Posted on 08/07/2010 12:09:52 AM PDT by Chet 99
Updated: 6:39 pm EDT August 6, 2010
CLAYTON COUNTY, Ga. -- An 8-month-old girl was in critical condition after being attacked by the family’s pit bull, Clayton County police said.
The toddler was taken to Children's Healthcare of Atlanta at Egleston, where she was rushed into surgery.
An officer at the scene told Channel 2 Action News reporter Tom Jones that the area in the home where the girl was attacked looked like a crime scene.
Officers said the baby's mother was in the process of feeding the child and the dog at the same time. The baby somehow got out of her high chair and onto the floor near the dog. Officers said the dog then attacked the baby, biting off her diaper and chunks of skin on her buttocks. The dog then dragged the child to the back yard before the baby's mother managed to snatch the baby away.
Family members declined to comment as they let the home. Police cited the dog's owner, a great uncle of the victim, for prohibitive treatment of the dog and for not having vaccination tags.
Homeowners said the dog has been a menace to the neighborhood for awhile.
Alfred Nelson said he was killing fire ants in his yard one day when the dog started racing toward him in a threatening manner.
“So I went and grabbed me a shovel and came back out. I immediately called 911 and had 911 send animal control out here to do their job. This all would have been avoided,” Nelson claimed.
The dog will be quarantine for 10 days to see if it has rabies.
So?
LOL...as if the dogs know the difference. Here are citations of the failures of breed specific legislation in Europe and the US...of course, every would be tyrant thinks they can do it just a little better...
http://stopbsl.com/bsloverview/the-failure-to-improve-safety/
No source, natch.
What's the percentage of drunk drivers that cause fatal collisions?
Are you really that obtuse, or are you just trying to waste my time? Many breeders, whose bottom line depends on the prestige and market value of pure breds have very good reason to try to undermine the efforts of adoption advocates, like Milan. Do you understand that, or do I need to elaborate further?
LOL...as if the laws are the same.
I’m sick of excuses, eliminate the breed and all mixes thereof ...
Are you really that dishonest, or are you just trying to waste my time? The criticisms, posted on the Pit Bull Chat Community website, addressed his training techniques and his lack of expert credentials.
First, I'd take their criticism a bit more seriously if they spelled "Milan" correctly. As such, I give them all the validity of a WWII historian who wrote about "Hitlar, Chorchill and Rosevilt". Second, if you're going to put so much stock in the Pit Bull Chat Community website, why don't you embrace some of the positive commentary on the breed with equal vigor?
Petty AND dishonest. Don't ever change.
Jusat the opposite. I know that if I were going to level criticism at the way somebody made their living, I would research it thoroughly, at least enough so that I knew how to spell their name...to do otherwise is petty.
At this point, I have given you link after link, doctors, behaviorists, even a lawyer’s expert testimony, AND shown you several sites that have information that flies in the face of the only “study” that followed your twisted logic, and you have probably managed to read none of it, all while you throw out little insults and snicker about my “imaginary” experts. What have you offered to the conversation? Again, trying to offset the fact that you have nothing by attempting insults is not a winning game. No one is fooled.
None of which is even slightly responsive to my question.
I'll ask it yet again:
What "credible expert" claims that the number of fatalities in America isn't disproportional to that breed?
Man up and just give the real answer, which is "None."
” I’ll ask it yet again:
What “credible expert” claims that the number of fatalities in America isn’t disproportional to that breed?
Man up and just give the real answer, which is “None.””<<<<
First off, I’m a woman. Second, it says very plainly that the quote above appears to be true, both in the CDC study and the first study on your link. I don’t know of anyone who is saying that is NOT the case. However, you are missing the entire purpose of the studies, focusing instead on one detail which is important only because you think it is. If THAT was all we needed to know, don’t you think that’s all it would say? Why don’t you actually read the studies on that link you provided? Instead, you rely on this complete stranger, who is also a lawyer, and has lots to gain from claims against “bad” dog owners, to give you the complete truth and tell you everything you need to know about those studies right there on his site. I’m sorry, but I am going with the guys that actually went to VETERINARY school, who are ANIMAL behaviorists, not LAWYERS. Read the studies!
Right now, pit bulls may indeed be number one on the list of fatalities. They are also the most popular type of dog, so that doesn’t really say much. Another detail you seem to be completely spacing is that the average number of fatalities has not risen substantially since pit bulls became number one. This is the part where you have to put your thinking cap on. If they’re not raising the death toll, but replacing other breeds on the list, then it really doesn’t matter how much of that pie they’re taking! If they’re not baking a whole new one, then the problem is not the breed!!! I don’t know how much more simple I can make it. Why are you relying on me to provide you with this stuff? You seem very hesitant to go with the experts on this, and that makes me think you don’t really WANT to know.
2. I don’t know of anyone who is saying that is NOT the case.
Fascinating.
“1. You will not find a credible expert that is willing to say a breed of dog is responsible for all of this”<<<<<<<<<
Find one expert that says it’s all the pit bull breed’s fault. The other quote was dealing with YOUR question, not my assertion. You are intentionally trying to make this into something else to make it look like you are correct, just like those poor souls over at dogsbite. I am absolutely certain that if you had done a lick of research on this, instead of relying on your lawyer to feed you info, you would see how wrong you are. Here was your question, which changed to this:
“What “credible expert” claims that the number of fatalities in America isn’t disproportional to that breed?”
Here was your original question, in response to my saying that the Merritt Clifton study has been scoffed at and dismissed:
“I specifically said to beware of because experts have dismissed it as being biased (solosmoke)
Again, not in the post I was replying to. By the way, who are these unnamed experts? (you)”<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
That’s what I was answering. Those experts whose names I took the time to look up for you all have had something to say on this subject, and all of them have education and experience in the exact fields that are related to the issue. They are not editors (bad ones at that) that choose to do an un-scientific compilation of cherry-picked dog attacks and then call it a study. They are the real deal.
“2. I don’t know of anyone who is saying that is NOT the case.”<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
This quote was in reference to the above question, re-quoted here:
“What “credible expert” claims that the number of fatalities in America isn’t disproportional to that breed?”<<<
Which is NOT the same thing as saying pit bulls as a breed are to blame for fatalities. The authors of the CDC study and the other one on your link (JAVMA) did say that it appears to be a breed specific issue, but WENT ON TO SAY :
“Although the fatality data are concerning, one must
broaden the context to consider both fatal and nonfatal
bites when deciding on a course of action. Nonfatal dog
bites continue to be a public health problem in the
United States. Although this and prior reports1-3 document
more than 330 DBRF during a 20-year period,
these tragedies represent only the most severe manifestation
of the problem. In 1986, nonfatal dog bites resulted
in an estimated 585,000 injuries that required medical
attention or restricted activity.8 By 1994, an estimated
4.7 million people (1.8% of the US population) sustained
a dog bite; of these, approximately 800,000 (0.3%
of the US population) sought medical care for the bite
(332,000 in emergency departments), and 6,000 were
hospitalized.9-11 This 36% increase in medically attended
bites from 1986 to 1994 draws attention to the need for
an effective response, including dog bite prevention programs.
Because (1) fatal bites constitute less than
0.00001% of all dog bites annually, (2) fatal bites have
remained relatively constant over time, whereas nonfatal
bites have been increasing, and (3) fatal bites are rare at
the usual political level where bite regulations are promulgated
and enforced, we believe that fatal bites should
not be the primary factor driving public policy regarding
dog bite prevention.
Several interacting factors affect a dog’s propensity
to bite, including heredity, sex, early experience,
socialization and training, health (medical and behavioral),
reproductive status, quality of ownership and
supervision, and victim behavior.”<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<JAVMA 2000;217:836-840.
Why don’t you just read the studies on there? The authors did not intend for some lawyer or some crazy yahoo to come along and preferentially paraphrase it! There’s a reason each goes on for pages, and that’s because to understand the issue, you have to be willing to read all the details. You can’t expect to take one or two quotes out of the whole thing and understand the entirety of it.
All? You just admitted that they concede that it is primarily that breed that accounts for a lion's share of maimings and fatalities.
Your "experts" supported MY position.
“Find one expert that says it’s all the pit bull breed’s fault.
All? You just admitted that they concede that it is primarily that breed that accounts for a lion’s share of maimings and fatalities.
Your “experts” supported MY position.”>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nope, and I am beginning to think you have comprehension issues. They agree that pit bulls and rottweilers are responsible for a much larger number of fatalities than other breeds, but go on to say not only that the average hasn’t risen, but there’s no way to know for sure that the numbers are correct for the breeds anyway, given the countless issues in correctly identifying breed, media misrepresentation, over-reporting, and not to mention the 90 or so missing fatalities where breed cannot be accounted for, and therefore cannot be used in the study. However, they DO NOT BLAME SPECIFIC BREEDS for this, and their results show that the average number of fatalities has not risen due to increases in the popularity of these breeds. They also show plenty of evidence that irresponsible ownership is the most common reason for dog attacks, found in attacks involving all breeds, which is their entire conclusion, and the biggest reason for them NOT approving of breed specific legislation.
Unless you have some hidden study I am not aware of that you would like to post, I suggest you go back and read the studies you seem so sure of. I have a sneaking suspicion that you are simply taking whatever I write and trying to use my often flawed and lazy writing skills to make it appear I am saying something I am not. Anyone can go back through and see what we both have written, and so far all you have done is try to pick apart little details and make them into other things. You have offered nothing, and it’s getting pretty obvious now that you don’t have anything TO offer.
Exactly MY point.
However, they DO NOT BLAME SPECIFIC BREEDS for this
You just admitted that they did.
Lemme know if you win the argument that you're having with yourself.
Oh, ok, I get it. So you think because more dogs of a certain breed are represented in the figures, that experts should be blaming them for the attacks? No matter the circumstances surrounding the attacks? Just based on this one detail? Seems pretty myopic.
The experts blame irresponsible dog owners because that factor is present no matter what breed is involved. The breeds are simply chosen by these owners, but are interchangeable depending on what’s “in” in the thug/young idiot world. That is why the numbers do not inflate when pit bulls suddenly outnumber german shepherds. They have replaced them in the numbers, not added to them.
I never once said the experts BLAME specific breeds of dog. I said they show that specific breeds are RESPONSIBLE for more attacks than others. The word “responsible” can be used in more than one way, in case you were wondering.
You are misinterpreting the meaning (probably on purpose) so that it fits your argument, but the truth can be plainly seen. If you are going to continue to argue semantics, I will not be participating. If you have no rational argument, no proof of your claims, and all you want to do is rearrange what I have said to force-fit it into what you perceive to be the truth, go right ahead, but anyone still reading will see that you are being petty, and not really getting anywhere. The studies I have spoken about do not change because you want them to. They are still there, waiting for you to open your eyes and read them. Until then, I suggest you find someone else to dance with.
The "experts" said that the pit bulls maiming and killing people were blameless?
If so, they're experts in propaganda.
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.