Pit bull attack
elizabeth
angles are perfect doggies, and it's the bad owners that cause the
trouble. FAct is, when a pit attacks, YOU CAN'T STOP THEM, which makes
them inherently dangerous. The victim in this case will never be
normal, he'll have huge medical bills, will never be out of pain, and
the losers who had the pit bulls won't pay a penny of damage, and will
probably not even go to prison. Imagine if they themselves had done
the damage--it's multiple felonies. Since gun owners are held legally
responsible for misuse of their guns, and since a gun never ran off and
shot anyone, shouldn't all dog owners be held legally accountable and
criminally liable for anything their dogs do?
Pit bull owners are as worthless as the breeders of 2 legged vermin.
Spay and neuter pit bulls and their owners.
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/local/14839443.htm
Posted on Sat, Jun. 17, 2006email thisprint thisreprint or license this
Attack memory: 'Dogs were eating him alive' VIDEO
A woman recounts the horrors of her husband's encounter with pit
bulls.
By KEVIN HOFFMANN
The Kansas City Star
The dogs literally tore the skin away from Alan Hill's body and
showed no signs of stopping.
He tried fighting them with his hands. He tried choking them. But the
pit bulls dragged him through the vacant lot in Independence like a rag
doll. His only hope, he later told his wife, was to crawl underneath
his Jeep parked nearby. But the animals kept pulling him away.
"Those dogs were eating him alive," said Connie Hill, Alan's
wife. "He said they were just chewing his skin."
When the three animals stopped, Hill somehow climbed in his Jeep and
called 911. He told a dispatcher he was dying.
Now, more than a month after the May 4 attack on Hill and two other
men, Hill remains hospitalized. He may never fully recover.
Connie Hill and other family members spoke to reporters Friday for the
first time since the attack.
Hill was attacked as he finished mowing property he owns near 23rd
Street and Kings Highway. The same dogs later attacked a man walking
along 23rd Street and another man mowing a few blocks away. The other
men have been released from the hospital.
Hill's family said they hoped awareness of his injuries would help
officials in Independence and other area cities ban pit bulls and other
dogs that attack. The family plans to present a petition with more than
1,000 signatures Monday night when the Independence City Council
discusses the city's dangerous dog ordinance.
Overland Park leaders also are debating a ban against pit bulls, and
Lee's Summit is considering restrictions.
"I hope they ban them," Connie Hill said.
Many pit bull owners have called or written The Kansas City Star to say
the problem is not the breed, but negligent owners. Many said their
dogs were friendly and had never shown aggression. Other pit bull
supporters argue that all types of dogs bite people, but it is the pit
bull that attracts negative attention.
Kathy Castillo, Alan Hill's sister, pointed out a pit bull attack
that occurred Thursday in Independence during a fight between two men.
When police arrived, the pit bull charged the officer, who shot and
killed the dog, according to police.
Police found and destroyed the dogs that attacked Hill and the other
men.
Paul Piper, 43, faces 10 municipal charges, including three counts of
failure to control a dangerous dog.
Police think Piper and a woman were living with the dogs at a house
that was supposed to be vacant. Investigators searched the house and
found the dogs had trashed the inside and left feces.
That led authorities to believe Piper and the woman had left the dogs
there and they got loose.
Piper was to be in court Thursday, but the case was continued. He could
not be reached Friday for comment. Meanwhile, Alan Hill, 59, who lives
with his wife in Lee's Summit, remains on a feeding tube at Liberty
Hospital. Charles Beggs, trauma medical director, said Hill was
fortunate that he was in good health and a physically strong man before
the attacks.
"If that wasn't the case, he wouldn't have made it to the
hospital, he would have bled to death in the field," he said.
Hill, a developer, remained on the brink of death for several days
after arriving at the hospital unconscious and in shock.
Beggs could not say when Hill would be released. But when he is, he
will have a long rehabilitation, including the need to recover
psychologically.
Connie Hill says her husband cries often, does not want to be left
alone, and fails to see any progress in his recovery.
When he closes his eyes, she said, he still sees the dogs.
Another city considers ban
Add Lee's Summit to Overland Park and other cities talking about
banning pit bulls.
Councilman Ed Cockrell this week proposed in a committee meeting that
the breed be banned before the city has an incident.
Two other councilmen had mixed reactions. Ron Williams said people who
already own pit bulls that behave should be allowed to keep those dogs,
but he would accept a ban on pit bulls coming into the city. Randy
Rhoads said a ban might create a false sense of security, because other
breeds are capable of seriously injuring people.
City Administrator Steve Lewis said Lee's Summit had ordinances to
handle individually vicious dogs.
Steve
> I'm fucking sick of pit bull owners who all insist that their little
> angles are perfect doggies, and it's the bad owners that cause the
> trouble. FAct is, when a pit attacks, YOU CAN'T STOP THEM, which makes
>
> them inherently dangerous. The victim in this case will never be
Oh, I know. I once had a young friend in my teens whose parents and
teachers turned her into a raving, rabid fucking Nazi by the time she
made her way through graduate school. The city and police didn't do
anything about her even though she tried rather hard to cause my death.
Anyways, she set her vicious attack judge on my person with no
warning (and without cause), and while greviously wounded, I failed to
expire.
The law enforcement authorities are, for some entirely inexplicable
reason, entirely unwilling to put down her judge and charge her with a
variety of offenses. More importantly, they are unwilling to
investigate the violent history of her judge, thus ensuring that his
many previous violent attacks remain concealed.
Clearly there is a need to change the laws, and the profession. Every
day there are vicious dog and judge attacks all over the country, and
it is simply uncivilised to let it continue. Banning pit bulls or
judges is a knee-jerk solution with no practical efficacy. Much better
would be to regulate the puppy mills and judge farmers, and stipulate
dire penalties for dog and judge-owners who lose control of their pets.
Regards,
Steve
Winifred
I completely agree. Not only are the dogs too dangerous to control the
fact is that the reason the people who have them want them is usually
due to illicit dealings-illigal drug manufacturers, dealers ect.
N8N
It's clear that you have absolutely no experience with dogs. Pits are
generally very sweet-natured if raised correctly and their only fault,
if you can call it that, is that they are very protective of their
owners and owners' friends.
Or I suppose sitting in my cousin's living room with a lap full of
wiggling pit bull begging to have his belly scratched is just a figment
of my imagination.
nate
ObP: Knee jerk responses to problems that ought to be dealt with on an
individual level.
Steve
Yeah, but how much can you really pay a dog before he starts getting
ideas that are incompatible with his station in life?
> Or I suppose sitting in my cousin's living room with a lap full of
> wiggling pit bull begging to have his belly scratched is just a figment
> of my imagination.
It could be a figment of your imagination; you people have a propensity
for inventing situations to describe on Usenet that have some
congruency with information (instructions, suggestions, or other
things) that you wish to convey inside of a small window of
opportunity.
Regards,
Steve
David
On Sun, 18 Jun 2006, elizabeth wrote:
[snip stevet-worthy frothing]
Oh come on. A snippet from the article you quoted shows the problem:
> Police think Piper and a woman were living with the dogs at a house that
> was supposed to be vacant. Investigators searched the house and found
> the dogs had trashed the inside and left feces.
> That led authorities to believe Piper and the woman had left the dogs
> there and they got loose.
THAT is the problem: the dogs were unsupervised and *not raised right*.
Cute little Pomeranians, left like that, might well get vicious. And
when people treat their kids like that and the kids turn out badly we
don't see big crusades to ban human children, do we?
It might be that the answer is to phase out pitbulls as a pure breed,
or to purposefully breed them for docility, or perhaps (as people seem
to love the Nanny State) license and regulate breeding and owning them
and/or require their owners to carry insurance; I personally think the
problem is "Tough Guys" who try to cover their macho insecurities with
"Tough Dogs," i.e. limpdick dipshits who just ain't man enough to have
a cute little doggy who couldn't fight his way past an unweaned kitten
(and who'd rather make friends with it anyway), but then I have a plus-
sized penis so I don't need vicarious compensation.
As for the "owners" of the pitbulls in the article, I think they should
be horse-whipped. They sure didn't do the damn dogs any favors either.
Failing that, hey, remember Ted Bundy? He was a white guy from a middle-
class background -- who became a serial killer. Clearly by your "logic"
middle-class white people should be banned. OUTLAW HONKIES!
HTH,
TD
--
"You'd better understand that you're alone, a long way from home."
...................................................................
(C) 2006 TheDavid^TM | David, P.O. Box 21403, Louisville, KY 40221
David
[snip elizabeth's post, including stolen new article, that Winny quoted
entirely just to tack the following pithy observation to the bottom:]
> I completely agree. Not only are the dogs too dangerous to control the
> fact is that the reason the people who have them want them is usually
> due to illicit dealings-illigal drug manufacturers, dealers ect.
Leaving your bias against a whole breed (can you say "doggy racism"?),
I personally agree that _a lot_ of the problem is due to the kind of
people who choose to own certain breeds and what they want them for.
If *you* learned to EDIT your posts, to cut out everything that's not
directly relevant to what you're trying to say, I might think you're
not a total idiot.
D.
David
(Nate, did you HAVE to quote TWO entire posts to make a good point?
If I didn't mention that here I'd be being inconsistent; somebody might
accuse me of being bias in favor of people who are not total dimwits!)