Other articles with keyword "DOGGIEPING" since 12/29/04
Posted on 04/26/2006 9:14:27 AM PDT by Wristpin
More about the incident here:
http://www.capitalnews9.com/content/your_news/mohawk_valley/?ArID=175447&SecID=6
Carville?
There are no bad dogs. Only bad owners.
Oh for cryin' out loud. This "discrimination" card is getting tired and worn. There was a time when being being described as "discriminating" was a favorable attribute.
There are no bad alligators either, but I wouldn't want one living in my neighborhood.
Wow, now that I have this important information I can get on with the rest of my day...
Walker said she is upset that the owners have not apologized.
The old lady is lucky to be alive-- Too bad the judge didn't order the breeder to spade and neuter every one of those genetic nightmares.
And if I were her I'd get a lawyer and sue the pants off the owner AND the breeder, before some little child is murdered by these monsters.
So....we should euthanize the owners instead of the dogs? Or both?
If this relocated, vicious dog mauls again is the Judge liable?
You tell me-- if a child molester gets probation for molesting a child, and does it again when he should have been in jail, is the judge responsible?
OF COURSE HE IS
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/09/15/deadly.dogs.ap/index.html
LOL
A Pit Bull involved in a mauling? I'm very surprised to hear that.
If I were the victim, my attorney would have filled up this guy's mail box by now.
I know he's responsible, is he legally liable?
I'm not sure how it works in New York, but in some states the "One Bite Free" law limits civil liability and the victim must prove the owner knew the dog was vicious. Common sense tells us a Pit is likely to be vicious, but some states don't allow the breed to be considered. There is a hearing about the medical bills coming up.
"but in some states the "One Bite Free" law limits civil liability and the victim must prove the owner knew the dog was vicious."
Where do they come up with these laws. Unbelievable.
Any dog owner who says their dog could never attack is an idiot. Sadly, the whole pit bull ownership issue is just one of the most recent manifestations of our society's failure to make the intrinsic linkage between rights and responsibilities.
No responsible person should own a pit as their first dog. No responsible person should own a pit without the time to adequately work with, train and socialize it, and no one should own a pit without adequate facilities, kennels, fences, etc. Having said that, those are my opinions, and people who cannot comply with some of my 'shoulds' still go out and get pits. That's one of the downfalls of living in a free society. The argument that, 'but if a pit attacks someone, the results are more serious than another kind of dog,' is completely spurious. By that same logic, one could argue:
'but if an SUV is handled irresponsibly, it could cause more damage than another type of vehicle.'
'but if a semi-automatic rifle is handled irresponsibly, it could cause more damage than another type of weapon.'
'but if a 10 lb. sledge hammer is handled irresponsibly it could cause more damage that a tack hammer.'
....etc.
If we wish to keep our nannies and big brothers out of our business, we need to confront the reality that some people will inevitably abuse their freedoms, and that yes, people may get hurt or die as a result. These abuses may be negligent or intentional, but they will occur...and people should be held accountable, but to eliminate a freedom because of the potential for abuse is to start us down a road we will regret, and one I'm afraid we've already embarked upon in many ways.
I'm not a pit bull fan or advocate, preferring shepherds by far, but I'm a freedom fan and advocate, preferring it above all other things.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.