Posted on 07/20/2010 8:12:21 PM PDT by Chet 99
Interesting, thanks.
This bears repeating:
It says the man died of a heart attack from the stress of being attacked. It also says that the police were called before regarding the dogs, and nothing was done. So, not only do we have irresponsible, criminal, sick dog owners with a PACK of dogs, but they were let outside to roam free fully knowing they were vicious, and the police/animal control did nothing to prevent this tragedy, even though they had already been called about it.
On the other side of the coin, we have literally millions of pit bulls that are being raised by great owners, horrible owners, and everything in between, yet the average number of human fatalities from all dogs combined has not risen, except to account for increases in the population of both humans and dogs. How come we only hear about the pit bulls in the news?
If 19 people hadn’t died last year from non-pit bull type dogs, and if there weren’t already two thousand people a day getting sent to the hospital from dogs that don’t end up on the news, I would say some of you have a good point. If the experts that study dog attacks, animal behavior, and genetics didn’t have the opposite opinion of many of you, you very well might be correct in assuming that a breed of dog is dangerous. However, because of these little details plus the volumes of evidence proving pit bulls are just dogs that don’t have locking jaws, supernatural strength, or a “snap” switch, I will once again side with the experts, and logic. I truly hope repeating these FACTS over and over again will eventually provide the necessary effects and some on this board will bother to read it all the way through, so that at least they aren’t being too terribly one-sided.
LEL, did you notice at the end of the story they quoted Dogsbite? That’s some good researching on the reporter’s part, isn’t it? Considering that site was created by a crazy woman who uses it to make profits off of other people’s tragedies, and that she uses reputable studies that DISPROVE her claims as somehow proof of her claims (can you say nutjob?), AND that she bans everyone who gives her any bit of logical, factual information, no matter how nice they are, andthat she has turned down stories that don’t involve dogs she hates so she can make it look like only those dogs are attacking people, it’s no wonder every reporter worth his salt is using her site as an example of how horrible the breed is! Good God, our country is headed nowhere fast, if these supposedly educated people are passing off the rantings of a self-proclaimed mentally-ill woman who happens to design websites for a living as expert testimony. Didn’t they learn anything in school? Or was it all about ratings and profits from the beginning?
Some interesting information about dogsbite.org:
http://btoellner.typepad.com/kcdogblog/2010/03/the-truth-behind-dogsbiteorg.html
Thanks for the article. I often use his site to show people things, as it is jam-packed with information. It is truly the most comprehensive site I have seen in a long time in regards to this issue.
I keep meaning to tell you, I appreciate your informative, well thought-out posts. They always seem to come at the end of these threads because there’s not much more that can be said by the time you’re done!
Thanks for what you do.
That is such a flattering compliment! Thank you. I always forget to mention how hard you and some of the others work to set the record straight on these threads. I am so glad there are at least a few of us that are willing to, because the future of all of our dogs depends on our ability to see where the real problems lie, and to fix them before ownership is limited to toothless toy breeds and stuffed animals.
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.