Alberta Woman Killed By Her Own Dog

[1899b]

Originally Posted by roper1

Yessir, I still like your chances with 2 cockers turning on you, 2 of the other ones what do you want on your headstone?

Agreed sir.....

[Ken07AOVette]

Originally Posted by britman101

And this is where the problem starts, in my opinion. Once you have a dog that likes to scrap and fight you have a problem. For the dog owner you now have a four legged time bomb. The dog likes fighting and all it takes is for that trigger to set it off and the end result could be ugly.

I agree
The time bomb is always there, it doesn't magically turn back into a fluffy cuddly kitty when the blood is done dripping of it's face.

[EZM]

Originally Posted by MK2750

Just use a little imagination.

It's a beautiful day and buddy (we will call him teacher) is walking arm and arm with his girlfriend in the park. Of course his well behaved Pit Bull is walking calmly at heel. He's capable of putting down a German Shepard in less than a minute, but we will get to that.

Buddy number two enters the scene and thinks he should try to intimidate this nice couple and their dog. He's had this death wish for most of his life but in all his worldly travels he had yet to encounter anyone so ruthless and dangerous as teacher and his dog.

As a show of intimidation he has his German Shepard jump up on the unsuspecting lady of the couple. With Pit Bull still calmly at heel teacher shouts a warning "Control your dog or I will release the Kraken....I mean Pit Bull and he will mutilate your pathetic animal!"

But death wish buddy fails to heed the warning! Teacher looks to his side where Pit Bull is waiting and with one flick of the wrist the wrath of Pit Bull is unleashed.

Although untold, the rest of the story is easy to envision. With a snap of his fingers, teacher ends the vicious assault,,, but it is too late. Death wish buddy realizing the error of his ways now kneels beside his fallen comrade whimpering.

The young lady rushes into teacher's arms "Thank God you were here teacher!"

"No, no, thank Pit Bull my dear, thank Pit Bull." and the threesome walk off into the forest.

I don't know what is hard to understand here. This type of thing happens all the time in rural Alberta farmland only usually with a lot more Bull and not as much Pit.

A masterpiece MK, pure poetry. I was thinking the exact same thing ....

First the story was a dog jumping up upon his girlfriend - and with a snap of his fingers the teacher unleashed death upon the german shepherd - or was it actually a mauling - which, once again, here's the teacher calmly issuing ultimatums to the other handler as his girlfriend is rolling on the ground fighting for her life.

Makes for a great story either way - both equally funny.

LOL

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by pikergolf

Having reread my post I would like to apologize for being overly opinionated and rude..

That being said, you said nothing of mauling, but that the other dog was jumping up on his girl friend. That is not mauling in my mind, but I was not there. If it was not a mauling there is no excuse for him turning his pit bull loose.

In my opinion, people looking for trouble usually find it.

No problem.

I probably didn't make it very clear; but it was told to me quite some time ago, and I'm not sure how bad it was because I wasn't there.

They sure do...

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by MK2750

Are you for real? If everyone killed every dog that jumped up on them, there would be dead dogs all over the place.

The problem dog is the one that kills in case you are somehow in doubt, but I don't think any of the guard breeds are ideal house pets with children. The herding breeds like to bite instinctively as well and would actually be low on my want list as a house pet too.

Let's pretend that fighting dogs and attack type dogs are indeed intelligent, easy to train and are good pets when well looked after. How many people fail at training the most eager to please animal on the planet, the Labrador Retriever??? 20%, 50% 75%???

Screw up training your retriever and you lose a duck, miss a flush, have a little mess on the floor, maybe a few holes in the back yard, chewed up shoe or maybe some damaged furniture. This happens to like, nearly everybody??We all know what happens when an owner screws up an animal whose instinct is to attack and protect.

Not sure how aggressive the jumping or whatever it should be called was, but I have no problem with peoples "attack dogs" being put down. Sounds like the dog was somewhat weaponized and in the hands of the wrong person.

From what I could gather, the problem was resolved before it could be found out how bad it was going to get.

Actually GR score lower on behavioural scores as scored by kennel clubs, than Staffordshire Terriers.

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by Big Sky

This is amazing!
What was the final outcome?
Did the GS owner report the incident? I would think that people would report having their dog killed by another dog.

Where and when was this? Is there a news report?

Not sure. It happened probably close to 3 decades ago; I believe around Vancouver. Could be wrong about location.

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by MK2750

Just use a little imagination.

It's a beautiful day and buddy (we will call him teacher) is walking arm and arm with his girlfriend in the park. Of course his well behaved Pit Bull is walking calmly at heel. He's capable of putting down a German Shepard in less than a minute, but we will get to that.

Buddy number two enters the scene and thinks he should try to intimidate this nice couple and their dog. He's had this death wish for most of his life but in all his worldly travels he had yet to encounter anyone so ruthless and dangerous as teacher and his dog.

As a show of intimidation he has his German Shepard jump up on the unsuspecting lady of the couple. With Pit Bull still calmly at heel teacher shouts a warning "Control your dog or I will release the Kraken....I mean Pit Bull and he will mutilate your pathetic animal!"

But death wish buddy fails to heed the warning! Teacher looks to his side where Pit Bull is waiting and with one flick of the wrist the wrath of Pit Bull is unleashed.

Although untold, the rest of the story is easy to envision. With a snap of his fingers, teacher ends the vicious assault,,, but it is too late. Death wish buddy realizing the error of his ways now kneels beside his fallen comrade whimpering.

The young lady rushes into teacher's arms "Thank God you were here teacher!"

"No, no, thank Pit Bull my dear, thank Pit Bull." and the threesome walk off into the forest.

I don't know what is hard to understand here. This type of thing happens all the time in rural Alberta farmland only usually with a lot more Bull and not as much Pit.

Pretty cute. You came up with much more detail than I ever could have.

A confrontation with an aggressive ***** and his aggressive dog is probably pretty easy to armchair years later.

I couldn't predict exactly how any confrontation like that would play out, and probably nobody but the "pit bull" knew either.

Just thought I would share a story about a supposed bad breed that came to someone's rescue, and a "good breed" that wasn't.

Meant to respond to this before, but I just had to take a break from this forum...

[barsik]

while these dogs may be fantastic pets, once they have been triggered by whatever stimulus to attack they do not listen to stop commands. if they could be trained to cease attacking they may be suitable for companionship and protection. as they are now, they are something of a canine psychopath. I would not own one if I could not exert total control over it at all times. attack trained police dogs require the handler to go hands on to physically restrain these dogs once they are given a command in aggressive mode, and pit bulls seem to have less restraint when it comes to attack mode.

[wind drift]

Originally Posted by Skull Man

I once had the opinion that it was just how the dogs are trained. I came across a bull terrier this year that got loose from someone's yard and was running around our green space in Calgary. Being a dog owner myself, I went out to try and leash the dog to get the dog back to it's rightful owner, it was a beautiful dog and seemed to have good temperament. I got close a couple of times but a few rabbits in the area were significant distractions. On my last attempt I just missed capturing the dog and another small dog from a backyard that backs onto the green space started barking, well...this dog took off like a shot, charged the chain link fence, blew underneath the fence and had the smaller dog's (~50lbs) chest in it's jaws. Myself and two other good sized men pinned the bull terrier and had two guys trying to jump on it's jaw trying to get it to release. I could not believe the power those dogs have. It took nearly two minutes and a lot of blood together the dog to release. It was at that point that my opinions changed, with other other sporting dogs you may get a bite and it is bad, but with certain dogs, that have a genetic disposition to hang on at all costs.

You can have statistics on bites, but it is the difference in damage that should be measured. As with most things in life, the way you collect and analyze statistics can usually get you to an outcome that favours the result you desire.

For future reference, (I thought I would never have to use this, but I did), here is a video...and if you think the video is scary, in real life it's way worse.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TnVsm8Rae0k

For me, you’ve nailed it. The analysis must address the focal question. It’s not bites that should be the focus, but the damage. Fighting dogs are bred to do damage. Entirely different context than defensive bites. Funny how we happily go back and forth ad infinitum about hunting and fishing gear...debating on nuances about what makes an item the right tool for the job, but recognizing that we have successfully done a similar thing by creating special purpose dogs to do specific jobs is dismissed by defenders of fighting dog breeds. We bred them, by design. They are well-suited to the job. Unless you’re a dog fighter or need a dog to be an extension of personal force, what’s the purpose of owning a fighting dog?

[Grizzly Adams]

From Cuba. Felt sorry for the little mutt, then someone went to pet him. Almost cost him a hand.



Grizz

[ruffy71]

This always bogs down because of the idea of breed bans. We don't need breed bans. What we need is accountability. Unless sued, somebody can own a dog, the dog can kill somebody, and all the law can do is order the dog be put down.

Let's change that up. For starters we could insist on liability insurance for dog owners. For all the people that argue the statistics, insurance companies know a thing or two about statistics. I'll insure my lab, you insure your cane corso.

For people with more money than brains, we can also change the criminal code. Regardless of breed, you will be charged with misdemeanor assault up to manslaughter for first offense, up to second degree murder if your dog has a criminal record of violence.

Since dogs are no riskier than cars, insure your dog like a car. If your dog rips apart a person or another dog, not one red cent of my taxes should be spent helping the victims, you pay for it, or pay for insurance.

Since it is always the owner's fault and never the dog's, people should be charged criminally just as for any violent crime they would have committed with their own hands.

[vcmm]

Thread is 7 months old .[09-23-2018] We all must be really bored

[SuperCub]

Originally Posted by Skoaltender

How many people here would be comfortable raising a small child in a home with a Pitbull?

Not I.

I meet 100s of dogs each year whilst out with mine and I stay clear of pitbulls and rotis and carry a larger folding knife for an unexpected dog altercation.

[Weedy1]

Originally Posted by Skoaltender

How many people here would be comfortable raising a small child in a home with a Pitbull?

Pre or post menopausal?

[rem338win]

I'm tired of the ban and hate crew that knows diddly **** about dogs or breeds. If you think dog attacks are lessened by banning breeds I suggest you jump on the handgun/assault band wagon as well. The positions are the same and have the same defenses.

Coming from the camp of experience out weighing all but few here I don't fear "Pitbull" dogs and never will. I respect all of them.

The sensationalism of the ban a breed crowd is pathetic and shows a serious lack of intelligence in their fear mongering.

If you want to be scared of a dog, feel free, it's your choice. Don't try to justify your irrationality by labeling without cause. The media sensationalized the breed and still does because silly people eat it up.

[Twisted Canuck]

Ah, the 'anyone who sees things differently is a silly fear mongering idiot, because I am An Expert and I Know' argument. Very persuasive.

[270person]

Originally Posted by rem338win

Coming from the camp of experience out weighing all but few here

Pretty much the common theme in all of your posts isn't it?

[Twisted Canuck]

Originally Posted by 270person

Pretty much the common theme in all of your posts isn't it?

**bahzinga**.......

[MountainTi]

Originally Posted by 270person

Pretty much the common theme in all of your posts isn't it?

Perhaps he does actually know it all..

[Weedy1]

Originally Posted by rem338win

Coming from the camp of experience out weighing all but few here I don't fear "Pitbull" dogs and never will. I respect all of them.

Could you please explain your experiences with dogs. Were you perhaps a police dog trainer?

[ruffy71]

Originally Posted by rem338win

I'm tired of the ban and hate crew that knows diddly **** about dogs or breeds. If you think dog attacks are lessened by banning breeds I suggest you jump on the handgun/assault band wagon as well. The positions are the same and have the same defenses.

Coming from the camp of experience out weighing all but few here I don't fear "Pitbull" dogs and never will. I respect all of them.

The sensationalism of the ban a breed crowd is pathetic and shows a serious lack of intelligence in their fear mongering.

If you want to be scared of a dog, feel free, it's your choice. Don't try to justify your irrationality by labeling without cause. The media sensationalized the breed and still does because silly people eat it up.

So we won't ban any breed. We'll just hold owners accountable. If you know dogs this well, you can own a herd of pit bulls, and cane corsos and your knowledge and experience will ensure no other pets or people get hurt. For the people not so knowledgable, insurance the companies and the courts will treat you accordingly.

[whiteout]

Originally Posted by ruffy71

So we won't ban any breed. We'll just hold owners accountable. If you know dogs this well, you can own a herd of pit bulls, and cane corsos and your knowledge and experience will ensure no other pets or people get hurt. For the people not so knowledgable, insurance the companies and the courts will treat you accordingly.

Dog owners are already insured through their homeowners policies and are held accountable by the court through bylaws and fines.

What isn’t regulated is ****ty training, there are still people out there that think Caesar Milan is a good trainer and what he does is the best way to train a dog. Not to mention the people who have no idea how to properly interact with a dog, can’t read body language or insist on putting their dogs in stressful situations

As for breed bans, Ontario has pretty much shown that they don’t work. Ban pitbulls and watch your bite stats go up instead of down. Sure, bites attributed to pitbulls went down, but other breeds just took their place. That’s not even discussing the issues with bite attribution.

[ruffy71]

But the rules and punishments in place do not force anybody to consider consequences.

What choices would people make if the dog you purchase, your name is listed officially as the owner, and when it kills somebody, you are convicted of manslaughter or murder and you go to jail?

That is not how our legal system treats dog owners, but it should. Then we don't have to worry about breed bans, or trying for force people to go to training classes, or this regulation or that regulation. No, you do what you want, buy whatever you want, train, don't train, but if your dog bites, maims or kills, that is how the law will treat you. Things would change overnight.

"what are you in for?"

"my dog bit a kid at the park and put her in the hospital for a week" I got 8 years for aggravated assault."

Sounds about right.

[whiteout]

Originally Posted by ruffy71

But the rules and punishments in place do not force anybody to consider consequences.

What choices would people make if the dog you purchase, your name is listed officially as the owner, and when it kills somebody, you are convicted of manslaughter or murder and you go to jail?

That is not how our legal system treats dog owners, but it should. Then we don't have to worry about breed bans, or trying for force people to go to training classes, or this regulation or that regulation. No, you do what you want, buy whatever you want, train, don't train, but if your dog bites, maims or kills, that is how the law will treat you. Things would change overnight.

"what are you in for?"

"my dog bit a kid at the park and put her in the hospital for a week" I got 8 years for aggravated assault."

Sounds about right.

You won’t see that because it’s unreasonable and would basically require intent to be removed from consideration when charging. It’s would also mean ignoring all the factors that can be behind a bite and the fact that there is no one size fits all approach when it comes to dogs. If you say that if you don’t train your dog you’ll be liable for damage, then you need a standard to measure against. How do you define that standard?

Breed bans are stupid because they don’t address the issues, they don’t result in less bites and they are incredibly subjective. Not to mention when breed is determined when a bite happens, it’s based on appearance and judgement by the officer, not on actual medical evidence. So you introduce bias right off the bat and skew stats

[ruffy71]

I'm no legal expert, but intent is a very interesting concept.

If you drive recklessly at excessive speed and kill somebody, you don't intend to kill somebody, you could be incredibly remorseful for having killed somebody, but the law has a harsher treatment for you, not based on intent, but on obvious consequences of your actions. If you were driving 15 km under the speed limit, apply the breaks and hit a child that jumps out between cars, you are not charged at all. In neither case is there intent, but the law does distinguish between these two people.

Same if you drink and drive. Same if get into a fist fight, you punch a guy and he falls on a curb and cracks his skull. You didn't intend to kill him, but are you just going to be fined and your house insurance premiums might go up? I don't think so.

But if you buy a dog, and it tears somebody apart, you get fined, and the dog is killed. No jail time.

I guess it's lucky I'm not in charge, cause in my world, you'd go to jail.

[ruffy71]

As far as ignoring all the factors that go into bites... so what? So many different factors can go into any criminal act. I can kill somebody in greedy cold blood. I can kill somebody in self defense. I might have been speeding when I hit that child cause I was car jacked and the guy was holding a gun to my head.... whatever.

If you think your dog was justified in killing somebody, get a lawyer and you'll have your day in court. But just like anything else, if you lose, you go to jail.

[Trochu]

It's a bit tricky with animals, and not at all as clear cut as some think it should be IMO.

If John's horse jumps the fence, wanders onto the road, and wipes out the guy in the Civic, is John going to prison for murder as he owns the horse and it was his responsibility?

If I intentionally torment your dog till he bites me, should you be charged with assault?

If a vet gets kicked, can he sue for damages?

If someone ignores the no trespassing signs, cuts my fence, and enters my yard because they want to see my pet T-Rex, and it bites them, am I at fault?

If I'm walking my dog, on a leash, and someone approaches with their dog off leash, and I ask them to leash their dog as I'm training mine, and they completely ignore my requests and approach anyway with the 'ol "my dog is completely harmless, he wouldn't hurt anything", and my dog bites it, am I at fault?

Yes, these situations are fictitious, what single guy would drive a Civic right, but they are generally plausible situations that are not simple, yes/no judgement scenarios in my mind.

[ruffy71]

There are answers to every question you ask.

Lets take the dogs on leash. If you are in a public space, you could have the most vicious dog in the world, but if it is on a leash and under your control, then if the gentlest dog in the world is off leash and comes up to your dog and gets killed, you are not to blame. Your dog is on a leash, the other dog was not, and you are in a public space. Period.

For the vet, if he/she is asked to perform vet duties for which he or she is going to be paid, then no, they cannot sue you. Which is why they all carry disability insurance.

If a person comes on to your property, the law is on your side, but cases have built up to the point where you better think about posting a warning.

And on and on it goes. Yes there could be really grey cases, just like there is for any other type of crime you can think of. But in the end- so what?

Do we throw up our hands at having laws because there will always be exceptions? No

Even it is complicated, and would make things more expensive, again, I don't care. If a child was at a park, and your dog got out of it's yard and killed the child- would you be willing to walk up to that dad and explain that it's not always black and white, and his 6 year old didn't read your dog's body language correctly?

Now before you say, "that scenario would never happen...." Yeah it has, and it will happen again.... because people don't get sent to jail when it does.

[ruffy71]

I just realized that in my example somebody will site that "I had a normal fence and somehow my dog got out"

Well there is always a precedent somewhere. If you went to a zoo and the tiger got out and ate your child right in front of you, the court will want to know that the zoo did more than a reasonable job to keep the tiger in. It will look at the design of the fence, how it was maintained, etc etc etc.

If you have a large agile dog, and just a regular fence, the courts will look at that accordingly, and say "you should have known better". If you built a 16 foot high concrete fence, and there was suddenly an earthquake, and your fence crumbled before you could reasonably grab your dog, and it got out and killed a child, the court would look at that too.

No scenario can be presented that means we can't have much stiffer laws on the books holding owners responsible for what their pets do. It is long, long, long overdue.

[ruffy71]

Interesting, where I live in St. Albert, you can be fined now if you don't pick up your dog's crap. And so it should be. I love dogs and own one, but I would listen to a politician that wanted to introduce the lash for people that don't pick up their dog's crap. I'd seriously consider that idea.