Posted on 08/11/2011 5:08:33 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
PACIFICA -- A pregnant Pacifica woman was found dead by her husband today after an apparent attack by a family pit bull, police said.
The 32-year-old woman, whose name has not been released, was killed in her home on the 500 block of Reina del Mar, said Capt. Dave Bertini, a Pacifica police spokesman.
The woman's husband told police that he had arrived home from work around noon and found one of the couple's two pit bulls standing over his wife's body. He was able to get the dog into the backyard before police arrived a few moments later.
Attempts to revive the woman were unsuccessful, and she was pronounced dead at the scene.
While the investigation was under way, Bertini said, the dog got loose from the yard and charged at officers who were stationed outside. They fired three shots at the pit bull, killing it.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Why thank you!
In Christian symbolism, the salamander is the soul who endures the fires of trial and tribulation and emerges unscathed...:)
#125-Why yes, of course I have a pit bull! I post pictures of him pretty regularly. Here, let me show you.
#131-Nope. But here's another picture of my dog.
#140-Still just one. Here's a picture of him!
#141, 142, & 143-Nothing I've seen today is as amusing as a) your inability to identify my correct gender and b) being told by a reactionary, willfully ignorant, vicious-dog owning tool like yourself that my post is dumb. :D Here, look at this picture of my dog.
That doesn’t look like a Pit Bull and FYI, many Pits that have killed people have similar photos. Your photos don’t mean jack sh#t.....all they mean is at that moment your dog was being nice. I hope I’m not on here one day and have to hear about a tragedy from you.
I never said they were my kids. Comprehend what you read.My kids were teenagers and she didn’t BITE, I said nip, not sure many would even say it was a real “nip”, at kids that came to our house. Once she did it, I crated her when kids came over. So don’t assume. I know more about dogs and their behavior than most people and I have a superior vet that specializes in it. I won’t go into detail because I don’t want the BO thugs hunting me down, but you have probably seen my vet on TV many times if you watch Animal Planet, Discovery, etc.
Their take on the nipping was that she did it when they walked away, and that she probably didn’t want them to When I say nip, I mean take their clothes in her front teeth, gently. The incident where she tore my son’s friend’s shirt was because she was sleeping, it was late at night, her eyesight and hearing were going, he didn’t knock, just came right in the door where she was sleeping. It startled her.
We warned people after you pet her, she may try to nip as you walk away. Had she ever bitten anyone we would have confined her. There is a big difference in biting and gently taking hold of someones pants or shirt as they walk away. She never chased them, growled or showed any aggression when she did it, but it worried me because it startled people that didn’t know her well. leave, she wanted them to stay near her, keep petting her. She did it to me and my wife a few times. It was when we were scratching her or petting her, as soon as we stopped and walked away, she would take hold of our clothes. No growling, no aggression, just taking hold of it. As soon as I said no she would stop and she never behaved as if she had done anything wrong.
So lose your idiotic BITING!@! and stop using words that I never used, JERK! Biting and taking hold of ones clothing as you turn away or nipping is not the same thing. She never BIT anyone.
Let me be clear, I don’t like you and I don’t like your ugly dog. So let’s make a deal. I won’t respond to your posts and you stay the hell away from mine.
See ya. :-P
Actually you are the only one I have ever heard say it, but YOU do say it repeatedly.
Or, more irresponsible people own pill bull type dogs and thus end up in some sort of rescue/rehoming situation. This does point to a problem (a certain sort of person is attracted to this type of dog) but it does NOT mean the entirety of all of the breeds that fall into this category are “bad dogs”.
If there were a way to filter out the irresponsibly bred pit type and mixes from the rest the bite stats might be quite different, but since people can’t even tell boxers from am staffs and american pit bulls it’s unlikely they could tell well bred from mixes.
And no, I own golden retrievers, but I don’t like laws that are based on a lack of knowledge and fear, whether they ban breeds or mandate spaying and neutering of all dogs, or for that matter requiring licenses for guns.
Imagine them at 100 pounds.
Ack! My KNEES!!!
No bait on your part, and an observation on mine.
Why are you so interested in the length of other men’s genitalia?
“Why are you so interested in the length of other men’s genitalia?”
I’m not. Why do you assume that any criticism of dysfunctional men using misbred, untrained, dangerous animals to compensate for a lack of education and social standing is directed at you ?
Over and out.
Ha! Great story. :-)
People who possess a quality have no need to mock or deride others who do not (in appearance or actuality) possess that quality.
Patient men, for instance, feel no need to mock the impatient. But one can find plenty of examples the inverse occurring.
Wise men do not need to mock fools, but one can find plenty of examples of fools mocking the wise.
People who themselves feel no need to “compensate” for physical attributes don’t mock others on account of the mocker’s suspicion that the victim of mockery owns a car or dog or (insert object) for the purpose of “compensating” for said physical attributes.
It doesn’t occur to them; it’s not within them to do so.
So when a Freeper does so, repeatedly-—well, that gets my attention. Undoubtedly, it’s gotten the attention of others.
And it says much more about him than it does those whom he attempts to mock.
Unfortunately, big dog owners are much more likely to be more concerned with proper training and socialization for their dogs because they know their domesticated wolves are capable of much more damage than a small dog.
Too many little dog owners treat them as living, breathing, stuffed animals—dressing them up, getting their “nails done” at the groomers, putting bows in their hair-—and ignoring or downplaying the training and socialization requirements of their pint-sized domesticated wolves.
A good dog owner knows that he (she) is alpha and can NEVER relinguish that post, if his (her) dog(s) is (are) to remain a content, well-adjusted member of the family pack.
“So when a Freeper does so, repeatedly-—well, that gets my attention.”
And that somehow makes it imperative for you to put in your two cents when no criticism was of you was directed or implied.
But you have a good day. Over and out.
Imperative? No.
But your decision to repeatedly use the descriptor is revealing about you, whether or not others reply.
Regards.
Re your post 167, perhaps I should have more carefully chosen my words. I should not have said that the apparent large availability of pit bull dogs in the petfinder.com site means that they are bad dogs. I really don’t know whether a given pit bull dog is good or bad. My concern is that if I were to adopt one and it turned on me, I could not contend with its strength and massive jaws and would quickly become another fatality. I am not willing to take that chance and that is my reason for not even considering the adoption of one.
And you’re right in the supposition that the owners of these dogs probably are not the most responsible dog owners out there and that may account for their showing up a lot in their availability for adoption.
Not surprising. Agenda-driven, like so much in the media. What IS surprising is the lack of recognition this gets from conservatives. No one ever comments on the “dogs got loose” part of virtually every media article: loose from where?? Translation: These are NOT family pets, but resident dogs — kept chained in the backyard, unsocialized, unvetted, intact. Count on it. Read an article the other day about a pit bull type that mothers chicks and a cat. Won’t see THAT in the MSM, though...not on the agenda.
The CDC has repeatedly stated that those stats cannot be used to “prove” one breed or type is more prone to bite than another, but alas the haters can’t read...(or refuse to deal with the facts - takc your pick!)
“There is currently no accurate way to identify the number of dogs of a particular breed, and consequently no measure to determine which breeds are more likely to bite or kill. “
And yet they try repeatedly to do just that. The CDC may be reliable, as far as it goes — and as long as the stats are used as a bully club to beat a specific breed or type over the head...but of course those that target a specific breed or type don’t read that small print. And one wonders how conservatives, supposedly so suspicious of 99.9% of the MSM reports, manage to look at these stories with any ounce of credulity and no critical thought whatsoever. Boggles the mind, doesn’t it?? Guess it explains how someone like Obama can get elected.....
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.