West Seattle Blog...

WSB Forum » Open Discussion

1. enginerd
   Member Profile

   My wife just had a scary incident dropping our youngest son off at daycare. After she had pulled her van up to the curb, one of the other parents waved to her and motioned for her to stay in the car. Just then, a loose pitbull dog at the sidewalk began barking at them from just outside the car, basically trapping them inside. After a minute or two of this, the dog continued on down the street. She was able to get our youngest son into the daycare and was coming back to the van when she and my oldest son saw the dog directly across the street. The dog noticed them and followed their movements from across the street, even keeping pace after my wife told my son to "run" for the van. The dog never crossed back to come after them, but it certainly was a dramatic moment, especially for a 5-year old. The other parent told my wife that he would be calling the authorities regarding the loose dog, but if anyone knows the owner of the animal, could you please inform them that their dog is menacing a daycare facility of all things. The incident occured between Holden and Webster on 32nd.

   Posted 1 year ago #         

2. hammerhead
   Member Profile

   

   you need to report this to animal control NOW

   Posted 1 year ago #         

3. kellym
   Member Profile

   I can't say with 100% certainty but I do know that one day late summer I was out on my parking strip(I live on that block) and several pitbull puppies came bounding across the street from a white house. I hear a lot of barking from there time to time so that may be the source.

   Posted 1 year ago #         

4. enginerd
   Member Profile

   kellym, any chance you could provide the last two digits of the address of the white house?

   Posted 1 year ago #         

5. kellym
   Member Profile

   I can look tonight when i get home....but another hint is it's on the West side of the street and the only white house on the block with a double lot.

   Posted 1 year ago #         

6. enginerd
   Member Profile

   Thanks Kelly,
   Your description is very useful, just checked out Zillow and I think I found the house and address and will call it in.

   Posted 1 year ago #         

7. furryfaces
   Member Profile

   Yes...call Seattle Animal Shelter immediately...if you haven't yet done so. Here are the contacts:
   Request a service, file a complaint or for information:

   Don Baxter, Enforcement Supervisor
   donald.baxter@seattle.gov
   (206) 386-4289

   Ann Graves, Enforcement Supervisor
   ann.graves@seattle.gov
   (206) 386-4288

   http://www.seattle.gov/animalshelter/contact.htm

   Posted 1 year ago #         

8. wsmom02
   Member Profile

   Thank you for taking action on this! I walk around this area a lot with my kids. How scary!!

   Posted 1 year ago #         

9. JoB
   Member Profile

   it's a good idea to report any unattended dog...
   and always wise to be prudent around any strange dog..

   but let's not over-react.

   had the barking dog been a cute little poodle instead of a pitbull...
   this would be a non-story.

   Posted 1 year ago #         

10. yeah-me
    Member Profile

    

    But a cute little poodle probably can't maim or kill the woman's five year old son.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

11. kellym
    Member Profile

    Well if it is the same dogs, they are no longer little or particularly cute. To small/young kids any dog running after them and barking can be scary and potentially ruin the whole dog experience for them for many years. I'm not sure what constitues over-reacting here by reporting loose dogs?

    Posted 1 year ago #         

12. JoB
    Member Profile

    yeah-me...

    sad to say..
    but that cute little poodle can maim...
    and if given the right opportunity..
    could also kill.

    i have the cutest little shiba...
    people routinely reach out to pet him even when they have been told he is not friendly...

    appearances can be very deceiving.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

13. JoB
    Member Profile

    btw...

    for the parents following this topic ...

    it's not really a good idea to teach kids to run from dogs.

    If you watch dogs at play.. you will see them chasing after one another and nipping at heels and necks... at best...not a good thing for kids...

    unless the dog is contained by a fence or tethered.. they can easily outrun your child.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

14. enginerd
    Member Profile

    C'mon JoB... most people wouldn't think twice about walking right past a yappy little poodle. I would be hesitant to even be near an unattended pitbull even if they were rolling on their backs and wagging their tails.

    How can you accuse anyone of over-reacting when the fact is that an unattended dog of a species that is widely held to be violent and dangerous was behaving in violent manner in an unprovoked situation (rightly so or not, I am not in the minority in believing pitbulls are inherently dangerous animals, especially when on the loose and acting without supervision... "going wild" if you will).

    Posted 1 year ago #         

15. enginerd
    Member Profile

    But yes I agree, "running" from a dog could be a bad move.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

16. JoB
    Member Profile

    enginerd..

    i wasn't meaning to be critical of your family's reaction in any way... i understand that your wife and children were frightened by that dog.

    However.. i would caution people to be wary of all loose dogs.. no matter what size or shape ... and to report them to animal control.

    Even cute fuzzy little dogs can inflict real damage on children.

    Just because pitbulls became the dog of choice for owners who trained them to be vicious doesn't mean that they are a bad breed... it means that there were some really bad owners out there.

    for all you know.. that dog was a highly socialized animal who regularly plays with children and escaped from it's owner's yard to go look for kids to play with.

    A loose dog isn't necessarily "going wild".

    I wouldn't make any assumptions one way or the other unless i knew the dog and owner well... and even then i am cautious.

    i encounter unleashed and unattended dogs every time i walk my leashed dogs in local parks and have been bitten several times coming between someone's "friendly" dog and my dogs. The most vicious of those bites was from a small chihuahua cross breed.

    the "vicious" pitbull is the dog of choice in other societies to watch over small children while they play...

    it's all a matter of perception.

    the more information you have the safer your children will be in these kinds of situations.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

17. funkietoo
    Member Profile

    Based on the media and the way dog attacks are depicted, I can understand your fear.

    At the same time, I agee with Job on several of her points.

    1) assumptions = stereotypes = discrimination
    2)which leads to creating 'exceptions'. For example, a nice social bully breed dog is the 'exception' or 'all men with beards are bad drivers, and if one happens to be a good driver, they are the 'exception'(this is my dad's stereotype of men with beards)
    3) fear creates a scent the animals pick up on instantly and you have just lost the alpha position.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

18. JoB
    Member Profile

    funkitoo..

    do they pick up on the scent of fear?
    or simply react badly to humans giving them mixed body signals?

    dogs are the only animal that we have proven can accurately read human body signals... which is why we are able to communicate with and train them so easily...

    but that is a mixed blessing because humans who send dogs mixed body language signals make the dog anxious and fearful...
    which can lead to a bad end for everyone involved:(

    Posted 1 year ago #         

19. enginerd
    Member Profile

    Are we now defining whether a dog is generally perceived to be dangerous or not by assessing its disposition, the intentions of its owner or whether or not the breed has received a fair shake in the media?

    Hey guess what, that Great White Shark that swims up next to a surfer but does not attack them is the "exception" too, it doesn't change the perception that the shark is a vicious and dangerous animal.

    My suggestion for lessening the assumptions, stereotypes and discriminations.... stop owning dog breeds that kill or severly injure people or other dogs in unprovoked, vicious attacks.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

20. JoB
    Member Profile

    enginerd...

    when one dog breed is outlawed or policed more rigorously..
    those who turn dogs into vicious predators simply move on to a new breed.

    I have joyously shared my home with most of the "dangerous" breeds ... rottweilers, pitbulls, german shepherds, Akitas ... even an out of control mountain dog...
    many of them coming from really abusive situations...
    dogs people think should be banned or put down...

    but even the rescued fighting dogs were pussycats once they figured out someone cared.

    I have been a very lucky woman to have so many incredibly forgiving dogs love me.

    I am a lucky woman now sharing my home with the most abused and least socialized of them all... although you wouldn't know it when he decides it's time to snuggle ...
    and he barely tops 30 lobs.

    Public education and a little understanding are a start to lessen assumptions, stereotypes and discrimination...

    but what would go further is holding our neighbors accountable for obeying the animal welfare and control laws already on the books ...

    promoting fear doesn't make anyone safer.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

21. enginerd
    Member Profile

    JoB, I don't doubt you for an instant that your dogs have been "pussycats" with you and around you.

    Would you guarantee though that your formally abused and dangerous dogs would not cause anyone any harm if they were to be wandering the streets unsupervised (either by accident, error or negligence)?

    I guess my assumption is that as a domesticated animal, dogs have been bred over generations to inherit certain qualities, traits and personalities. Many people own various breeds in order to exploit these traits for whatever purpose, whether it be for work, defense, or dog fighting. Just because a particular dog does not display these traits explicitly, does not mean it does not lurk within its genetic code.

    I am not calling for a ban on certain breeds, just a little education and understanding that a dog breed that possesses sharp teeth, a powerful jaw and a known propensity to attack unprovoked and fight to the death is probably not the right animal to own in an urban environment.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

22. MAS
    Member Profile

    If it was truly a pitbull and not the boxer that roams that area, it's attacked me and my dog as well as at least one other dog (Amber's owner, you might want to chime in if you're reading this.) The owner lives in a small white house on the N side of Webster between 31st and 32nd and apparently doesn't like keeping his dog on a leash. The dog hurls itself at the fence hard enough to hurt itself every time I walk by and I expect based on the attacks I've witnessed - would be a danger to children.

    If it's the brindle boxer that lives on the opposite side of Webster, it seems harmless (again, based on observed behavior) but allowed to wander around the neighborhood, which will likely end tragically some day for the dog and the poor driver that accidentally hits it.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

23. JoB
    Member Profile

    enginerd..

    where do you get this stuff?

    "a dog breed that possesses sharp teeth, a powerful jaw and a known propensity to attack unprovoked and fight to the death"

    All dogs possess sharp teeth. All dogs will threaten to attack if sufficiently provoked... Most dogs have strong jaws. And except for a few rare cases... the fight to the death stuff is macho fiction.

    You asked if i would have guaranteed the dogs i rehabilitated wouldn't cause harm if they happened to be wandering around unattended?

    If you are asking about my current pup.. the answer is no. But he is such a sweet little cute thing that everyone wants to pet and hug him. I have trouble keeping people away from him.

    However, the greater answer to your question is that yes, I did trust those great big "aggressive" rehabilitated dogs out in public without a leash and i took them everywhere with me... even to rugby tournaments.

    They never as much as growled at another person.

    I trusted them unsupervised with my grandchildren when they were small.

    Some of them lived their whole lives with me. Some of them stayed long enough to trust humans again and found forever homes elsewhere.

    They were incredible companions with big hearts who would have done anything for people who treated them with kindness.

    I no longer walk any dog unleashed because I have learned how dangerous that can be... nor do i leave them unattended. They are either kenneled or with me.

    but there are an incredible number of dog owners who think the rules don't apply to them and put themselves, their dog and others at risk by not adequately controlling their dog's behavior.

    that says more about dog owners than about dogs...

    and that would apply to all dogs..
    not just the big scary ones who have gotten a bad rap in the press.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

24. hammerhead
    Member Profile

    

    FYI Sharks are NOT vicious they are doing what they are supposed to do. Humans are in THEIR oceans.

    Ok back to the subject. "Bully" breeds are always getting the bad rap. Look at the bullmastifs that "attacked" a 10 year old boy. The boy WENT over the fence into their territory, when he could have gone to the front door. So guess who gets to suffer the dogs. Still waiting to find out the plight of those dogs but they DO NOT deserve to KILLED.

    Job is right for the most part the bully breeds are bullied themselves. Oh don't blame the dog blame the HUMAN, they are the ones not being responsible for their dog. Even reporting it does not guarantee that the owner will be found or even fined.

    I understand everyone's fear. Even chihuahuas are aggressive and bite all the time you just don't hear about it.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

25. enginerd
    Member Profile

    JoB and Hammerhead... please reread my original post... I offered an account of a harrowing run-in with a canine of a breed widely perceived to be vicious, even deadly, if it ever attacks. Clearly the animal displayed behavior suggesting it may wish to harm my wife and children in a completely unprovoked attack. There were two main goals to the original post...1) to warn others in the area that a potentially dangerous dog was loose in the area, and 2) to ask if anyone knows of the dog so that the owners can be notified that their dog is loose. End of post.

    From that simple post, I was questioned as to whether I was "over-reacting" and that if it "had been a cute little poodle... this would be a non-story". On that point I agree, had it been a poodle I doubt anyone would care. But I disagree strongly about the over-reacting part. It is precisely because this was a pitbull acting in an aggressive manner that I thought it was important enough to alert my neighbors and ask for assistance.

    JoB, many of the points you raised are valid... not running from dogs, be wary of strange dogs, report all loose dogs, etc.... but on the point of whether I am over-reacting just because a pitbull was involved in this encounter, I respectfully disagree. Any animal that is loose in a neighborhood and behaving in an aggressive manner just a few feet from a daycare center is a matter of concern to many of my neighbors. The fact that this was pitbull may make the situation even more dangerous to some readers, and some not.

    Google "American Pitbull Terrier" and read any of the descriptions about the breed, and among the many praises of loyalty and obedience blah blah blah... you will surely see the words "powerful jaws" and "fight to the death"... perhaps my belief that the dogs are known to attack unprovoked is just urban legend though...

    Posted 1 year ago #         

26. DP
    Member Profile

    

    Some dog-bite statistics, as presented by a site called "Dog Bite Law."

    http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html

    Excerpts from the site:

    Merritt Clifton, editor of "Animal People," has conducted an unusually detailed study of dog bites from 1982 to the present. (Clifton, Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 to November 13, 2006;)

    Download the study in PDF format here:

    http://roominate.com/blogg/dog_attacks_1982_to_2006_clifton.pdf

    According to the Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes are responsible for 74% of attacks that were included in the study, 68% of the attacks upon children, 82% of the attacks upon adults, 65% of the deaths, and 68% of the maimings. In more than two-thirds of the cases included in the study, the life-threatening or fatal attack was apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal in question.

    In summarizing the dog-bite stats, Clifton states:

    If almost any other dog has a bad moment, someone may get bitten, but will not be maimed for life or killed, and the actuarial risk is accordingly reasonable. If a pit bull terrier or a Rottweiler has a bad moment, often someone is maimed or killed--and that has now created off-the-chart actuarial risk, for which the dogs as well as their victims are paying the price.

    Is the "Dog Bite Law" site biased? Maybe. The author of the report claims that he culled the statistics from newspaper clippings, but there's no way to check his numbers, and this is not, after all, a controlled study . . .

    Nevertheless, you don't need a controlled study to know that a pitbull can be a very dangerous animal — just like any other large breed. You also don't need a study to tell you that certain dog breeds have innate tendencies.

    It's no more a matter of conjecture, for example, that pit bulls exhibit a tendency for aggression (a trait for which they were originally bred) than it is a matter of conjecture that rat terriers will dig holes in your yard if the instinctive behavior is not "trained" out of them.

    Can a pit bull's in-bred aggression be overcome by a good, loving home? In most cases yes — especially where the owner is able to train and socialize the dog from puppyhood.

    Unfortunately, many people acquire pit bulls with the express intent of encouraging the dog's natural aggressive tendencies, and the result of this, not surprisingly, is a large percentage of aggressive individuals in the general pit bull population.

    So have pit bulls gotten a "bad rap" in the press, as their defenders claim? I don't think so. Instead, I think a lot of pit bulls are just doing what comes naturally to them — and doing what many irresponsible owners want them to do, in fact — by being aggressive.

    At this point, I'm not for an outright ban on the breed. But I would support stricter licensing requirements, requirements that include specialized training courses and an insurance policy at a minimum.

    Finally, I think it's pretty specious to compare a chihuahua bite to a pit bull bite. I mean . . . that's just ridiculous on the face of it. JoB's account notwithstanding, when's the last time anyone read in the papers about a chihuahua maiming someone? Clifton's report doesn't list a single instance of that in a 24-year period. Yet, in that same period, there were 608 maimings and 104 deaths caused by pit bull terriers.

    For the record, the next bitingest breeds behind pit bulls were:

    Rottweilers: 223 maimings and 58 deaths
    Akita: 39 and 1
    German Shepherd: 38 and 7
    Chow: 32 and 6

    (I am sorry to report that Wheaten terriers also made the list, with a single maiming. But I suspect that was really just a misunderstanding.)

    Posted 1 year ago #         

27. abstract
    Member Profile

    This post is turning into a ridiculous post. I feel bad for enginerd, his wife, and child. I hope animal control will follow up and find this dog. I am not a fan of vicious dogs, pit bulls or poodles. The fact is that pit bulls can cause damage quickly, toy poodles can't. I wish the city would require a license to own these types of dogs.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

28. Lucian
    Member Profile

    

    @27 No kidding! Makes people not want to even post.

    Thanks for ruining yet another thread official WSB Forum Scold..

    Posted 1 year ago #         

29. JoB
    Member Profile

    DP..

    "The author of the report claims that he culled the statistics from newspaper clippings, "

    enough said.

    Lucien...

    not scolding.. educating.

    i agree completely that loose dogs are a problem... but would have everyone be wary of any loose dog.. not just pitbulls.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

30. DP
    Member Profile

    

    Here's the relative order of weight to give to purported evidence about dog breeds:

    Most weight: Scientific, controlled studies
    Less weight: Items culled from newspaper reports
    Least weight: Personal anecdotes about chihuahua's being more dangerous than pit bulls

    Did you even read the man's report or look at his Web page, JoB? It's pretty well put together.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

31. DP
    Member Profile

    

    Also, I question this notion of the "responsible" versus the "irresponsible" pit bull owner. I don't think you can make such a distinction without considering the characteristics of the breed.

    Let's consider two pit bull owners. Both are basically good people, but they have very different ideas of what a pit bull is for:

    Owner A (we'll call him "Butch") considers his dog to be a kind of live-in security guard. He lets the dog run free in the back yard and encourages it to attack anyone who trespasses on his property. Butch doesn't maltreat his dog in any way, but he does take advantage of the dog's power and naturally aggressive instincts to keep people off his property.

    Owner B ("Sarah") rescues her pit bull from a shelter, treats it with kindness, and tries her best to socialize it, with apparent success. One day, however, while Sarah is playing with her dog in an off-leash area, it attacks and severely mauls a smaller dog.

    Of these two pit bull owners, Butch and Sarah, who is really the "irresponsible" one?

    Posted 1 year ago #         

32. yeah-me
    Member Profile

    

    I find it so irritating that people always toss out the argument that it is the owner not the dog.

    I have a Aussie-cross. I can't stop her from herding the cats and myself around the house. Herding is what she was bred to do.

    I used to own a Springer Spaniel -- the goofball would chase a rock if I accidentally kicked one down the sidewalk. He slept with is tennis ball his entire life. Fetching is what he was bred to do.

    Many, many years ago I owned a Pit Bull. It attacked and killed a neighbors goat. It then attacked our pony. Fighting is what he was bred to do.

    Someone can be the best intentioned owner in the world, but still not be able to overcome the fundamental breeding of a fighting dog.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

33. JoB
    Member Profile

    DP..

    yes, i did look at his site.

    i also looked at several others and there is no question that maiming and killing attacks by pitbulls and associated breeds far outnumber those of other breeds.

    however, those stats don't tell the whole story.

    most dog attacks happen on the owner's property..
    most victims are friends/family of the owner.

    the public perception of marauding dogs randomly attacking children on the street is nothing more than sensationalism created by the news media.

    if you go beyond that and look at owner profiles of dog owners whose animals are involved in killing/maiming incidents it gets even more interesting...

    they fall mainly into two groups...

    those who chose the dog breed either for it's perceived capacity for violence

    and those who chose the dog breed for it's perceived watchdog characteristics and keep the dog mainly isolated from it's family..

    This is an owner problem.. not a breed problem..

    if you are interested in scientific controlled studies here is a site that has all kinds of interesting information about dog bites and links to many quality studies on the subject...

    http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html

    of course, this is a legal site so the focus here is on stats that prove liability... but it still makes for some pretty interesting reading.

    " * The median age of patients bitten was 15 years, with children, especially boys aged 5 to 9 years, having the highest incidence rate
    * The odds that a bite victim will be a child are 3.2 to 1. (CDC.)
    * Children seen in emergency departments were more likely than older persons to be bitten on the face, neck, and head. 77% of injuries to children under 10 years old are facial.
    * Severe injuries occur almost exclusively in children less than 10 years of age.
    * The majority of dog attacks (61%) happen at home or in a familiar place.
    * The vast majority of biting dogs (77%) belong to the victim's family or a friend.
    * When a child less than 4 years old is the victim, the family dog was the attacker half the time (47%), and the attack almost always happened in the family home (90%). "

    from the same site...

    "In Canine homicides and the dog bite epidemic: do not confuse them, it has been pointed out that the dog bite epidemic as a whole involves all dogs and all dog owners, not just the breeds most likely to kill.

    In all fairness, therefore, it must be noted that:

    * Any dog, treated harshly or trained to attack, may bite a person. Any dog can be turned into a dangerous dog. The owner or handler most often is responsible for making a dog into something dangerous.

    * An irresponsible owner or dog handler might create a situation that places another person in danger by a dog, without the dog itself being dangerous, as in the case of the Pomeranian that killed the infant (see above).

    * Any individual dog may be a good, loving pet, even though its breed is considered to be potentially dangerous. A responsible owner can win the love and respect of a dog, no matter its breed. One cannot look at an individual dog, recognize its breed, and then state whether or not it is going to attack"

    The point is simple. while including the breed of the dog in the headline creates more readers.. it is not the most important information.

    I think the post with the most actual information in this topic was posted by MAS... who states that although there is a pitbull that does roam the area and has been known to attack dog walkers... there is also a brindle boxer who is often loose on the same street.

    Of the two dogs known to be loose in the neighborhood... the event described by enginerd seems more likely to be a contact with the brindle boxer than with the pit bull.. which by the way does NOT make it any less serious...

    and that was the point i was trying to make.

    which leads me to a last link from that same site..

    http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/prevent.html

    this link offers some surprisingly useful information about dog bite prevention.

    LOL.. i just realized that after all that reading we ended up citing the same website but found entirely different information on it...

    perhaps i should have asked if you actually read the site?
    ;->

    Posted 1 year ago #         

34. JoB
    Member Profile

    enginerd...

    i am truly sorry your wife and child were frightened and am glad that you posted so that other parents and the preschool can be aware of the problem.

    This kind of exposure is likely to be more effective than individual complaints about loose dogs in the area.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

35. JoB
    Member Profile

    Yeah-me...

    i will admit that people often choose a dog for it's breed characteristics and then are surprised when the dog exhibits them...

    woe be unto the squirrel or rat or possum or mole or cat that finds itself hunted in my yard since i have a couple of the best hunters i have ever seen...

    but the story you tell about your pitbull sounds more like an aberration than a breed characteristic.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

36. JoB
    Member Profile

    DP..

    a dog attack in either of the scenarios you mentioned is a tragedy.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

37. Hydrangea
    Member Profile

    JoB, I have some comments for you.

    Regarding your statement, "the public perception of marauding dogs randomly attacking children on the street is nothing more than sensationalism created by the news media": my husband was severely bitten by an unknown pit bull while running through the park by Delridge Community Center last May. He had no connection whatsoever to the dog's owner, and did nothing to provoke the dog. He merely passed within a few feet of it.

    Other people have posted to these forums in recent months with similar experiences.

    Regarding your comment, "but the story you tell about your pitbull sounds more like an aberration than a breed characteristic": One of the receptionists at the Swedish Hospital Emergency room told us that she had a pit bill she lovingly raised from puppyhood, only to have it bite a chunk out of the leg of a person visiting her home, also with no provocation.

    I can't understand why you won't let this drop. Not every pit bull is dangerous, but many of them are, and they can turn vicious with no warning. There is no need to keep defending them.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

38. DP
    Member Profile

    

    JoB: Your first link is the exact same page I cited to you before. The exact same page!

    Frankly, I don't see what the hell difference it makes whether the kid maimed or killed is a family member of the dog or not. And what the hell difference does it make if it happens indoors or outdoors, in a yard or on the street?

    If anything, the fact that a pit bull would severaly maul a family member just proves that the breed is inherently dangerous and that the aggression simply CAN'T be trained out of it.

    So why do you talk about Pomeranians and chihuahuas? Sure, there are some bad Pomeranians (or Pomeranian owners) out there. Sure, a few kids will get mauled by Pomeranians. But even if Poms turned out to have ten times the aggression of pit bulls, many, many more kids will get mauled (and killed) by pit bulls than by Pomeranians.

    Tell me, do you attribute that statistical difference solely to "owner irresponsibility"?

    It's simple, JoB: Pit bulls kill more people than Poms because pit bulls are much bigger, stronger dogs. And they have more than enough natural aggression in them to make that difference in size and strength matter.

    As far as the issue of "pit bulls running loose," I'm with you on that. There's no more need to panic over a pit bull being loose than to panic over any other large dog being loose. But the real issue here, as I see it, is this idea of how much owner responsiblity even matters when it comes to naturally aggressive breeds.

    In any case, voluntary responsibility does not seem to be something we can rely on when it comes to pit bulls. So I think we're going to have to legislate it.

    Special training and licensing requirements for pit bulls. That's all I'm saying.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

39. JoB
    Member Profile

    hydrangea...

    i was badly bitten by a german shepherd within a block of my home riding a bike and a german shepherd was sicced on me and my dogs in Lincoln Park by it's owner... should we all fear german shepherds?

    i was badly bitten trying to keep an unleashed Chihuahua away from my dogs so it would get killed by them in a local park... should we all fear chihuahuas?

    One of the kids in our family was bitten in the face barely missing an eye by a dachshund .. should we all fear dachshunds?

    the point is that singling out any one dog breed as the cause for fear ignores the danger posed by all dogs.

    I can't understand why there is so much resistance to singling out the owners that allow their dogs to run off leash but none at all to singling out a breed of dog to label vicious.

    maybe it's just easier to blame the dog?

    Posted 1 year ago #         

40. Que
    Member Profile

    I think that we can all agree that irresponsible dog ownership (which can take a multitude of forms) is lousy for everyone. It is lousy for the community, it is lousy for the dogs, everyone.

    However there are breeds that require higher levels of owner responsiblity to maintain canine domesticated civility. There are also breeds for which there are greater ramifications for the lack of owner responsiblity. While we can all be injured by a Chiahuahua who has been poorly trained and not well socialized, the ramifications are less. Powerful dogs of all stripes require dilligent owners who are attentive to their emotional and training needs.

    That being said, I totally feel for Enginerd's wife and child and how frightening that experience was. I think that this thread has been totally highjacked by the breed discussion and has forgotten about how this was originally about a scared mom and little kid. It makes me sad.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

41. JoB
    Member Profile

    Que..

    i wish we all agreed that irresponsible dog ownership is lousy for everyone but caution you not to test that hypothesis on the forum by posting about unleashed or unsupervised dogs.. not to mention roaming cats... or you will quickly find that we don't all agree.

    I agree completely with you that there are dogs that require higher levels of owner responsibility..
    but those dogs don't always come in the large packages we would expect.

    Nor are those small packages necessarily any less dangerous. A Pomeranian was responsible for the death of a child and they don't come much smaller than that.

    We have become so focused in this society on individual rights that somehow the responsibilities that come with those rights have been shuffled to the side.

    Behind the dog that might have been a pitbull and might have been dangerous but that definately frightened the women and children at that pre-school is an owner who has not contained their dog successfully with a leash or a kennel or a well fenced yard.

    Accidents happen to even the most diligent dog owner... but posts report a history of both a pitbull and a brindle boxer running free in that neighborhood. That points to irresponsible owners.

    Do dogs of all shapes and sizes routinely run free in that neighborhood? Who knows?

    We only hear about the "frightening" or lost ones.

    What has apparently been lost in my posts by those who see this as only a breed issue is my concern for all moms and kids who are harassed and frightened by all unsupervised and untrained dogs.

    This is an excellent opportunity to galvanize public support behind reporting all loose and unleashed dogs to animal control... making not only Enginerd's family but all families in West Seattle safer.

    Instead we get post after post of why pitbulls are an inherently dangerous breed by people who for the most part know little more about them than what they read.

    I too am saddened by the response to this topic...
    not because i am saddened that so many people believe pitbulls to be a dangerous breed...
    but because so many people would rather blame a breed of dogs for what is essentially a human behavior problem than address the human behavior that created the problem.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

42. JoB
    Member Profile

    DP..

    you apparently discount the human responsibility involved in choosing a designer breed for it's macho potential and ignoring it's socialization needs...

    or the human responsibility involved in teaching a dog to attack and thinking that it will only attack strangers...

    or the human responsibility involved in training your dog using dominance techniques and not understanding that that while that kind of training might make your dog subservient to you it will also make it dominant towards others...

    or the human responsibility involved in substituting a dog pack for including your dog in your human pack...

    or...

    need i go on?

    Posted 1 year ago #         

43. Lucian
    Member Profile

    

    Interesting.. Kind of like the human responsibility to not completely dominate community forums and always have the last word.

    http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/298096

    Posted 1 year ago #         

44. JanS
    Member Profile

    

    Lucian...getting personal on here is verboten...just a heads up. Speak about the topic, not the poster, please. It adds nothing.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

45. JoB
    Member Profile

    Lucien...

    this is the second inappropriate comment from you about someone i am pretty sure you don't know well enough to be calling names.

    all you have to do to ensure that the poster in question never irritates you with their comments is hit the ignore button. you will find it under their last post.

    voila! they will instantly disappear for you...

    so far..i have used it only twice and for a limited time..
    but i can assure you it was exceedingly effective...

    Posted 1 year ago #         

46. TammiWS
    Member Profile

    

    Sorry Enginerd your post got sidelined. I hope your family is okay.

    As a side note, this happens so often on this forum its getting really sad and quite predictable.

    Conversations DO get dominated by a few, many get fed up, someone calls it out and then the post gets shut down for the call out rather than addressing the problem many of us have with certain folks dominating so many posts, on every topic under the sun.

    And, what is often described as educating us on the forum doesnt always come off that way. It comes off condescending and ultimately argumentative.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

47. kellym
    Member Profile

    For me it has gotten old I am tired of being "schooled" on nearly every subject. I will return to the blog for the front page news only. Enginerd hope you get some closure with authorities on this. Good luck and maybe by chance when you are on your daycare run we will meet as I love just a few houses away....

    Posted 1 year ago #         

48. mirabile
    Member Profile

    

    I think debate is healthy as long as it's conducted within a respectful environment. This is a hot topic and since it affects our and our children's safety, it's easy for the discussion to escalate into something uglier.

    That said, I'm really impressed with the level of research that I've observed on both sides of the argument. When everyone works together, I've seen this group of people make actual, quantifiable differences (remember the KFC flag). That's impressive.

    So what I'm most concerned with is the outcome of enginerd's call to Animal Control.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

49. waterworld
    Member Profile

    

    JoB: Earlier you said that you could not understand why there is so much resistance to singling out the owners who allow their dogs to run off leash, and accused DO of discounting various levels of human responsibility for dogs' behavior. In reading the many posts here, though I don't see that; rather I see people saying that one of the reasons -- not the only reason -- why people react the way they do to attacks by pit bulls and certain other breeds is that these breeds are associated with a higher likelihood of causing injury. Responsible ownership may make all the difference, but associating certain breeds with a potential for harm is not a fantasy.

    One thing I think is important to note (or re-note) is that dogbitelaw.com is written by a lawyer who represents exclusively victims of dog bites. I would not assume that his site is unbiased. I went back over to the Centers for Disease Control site, and pulled one article entitled "Breeds of Dogs Involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 to 1996." You can find it here:

    http://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/images/dogbreeds-a.pdf

    It's an interesting report. The data reveals that pit bulls and Rottweilers account for the majority of dog related deaths over a twenty-year period. Further, the CDC reports that more than half of the fatalities in a twenty-year period occurred off the owner's property, not on it. (Perhaps the trend goes the other way when injury-only cases are factored in.)

    These statistics are unreliable for certain purposes, which the CDC acknowledges. For one thing, there is no good way to quantify the risk that a breed poses. Risk analysis requires comparison of the number of injuries/fatalities caused by a breed to the total population of that breed, and we don't have the latter information. Also, data collection has been erratic, and an attack by a breed commonly believed to be dangerous is perhaps more likely to be documented.

    That said, the data is useful for making some general observations. For example, the discrepancy between the numbers of fatalities related to attacks by pit bulls and Rottweilers and the number caused by any other breed associated with a fatality, is so large that one of two things must be true: either (a) pit bulls and Rottweilers pose a greater risk of death than the other listed breeds, or (b) the population of pit bulls and Rottweilers is a large multiple of the population of any of those other breeds. (By large multiple, I mean a multiple of at least 5 or 6, meaning that if the risk of fatality is equal between pit bulls & rottweilers and husky-type dogs, then there must be six times the number of pit bulls & rottweilers in the nation than there are husky-type dogs.)

    All I'm getting at is that it is not non-sensical that people are more concerned that a pit bull or Rottweiler might harm them or their children. That's not blaming the breed, as you suggest, because none of this tells you why the attacks or fatalities happened. Maybe it's thousands of years of selective breeding, maybe it's owner irresponsibility, maybe it's both, maybe it's neither. The numbers don't tell the whole story, but they do tell a story.

    Posted 1 year ago #         

50. thee
    Member Profile

    

    forum bossy-bosses are bossy!

    Posted 1 year ago #         

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.