped his yard and viciously attacked the elderly, small dog. The owner at least sprang for vet bills, but the Provincial laws required that the dog be put down (not his first attack, and he had been ordered to be fenced AND muzzled after an earlier incident)

    Then there was the Weimaraner who bit my husband on the leg when he was on a bike and waiting at a street crossing on a bike path, because his stupid whiny owner was too small and too whiny to let the dog know who was in charge yet still kept him on a zip leash and took him out in crowded situations ("he doesn't like cyyyyyclissssts" ... so why the &*#%^%#! was he where cyclists would be????)

    My neighbor's Dad had a rescued Bassett hound with three legs. The dog was elderly and grumpy and had some pain issues. I could read him pretty well and he understood me and we were good friends ... but they kept all the little ones away from him, crated him if necessary, and warned all who went to friend him because he had a snapping turtle attitude.

    Then there was Thorazine Woman and her nasty off-leash Husky that I threatened to shoot if he aggressively charged me, my children, or any of my neighbors ever again. When Ms. Expressionless Drugface emerged from her walk with her smaller dog, having left this aggressive, threatening dog off the leash to terrorize my neighborhood that final time, I was swinging a shovel at his muzzle and I let her know in no uncertain terms that I never wanted to see that dog in my neighborhood off a leash again. It had charged and snarled at nearly every one of my neighbors, and had gone after my kids on our own property because we were there. When it went after my cat I went after it.

    Notice something here? Only one of these owners understood their dog enough to appropriately manage their aggressive tendencies. That dog never bit anyone despite his snappishness. The rest? Idiot owners with no clue or who willfully believed that their dogs "rights" were more important than the safety of humans around them.

    Notice something else? NONE OF THESE DOGS WERE PIT BULLS.

    Coming from someone who

    Coming from someone who actually knows one of the two pit bulls... He's a big baby never harmed anything. His owner was the man who was murdered in Revere. That was the dog who ran back to the "New" owner's apartment.

    And if you want to get into statistics and science, Chihuahuas Bite more than pit bulls, Mastiffs, Dobies.... All the bigger "badder" Breeds....

    So Let's try and figure out who to blame again because it's Obviously not the dogs.

    Um, if the dogs were inside

    Um, if the dogs were inside the apartment there can't have been any physical contact. The owner also said that he left the room and "moments later" some kids came by, so whatever taunting may have happened can't have been very long either, otherewise the owner would have come back. Taunting animals is wrong, but whatever obnoxious noise some kid makes on the street should not result in them being bitten.

    Moments later

    The brief time between the owner leaving the room and his dog going on a rampage is ipso facto proof that the taunting must have been deeply personal and insulting.

    I bet the boy called the dog's mother a bitch.

    It doesn't matter if smaller

    It doesn't matter if smaller dogs bite more. I'd rather be nipped by a chihauhau 100 times over than be bit by a pitbull once.

    Though if you'd like to compare the two as basis for your flimsy arguments, feel free.