- Pet forum for dogs cats and humans 


Pit Bull Death Refusal

October 15th, 2004, 11:55 AM
A Humane Society keeps a Pitt Bull in custody and refuses orders to put him down! :) This all came about after a child attack. For more go to the link below.

They did not give the full story on the attack but the owners gave up the dog and the society accepted full responsibility.

Beautiful dog - his fate will be decided today.

October 15th, 2004, 12:21 PM
I feel sorry for the poor dog..but whats the right answer in a case where a dog attacks a small child? Will he do it again? will he not? No one can predict the answer,not even someone trained to evaulate dogs..

What would I do in a case like this,had it been my child? first off I dont think I would have allowed a child that young around any strong dog..pitbull or not.So there isnt really any easy answer is there :(

October 15th, 2004, 02:24 PM
You are right when you say there is no easy answer. My answer would be to do what the owners did and give the dog up (luckily Bandit had ended up at the society). They cannot take the risk of keeping him, unless they can assure that there child would not be in that situation again. I do not believe that the animal should be put to sleep. I think he just needs to be rehomed in an environment without small children. Some animals do not react as well to children as others do. Maybe some obedience classes and training as well. I do not think he deserves to die....

October 15th, 2004, 04:07 PM
First of all Bandit is a black lab X,they say he's crossed with a pit-bull,but he looks like a black lab.
I've been following this story from day one,I guess calling Bandit a pit-bull will get the government more support,but Bandit is definetly NOT a pittie!
The THS is refusing to put him down because he's a wonderful dog and has been with them for about a year.
I am sure there are circumstances where any dog can harm a child,if not properly watched,kids can unknowingly hurt animals.Don't get me wrong,I certainly feel for the child,but there is a reason why rescues do not give dogs to families with small children.Little kids always need supervision around dogs or cats for that matter.
I am hoping Bandit will not be killed,he should be adopted out to someone with no little kids.

October 15th, 2004, 08:16 PM
I'm sorry but IMO if this dog attacked without being provoked he should be PTS... if the attack was provoked then he could be rehomed to a place without children IMO.

There are just too many non agressive dogs out there that need homes to spend all the time and money necessary to re habilatate a human aggressive dog. Especially a large dog like this (regardless of breed). Being PTS is no different to the dog than being put out to be fixed - it is us humans that place a stigma on death.

I've owned a dog that attcked un provoked... and as much as I loved him I made the choose to have him PTS. I couldn't bear to rehome him - I'd be worried he would be abused if he did it again, and I couldn't bear to keep him muzzled at all times outside the house - that would have been unfair to him. It was by far one of the hardest decisions I've ever made, but to this day I think it was the right one.

IMO the fact that these people placed the dog with THS is horrible - if you do not want the dog, especially for an aggression problem, either find the dog a new home that can work with and handle the dog or you have him PTS - giving him up to THS is cruel... that poor dog has now spend a full year in a small cell... I personally think that is horrible.

end of rant - sorry but I feel strongly about this.

October 15th, 2004, 09:05 PM
As someone who has put a dog to sleep for going after a young child (my son), I can tell you that the decision is not an easy one.

For whatever reason, the dog bit a young child and did quite a bit of damage. Do you honestly think that you could rehome this dog and he would NEVER come into contact with young children again. For the rest of his life?

Last year, a doberman was given to a shelter to be pts. The dog had bitten it's owner, not once but twice. The shelter, in it's infinite wisdom, observed the dog for the required 10 days and decided that it was a very nice dog deserving of a fine family. It was adopted out to a lovely woman in her 60's who had experience with the breed. One night, while her boyfriend was at work, she decided to trim the dogs nails. The dog killed her.

It is very difficult, if not impossible, to test a dog's temperment in a shelter situation. Shelters in no way resemble a home environment. Any good rescue group will tell you that there is a "honeymoon" period when you bring a new dog into a home. A dog that is great the first month or two after you bring it into your home may have a whole set of issues that "suddenly" appear when the dog feels comfortable in his surroundings.

October 16th, 2004, 01:50 AM
I totally agree with the last two posts, although I empathise with why people are reluctant to put an animal to sleep. People always come first, and if a dog has shown the potential to attack and do serious damage, that dog should be put to sleep, no matter what the breed.

Euthanising a pet that is unpredictable is not cruel, in my opinion. It isn't even about choice -- there is no choice when human safety is concerned.

October 16th, 2004, 01:53 PM
you made some excellent points..honestly if a family dog EVER went after one of my kids..provoked or unprovoked,,I would have no choice but to PTS.As much as I have loved and love my children are my first priority..What kind of dog owner would I be should I allow this dog to get rehomed,with the potential of it attacking again?

What kind of parent would I be tho...if I allowed a small child around a large strong dog without supervision...As docile as my golden Cujo was ...he was NEVER EVER left alone with ANY of my kids,,,especially my 6 year old...the potential to harm is always there..and its my responsibilty to protect my children first

October 16th, 2004, 02:34 PM
At the time of my Son's birth our (male, neutered) German Shepard was 6 years old. After our son was born our Dog changed, he became way too overprotective. He would let people come in the house or yard but wouldn't let them leave. He would growl and snap. So off to another training class we go. Two years ago when my daughter was born the Dog started this all over again. So off we go to class again. He was doing pretty good for a few months. Then one day he bit my Sister inlaw. Obviously something had to be done with him. The next day he was outside in our large fenced in back yard with me. I was playing ball with him and feeling just horrible about what had happened and what I was about to do. I was taking him into the Vet's that afternoon to be Put to Sleep. As we were playing ball our Neighbour from down the street came over she didn't even have the gate closed and the Dog was on her. sad I couldn't believe it. Luckily she managed to get back outside the gate with only one small bite and a lot of scratches. What was wrong with my dog? Why had he turned so aggressive? The Vet could not answer me. I held him while they put him to sleep and cried the whole time. I had no choice but to Put him to Sleep. There was no way I could re-home him. Even if he went somewhere with no kids he could never be trusted again. sad

October 16th, 2004, 02:44 PM
The first bite was much less severe, & the dog was re-homed after that to the home where the 2nd. child, (grandchild) was bitten. I can't say for sure this is true, but as I have heard the story from people closer to the incident than I am..

October 16th, 2004, 02:49 PM
In my thoughts only, I have watched this story from the start aswell and the owner of the dog which is the grandmother said it was unprovoked.

Any dog has only one way to defend themself and that is to bit, but I think if a dog bits a child and it was unprovoked I believe it should be put down. I love my dogs more than life but if they ever hurt a child I would have them put down. I have no child in my home but I know that both my boys love kids and I do not worry when child are here.

With Bandit, I have seen him and I do not see him looking like a Lab, his mouth is pit bull. I believe in this case he should be put down as he has attacked a child unprovoked and if he finds a home with no child how can any of us say he will never be around young children to do it again. The last person was what 18- 19 something like that.

No way of known if the new owner will make sure Bandit never does it to ANYONE again. The owners want him put down I believe he should be.

To repeat, I love dogs but in some cases i do believe this time Bandit should be sent to a better place.

October 16th, 2004, 08:08 PM
I completely understand what everyone here has said. I myself know that child attack situations are very touchy subjects, and full of mixed emotions. I am a child of a dog attack. When I was 7 years old I was playing with my Mothers friends black Lab and I was unsupervised - this dog was known for being very loving and friendly and had never hurt a soul. Unprovoked he pounced on me and bit into the left side of my face. Luckily there was not much damage - I still have a small scar today where you can see the marks of his upper and lower eye-teeth marks. Did I freak out and cry? Of course! Did my mom feel terrified and upset with what had happened? Yes. The dog was never put to sleep though. They just made sure that he was not around small children again. He never had attacked since that day. When he went for walks and children were near, he usually payed no attention, the owner kept a tight lead for extra precaution. He usually got his exercise in the extremely large back yard though. When family came during the holidays and small children would be there, he was kept in the garage with all of his toys and dog house.

I just believe that this dog deserves a second chance in a home without small children. I looked into the comment earlier on this possibly having been a second attack - no evidence has shown this.

I did not realize I was going to cause such a stir.

October 17th, 2004, 01:07 AM
Sorry, but if ANY breed of dog EVER bit any of MY kids to the point of drawing blood, especially in a vicious manner,
No matter HOW sweet and even-tempered that dog was normally....

( i mean, if your kid took a knife to it or was excessively causing it serious physical pain then sorry but the little sh&&head kid deserved it)

But with all the even tempered dogs out there that have never been known to hurt anyone...
i mean,
'give it another chance'
gets old REALLY fast.
Especially when that sweet and loving dog

rips half your son's face off.

I think that dogs who are adopted are getting their second chance right there. It's up to the people choosing to pick the right dog: it's in THEIR hands,
as well as taking care that they do not attack anyone.
After that, yes i DO sympathise for the dog, but there are simply not enough PEOPLE who are responsible to take on all the dogs out there who might attack a person.
Whereas there are plenty of harmless DOGS that can take on the people who at least know enough to provide vet care, food and water.

Sorry guys, but in my opinion,
Bandit's fate was decided when he was adopted to the wrong family,
and though it wasnt his choice,
it was a choice.
We don't always get to decide out own fate, and the fate of animals DOES largely lie in the hands of humans (SADLY)

Its good to see that the people at the shelter CARE, and the public cares about him,
but there are just too many animals that need care...
Just my opinion.

regardless of breed.

October 17th, 2004, 01:16 AM
I should have mentioned:

I have a dog (well, my parents have him)
that is known to

By "attack"

i mean play biting, pawing, running past you too fast and knocking you down, jumping up and wagging his tail too hard.

If a dog is playing too rough, i should have mentioned, that is not the same as attacking.
A dog can be scolded or/and trained out of playing too rough,
but if the INTENTION is to cause physical harm,

namely to show dominance,

that is an attack.

If there is serious accidental injury,
frik, it was accidental as in the dog bumped into you and you fell and broke your hip,

well, sheesh....
you'd be so extremely asanine and anal to have a dog euthanized for being clumsy or playful,

unless that play escalated and became uncontrollable or severely painful and repetetive...
like everyone agrees... very touchy.

October 17th, 2004, 07:39 AM
I understand what you are all pointing out,the safety of children before dogs!
Unfortunately many parents do not ensure the childrens or the animals safety,I know of one 2 year old little menace,who terrorized 2 cats in the house,he's now sporting a scar in his face.Where the cats at fault,NO,but they ended up being put outside and eventually HS.
This very spoiled little brat,should have been told right from the start how to treat those cats(I actually love kids,but this boy is a holy terror :eek: )
I would never allow any child to mistreat an animal nor the animal a child.
As for Bandit,HS must have had it's reasons keeping him alive,I am sure they euthanize dangerous dogs every day.
Nobody really knows if this was an unprovoked attack or not,they were not supervised by the irresponsible grandmother.
HS must have seen something in Bandit to save him from death,he has been trained,socialized and proven to be a"good"dog,why should he not have a chance at life with good owners???
MBRA says,he won't know he is being killed it's just like going to sleep :eek:
If that is the attitude we should have,why don't we just kill all the animals costing money in shelters or eradicate any animal causing any kind of problems,it's so easy sad
I know mine is not a popular opinion,but I still believe HS knows what they are doing and Bandit deserves another chance at life,just like any other living being on this earth.
But after nov 15th,I am sure he will end up on the same heap as all the killed Pit-Bulls and I am sure MR Bryant and company are very proud of themselves.

October 18th, 2004, 10:32 AM
As for Bandit,HS must have had it's reasons keeping him alive,I am sure they euthanize dangerous dogs every day. Nobody really knows if this was an unprovoked attack or not,they were not supervised by the irresponsible grandmother. HS must have seen something in Bandit to save him from death,he has been trained,socialized and proven to be a"good"dog,why should he not have a chance at life with good owners???

I know mine is not a popular opinion,but I still believe HS knows what they are doing and Bandit deserves another chance at life,just like any other living being on this earth.

I agree with you Chico 100%! I was going to say pretty much the exact same thing. I am glad to see I am not alone in my thoughts and feelings:) Thanks for not being intimidated to put in your un-popular point of view after all that has been said :thumbs up

October 18th, 2004, 10:43 AM
I think that the grandmother was an idiot for leaving the child and the dog alone. I don't care what breed of dog it is, a Lab, a Jack Russel or a pit bull. Animals should not be left alone with a child. That's the grandmother's fault.

The courts have ordered that Bandit be PTS. This went through on Friday afternoon after Moron Bryants announcement - so I guess in no way did this announcement affect the outcome on the ruling for Bandit right? *sarcasim* !!

IMO, once viewing the circumstances of the "attack" it should be decided whether the animals is PTS. If it is a provoked attack, like pulling tails, poking with sticks and such, the dog is not at fault. That's the child - who is the adults responsibility, therefore human error again!!!

October 18th, 2004, 10:51 AM
It is so hard to say what went on exactly when there was no supervision in this situation. I agree with you Sammiec when you say it is possible it was provoked....we just do not know and never will. I do feel sorry for the child as it is a scary situation (I hope it does not affect him in life with other animals) and I obviously feel sorry for Bandit as well. I too heard the sad news, but I am not surprised at all....we all knew what would happen given te fact that his verdict had to wait until that already awful day. Convenient?

October 18th, 2004, 11:01 AM
I agree also. I hate to tell you that children are not as innocent as they seem. I witnessed that for myself at my brothers house this weekend. My nephew who is great and I love dearly was brought up with an Akita who would go to his death to protect my neice and nephew. Well she actually growled at him this weekend and it was a warning I saw the whole thing and my nephew was teasing and poking the dog. My brother immediately starts saying the dog is going and I jumped in and said I saw it an he was teasing the dog and the dog warned him. So I know how perfect his children are and they would never lie haha. But this is exactly how kids get bit all the time and did nothing to the dog. I sat my nephew down and told him that by doing that to the dog and then lying your dad was going to get rid of the dog. I also explained that he has to and should know to have respect for animals.

October 18th, 2004, 11:06 AM
Good for you Mastifflover!!! Well done :thumbs up I think what you just shared was a great and relevant story to the discussions at hand here :)

October 18th, 2004, 11:09 AM
Thank you for stepping and telling him that it was not the dogs fault. Too many people are not willing to discuss safety with their children, be it guns, drugs, sex or DOGS!!! I am not stating this because of your family, it just brought this thought to the mind.....

There are MANY instances where the dog is at fault for warning the child that it has had enough. The children are not educated on how to treat a dog, they poke, pull, and jump on the dog. Same as a parent, these dogs can only take sooo much before they "yell" at the child to stop right? The dog snaps and nips at the child as a warning...that's considered aggression and it's the dogs fault.... Funny, this comes back to the adult teaching their child about how to treat a dog... that's once again... human error....why is it that we can see this, but the government cannot....

October 18th, 2004, 11:09 AM
Just for the facts my nephew is 10 and my neice is 8 so they are still young enough but at the sametime they are old enough to know better.

October 18th, 2004, 11:30 AM
Sammiec -

You are so right. Why can the government not see? The government, in almost all cases, has never been ever to see from the people's point of view. They are above everyone in the society when they become part of the government and forget what it was like when they too did not have a voice that was heard. Funny thing is, these people are elected by the people so that they CAN have their voices heard.....ironic? Instead, if we are not stepped ON we are stepped over. How will we ever be able to protect our animals when they wind up being a part of political debate when we cannot even protect ourselves?

October 18th, 2004, 11:40 AM
You're so right tyr... this is why I feel so discouraged about the whole ordeal. I mean, this man ASKED for our opinions. I am sure that MANY of the opinions he recieved where based on emotion and not facts - for both sides. There are facts out there and someone in his position, if he cared enough to CAN have that information. It sickness me, the small amount of information that I have been able to find.... they group rotties and pit bulls in the same category and say that in the last 25 years over 21% of the bites have come from this category -- that doesn't tell us anything... it very well could be a sum of numbers over 25 years and ACTUALLY only 1 % of bites have come from rotties and pit bulls meaning that 0.5% of bites could possibly be from pit bulls alone.... It's ridiculous... If I've ever needed an example of biased reporting, this is it!

October 18th, 2004, 11:54 AM
No kidding! You have got that right! You are right when you say that he could have found the facts to make an educated decision. His decision was based on emotions alone - as well as the greedy need for votes. It takes years to pass bills that should be based in months - yet when it comes to something so small and petty - without any real backing - it took only a few months to put one through. The government has their priorities all mixed up and out of place.

I am extremely confident in the fact that there were many emotional responses to both you said. Unfortunately, I feel that there were probably much more emotional response on the supporting side. How did he decide what was to be kept in his pile for support and opposition? I am sure that all someone had to send in for the supporting side was a letter with a sentence " I support you!". Whereas for the opposing side he disregarded letters full of facts and valid stories - just so he can say "5000 support me!".

I wrote all of the papers in my areas to get an article or just to be put in the letters portion of the paper - I checked everyday and non of them were accepted. It is very discouraging..... I understand what you mean.

As for the stats, they are completely useless. I just posted, in another thread, some interesting tidbits from my local paper - an article posted recently. It was showing stats for Pits that pertained to the US, yet they were using them as valid stats for Canada! I feel sick to my stomach all the time now.

October 18th, 2004, 12:02 PM
LOL, stats mean nothing apparently.

There was a pit bull attack in Brampton awhile ago. They have an article in the paper today - which I have mailed them today saying that I am boycotting their paper now...

BUT this article from this week said that a lady and her two children were attacked by a 140lb pit bull!!! WTF!! Where are the facts for that one?? At least show us a picture of this record breaking pit bull! That's HUGE!!!

October 18th, 2004, 12:34 PM
LMAO! That is almost Dane size!!!!!! If a Pitty is that big he would be much too fat to do anything at all - most of all attack something! They really should show the picture of the actual dog when writing such an article.

Good for you for standing up for yourself and others! I am glad you boycotted that paper - that is just sheer idiocy on their end.

You're great :D

October 18th, 2004, 12:51 PM
I know this pit is only 20 pounds less than my English Mastiff I cant wait to see the picture of this thing it must look like Jabba the Hut

October 18th, 2004, 01:13 PM
That is funny,that pittie must be a monster :crazy:
About politicians,I hated Harris and his goons for what they did to our poor,was elated when the Liberals won,boy was I wrong :evil:
"Kitten-Eater"(as McGuinty was called)was to kind a word to describe these's a very sad day in Ontario,when hundreds of dogs will be murdered because they are Pit-Bulls,or something like it. sad sad sad
To me,it's just too hard to believe....
Sammiec give Briggs a big kiss and a hug,we love her :love: and all the other pitties on this Forum.

October 18th, 2004, 01:34 PM
I do not own a Pit Bull but my friends do and I love every mm of them! Same goes for all Pit Bulls.

Unfortunately, back to the government, this is what happens when you have monirity vote government. You either get all bad or all good when they are in with a majority. With minority you get a lot of good and a lot of bad because everyone has a say - the more seats you have the bigger effect due to having more say. With Tories being second in seats they have had a lot of push and sway :mad: :evil: The Mcguinty government has to go! Almost everyone hates everything that they do - McGuinty is the biggest of all these evils. "Kitten-eater" I like that analogy.

It is a very sad day. Like I said in a previous post, I think Mr. Bryant should be the first to inject that needle into a 6month old pup.

It is too hard to believe - I feel sick to my very core. Friday I just cried at the thought of it all.

October 18th, 2004, 01:40 PM
I think every politician who voted for this should have to euthanize one of these very sweet pups. Reason being they make these descions and then go there nice cushy homes. Let them see up close and personally what their law does and how it feels that is just in case any of them actually have feelings.

October 18th, 2004, 01:43 PM
My thoughts exactly. It is easy to be ignorant and ignore the pain and problems caused by your direct action when you do not have to see it or deal with it first hand.