Now this really pisses me off to no end
Per this:
A BOY of seven narrowly escaped death after being mauled by two American pit bull terriers.
Frankie Knowlden had climbed into a neighbour’s garden to retrieve a football.
Dad Matthew managed to prise him from the dogs’ jaws.
So the child was trespassing? Where were the parents?
It is believed the dogs had escaped from their steel enclosures in the garden.
Police said they had no powers to remove them because the owner had taken “reasonable” steps in the way they were kept. But Matthew plans to sue and is angry that they were not destroyed.
So, your child enters someone’s property without permission and where were you? The owners took precaution.
What really annoys me is that, in typical media stupidity fashion, the article shows a picture of a Pit Bull (not necessarily one in this incident) with the caption: VICIOUS: A pit bull terrier
Pit bulls are no more vicious than any other dog.
August 21st, 2003 at 9:25 am
I also liked the part that said “American Pit Bull”…they just had to throw that in didnt they…
August 21st, 2003 at 12:28 pm
American Pitbull Terrier is a breed of dog, Justin.
I think characterizing a child as “trespassing” to retrieve a ball is a little harsh. Especially if you think being mauled is appropriate retribution.
Parents should not be exempt from their responsibility to watch over their children. And, it’s unfortunate that the dogs escaped from their steel enclosures.
But, maybe keeping dogs that are trained to kill (or at least, not trained not to kill) in a neighborhood populated with children is not a very wise idea.
August 21st, 2003 at 12:34 pm
The recurring theme is responsibility. The article stated the child climbed to the garden, which implies a fence. It seems the dogs were in a cage and in a fence.
And i in no way am implying the mauling is appropriate retribution. I am stating that the responsibility lies with the parents as the owners of the dogs took reasonable steps.
And i don’t recall the dogs being taught to kill being mentioned in the article. But you’re correct that dogs should be trained appropriatley.
And my main gripe is the media portrayal of the breed when the media should be harping on irresponsible dog owners.
August 21st, 2003 at 12:39 pm
Agreed..
August 21st, 2003 at 1:27 pm
My dog is part pit bull. She’s the sweetest thing in the world 🙂
August 21st, 2003 at 4:13 pm
I also think its harsh to consider it “trespassing” when a child climbs a fence to retrieve a plaything. As the mother of two boys, I can testify that a fenced yard does not prevent the flying football or frisbee or whatever from occasionally entering the neighbor’s yard, no matter if Mom is standing there watching or not. No child deserves to be mauled by a vicious dog. The owner is responsible for training the dog so that it does not present a danger. This particular dog owner is at fault.
August 21st, 2003 at 4:17 pm
This particular dog owner is at fault.
The police disagree. The dogs were in an enclosure behind a fence. Yes, the trespassing comment was off the mark and typed in anger as a result of the reporter in this instance minimizing the responsibility of the parents in this case. Funny how someone is responsible for training an animal to not be a danger but no one is responsible for training children not to jump fences where large dogs are known to roam.
August 22nd, 2003 at 12:28 am
the kid hopped the fence. The dogs shouldn’t have been out of the enclosure, but seeing as how it was their owner’s property the dogs were well within their right to be anywhere in the property.
I suppose it’s hard to think rationally or logically when you little boy just got used as a chew toy. That’s why “fair and impartial” people are supposed to make up a jury…
August 22nd, 2003 at 8:57 am
Exactly, glenn. And by glenn i am not referring to white glenn.
August 22nd, 2003 at 11:50 pm
gotta agree with glenn on this one too.
dogs have a right to be anywhere on their owner’s property. now, if dog’s owners had posted warning signs, beware of dog and the like, then he should be in the clear. posting warnings, in my view, is the end of his responsibility (other than having already constructed fence/cages and the like).
also agree with SU, as to where were the poor kid’s parent(s) ??
August 23rd, 2003 at 2:50 am
Hello? These people had multiple dogs that are able and willing to kill children running loose behind a fence of some sort that can be scaled by a SEVEN YEAR-OLD, yet posting a “warning” would make them responsible owners? What good are warnings when children too young to read can wander into what apparently is a kill zone?
And pit bulls are “no more vicious than any other dog?” Well, not unless you consider attacking and/or killing people representative of viciousness. Despite being a relatively rare breed until the last decade or so, they and rottweilers are responsible for more than half the dog attack deaths in the U.S. from 1979 to 1998. Whether pit bulls are “no more vicious than any other dog” is irrelevant if their viciousness is capable of manifesting itself in far more dangerous ways due to size or strength or any other characteristic.
P.S. Does the “Chillow” really work???
August 23rd, 2003 at 3:24 pm
Click the links in the upper left corner of the page for info on BSL. Pits and Rotties are involved in these incidents (rotties more so) because they are popular breeds. Rottie being #1 in popularity and dog bits, if i recall correctly. And, unfortunately, pits are popular with classes of people who shouldn’t own dogs (like dog fighters and drug dealers who use them to guard stashes). It’s like saying hondas/toyotas are dangerous because they’re in more accidents. They probably are but there are lots of hondas/toyotas.
Facts are (and peruse the pets and responsibilty category above to see me coming down on owners in the past, if an owner is stupid, i will call them on it) the dogs were in a pen, behind a fence, and on their property. Period. I have two very friendly dogs (not pit bulls by the way) who love everyone. But you’d get bit if you hopped my fence. However, if we introduced you to them in the house, they’d love ya for life. The child should not have climbed the fence (yes, i know its a child and he may not know better but parents should teach kids not to go where big territorial dogs are caged). If the dog jumped the fence, you got me. Bad owners. These owners took appropriate steps. As glenn said, it’s hard to be objective when a small child suffers.
And any comparable sized dog (say a golden retriever since size wise their about the same as a pit) is capable of violence on a similar scale. There are several incidents that i’ve documented on this page where it is clearly the owners’ fault. This is not one of those cases. Poor parenting, ’nuff said.
And yes the chillow kicks ass!