When dogs attack, owners can go to prison (Pit bulls kill child - Owners get 7 years)

WFAA-TV ^ | 1/19/2009 | JIM DOUGLAS

[stinkerpot65]

The scene was so gruesome that even seasoned emergency responders broke down and cried.

"They were never agressive; never seen them agressive," Watson said. "Never bit no one."

"I'm scared," Watson said. "I've got three kids who are going to be without a mom to be there for them."

Watson was sentenced to seven years in prison; that's part of the reason she can't stop crying.

[gleeaikin]

Getting too close to a mother dog with puppies could certainly trigger an attack. So, several questions: Why were the puppies in a place that a strange child could approach? When they had 4 dogs a least, why did they need to have more? Why do they have so many children if they are too poor to build a good fence? Sounds like a whole lot of irresponsible breeding going on here which will get a 7 year respit, Of coure, for good behavior, they will probably do less time.

[vox_freedom]

I’d switch the sentencing and give these two pit bull owners the death penalty and the dog seven years in prison.

[Skid Marx]

Because we value freedom.

With freedom comes responsibility. When one becomes a menace to the lives of others by not excercising caution when he enjoys his freedom, then everyone may end up losing theirs.

[Always Right]

Your freedom stops at the edge of my property, well actually at the edge of yours as there could be public access between us.

I did not disagree with that. But does a responsible dog owners rights end because of a negligent one? These owners got what they had coming to them.

[Frantzie]

Yes but who did the “breeding.” Trailer park and ghetto geneticists? ;-)

You are right about their instinct to kill. I think Labs instinct is to eat and swim. They also retrieve. They say Labs are great at service dogs, bomb sniffers etc because of food. They also have an agreeable nature and love praise from the owner.

Goldens love to carry a ball or newspaper in their mouth. They almost like to gather things.

[Always Right]

With freedom comes responsibility.

So you take away the rights of the responsible because of the irresponsible? That is same logic the gun grabbers are using.

[palmer]

I agree a lab is a better choice for most people, but a mistreated lab is dangerous too. The mistreatment of dogs is a much bigger and more serious problem than the breed. Choosing to prosecute a breed is easier (a cop-out really) but doesn’t punish or deter the people who mistreat animals.

[CSM]

I don’t understand people that own pits or rots. I don’t begrudge them the right to do so, but they do need to keep these dogs secure, just like it is my responsibility to keep my choc lab secure. The risk is to great for me to allow my dog to run free. The risk to her and the risk of liability to me.

This is a very sad situation that could have been avoided if these particular dog owners took proper responsibility for their dogs. I know when I was living in farm land, if a dog was running loose, then it was at risk for being shot by the land owner. It was the “law of the land” and I would think that these dog owners would not have wanted to take that risk for their dogs.

With their chosen breeds, they were taking additional risks.

[palmer]

With freedom comes responsibility.

Same as gun ownership. The right to own a gun comes with the responsibility of safety and marksmanship training. Anything less like banning certain types of guns, is a cop-out.

[deport]

The following article from Dogsbite.org shows the potential for Texas gov't from the city to the state getting involved with legislation.

---

Sunday, August 24, 2008

Texas Update: Cities Contemplating Pit Bull Laws and More

The Texas Pit Bull Problem
Dallas, TX - The Dallas Morning News recently published a story that talked about several Texas cities that are contemplating breed-specific laws. Duncanville, Cedar Hill and Mesquite have each passed resolutions urging the state Legislature to allow breed-specific law. These same cities reported that from July 2007 to July 2008 about a third of all animal attacks involved pit bulls.

The article quoted one Mesquite pit bull owner, Felipe Badajos (51), who doesn't mind his pit bull playing around his 8-month-old son, Sebastian. He trusts his pit bull Rocky because he's well-trained. In response to the many pit bull attacks on children Felipe said: "Well, that means the owner is doing something wrong. They don't feed their dog; they don't take care of the dog."

A hungry and semi-neglected dog does not automatically lead to an attack, specifically an attack that leads to disfigurement or death. If all hungry and semi-neglected dogs did launch such attacks, LifeFlight helicopters would block out the sun. For the sake of 8-month old Sebastian, we hope that Rocky does not "flip" into his genetic inclination: to grab hold and shake like mad.

In addition to Duncanville, Cedar Hill and Mesquite, the city of Center has also had breed-specific law brought to its attention.

Texas Fatality Updates

• Since January 1, 2006, Texas has suffered 15 fatalities due to dog attacks. Of these fatalities, 80% (12) were attributed to pit bulls, 13% (2) to rottweilers and 7% (1) to the combination of a doberman and shepherd.
• 2 fatalities each have occurred in the counties of Hidalgo, El Paso and Bexar. In the instance of Bexar, both fatalities occurred in the City of San Antonio in the year 2007.
• In 2006, Texas lead the nation in fatalities (6). Of these fatalities, 67% (4) were attributed to pit bulls and 33% (2) to rottweilers.
• In 2007, Texas lead the nation in fatalities (7). Of these fatalities, 86% (6) were attributed to pit bulls.
• So far in 2008, Texas has suffered 2 fatalities, both of which are attributed to pit bulls.

Related articles:
08/22/08: Fort Hood, Texas U.S. Army Base Passes New Pit Bull Restriction
06/19/08: 2008 Fatality: Boy Killed by Pit Bull in Weslaco, Texas
05/19/08: 2008 Fatality: Boy Killed by Pit Bulls in Breckenridge, Texas

Labels: statistics, texas dog law

[dhm914]

wish folks would chain up or house there wandering cats, highly destructive to other folks property, the owners just allow them to raom, defecting , peeing and scratching on other folks property. pets are a real pest when allowed off owners property.

my solution is kill any animal that wanders off the property . that would make owners more responsible, or at least rapidly end there irresponsible ownership fast.

with the right to own a pet comes reposnibility to control it at ALL times. Unfortunatly too many pet onwers disregard their neighbors property and allow their animals to roam and cuase destruction.

[palmer]

With their chosen breeds, they were taking additional risks.

The primary risk is the owner, not the dog. Irresponsible people should not be allowed to have dogs of any breed without some sort of training, licensing or supervision.

[palmer]

wish folks would chain up or house there wandering cats, highly destructive to other folks property, the owners just allow them to raom, defecting , peeing and scratching on other folks property. pets are a real pest when allowed off owners property.

There's two things I do about that, get my cats neutered so they don't roam looking for sex, and I live on 5 acres (10 if you count the empty lot next to me). Otherwise my cats could be a problem like you say.

[Badabing Badablonde]

All of the gun-owners I know go above and beyond the call of duty in assuring that their guns, ammo, and all that that entails (sorry, I’m no gun owner so that’s as much as I know) is locked, secure, registered, in good working order. Responsible gun owners......I never feel unsafe in their homes.

Does the typical owner of a pit bull exercise such overkill of responsibility? If they did, I would think that the dog would be muzzled, chained, etc. at all times unless the owner personally is handling it. \

Just my observation.

[oldenuff2no]

I agree with you. I've stated my reasons at length in the past right here. Someone please inform me what it is these dogs can do that another more predictable breed can not. Why not own a Lab, or a German Shepherd. Whey would a person chose to own the breed of dog that is responsible for more child deaths and attacks than any other dog breed?
Would you own a firearm that was known to malfunction on a regular basis, or a car that was known to instantly turn right at unknown and unpredictable intervals? There is not reason to own these dogs. There is no reason for the rest of us to put up with neighbors who choose to keep these time bombs. This breed of dog has been bred to bite and fight. It is an on-board instinct that they are born with. It will always be present in these dogs. No owner or trainer is capable of taking an instinct out of any dog. There is no legal dog fighting in this country so there is no reason for Pit Bulls to be allowed in this country. If a Pit Bull attacks in an unwarranted manner, the owner should be treated as if they themselves had perpetrated the attack with premeditation. If you choose to own and maintain a Pit Bull and it attacks and kills a child it is not an accident. You, the owner, made a choice to maintain an unpredictable weapon and then failed to prevent the attack. You made the choice so you should be guilty of premeditated homicide or at the very least reckless negligent homicide. After one of these dogs kills or maims a child you always hear about the dog owner saying that they didn't know their Pit could harm anyone and how gentile and loving their dog is. All of this does not bring that kid back to health or life. These dog owners have been told time after time exactly what their dogs have been bred to do. The dogs actions have been predicted. The dog owners have refused to listen in fact they will almost always argue with the facts and national statistics, but they have been told, informed. From that point forward they must be held criminally responsible for their dogs actions. The charge should be homicide.

[gleeaikin]

My son’s wife, and consequently my son owned pit bulls. They were always well behaved when I was around, but I was always nervous for the grandchildren. For a while they lived in a rather dangerous neighborhood for lack of money, and I felt they were safer having the dog(s). One day when the people were away, the dogs got into a dominance battle, and they had a $1,000 vet bill. My son complained that when he took the dog(s) for a walk, always on a leash, there frequently were people whose dogs were unleashed. He always had to warn them to keep their dogs away, as pit bulls were bred to kill other dogs.

Before he was married my son and a friend rented my income apartment. His friend had a 7 month pit bull and a small alligator. They would put the dog in the bathroom when they were at work. It ate the bottom off the door and I had to replace it. When I visited, the dog was very affectionate. He would lie on the couch and put his head in my lap and beam at me with his tail going thump, thump. Later when my son was married, at least one of their dogs would snuggle against me on the couch.

I am not a dog person, although I will be kind and friendly to one if it is around. I prefer the independent cat. This is all I know about pit bulls from personal experience.

[old and cranky]

I agree that dogs can find ways out, we have had our get out a couple of times, several years ago, but we fixed the problem and chased them down immediately. We have a HUGE problem of dogs running loose in our neighborhood, ours haven’t in years. I keep my dogs contained (black lab, lab/britany mix and a german shephard), wish others would do the same...and they can if they want to.

[Boston Blackie]

Hodges said responding lawmen had to shoot two of the dogs to protect themselves; the other two were captured and euthanized.

The owners should have suffered the same punishment as their dogs.

[Above My Pay Grade]

I disagree. It is manslaughter and I think the 7 years is more or less fair.

Murder requires an intent to kill. The couple was reckless and their recklessness lead to the death of a child. They deserve to be punished, but not as harshly as if they had ordered the dogs to attack the child, or had otherwise intentionally killed the child.

[caseinpoint]

These folks are lucky the old Code of Hammarabi isn’t still in force. Had it been, instead of going to jail, they would have had to deliver up one of their kids for execution.