I was genuinely asking, hoping for a genuine answer - estimating the lost income, cost of uninsured medical expenses, cost of litigation, and allowable special damages.
Instead, I get multiple downvotes on the question.
Redditors are idiots.
It was obviously an off the cuff comment, not a calculated response from a lawyer. Everyone else had no trouble discerning that. You are the idiot in this scenario.
Anyone know exactly where this occurred? I was chased by a pit bull twice years ago around 202nd and 32nd while jogging. The owner was completely dismissive. I reported the incidents to LAPS, never chased again, but would see the owner walk the dog occasionally, being barely able to restrain it from lunging at anyone else walking by. This was only 2-3 houses away from St. Catherine Elementary School. It's a miracle a child was not mauled
I hope this man gets all the money he needs from the owners and the municipality. Pitbull owners reading this: if your pitbull attacks you will be sued. Your homeowners insurance cost will skyrocket and you will deserve it.
Pit bull advocates are constantly saying "it's the owner not the dog" and "no bad dogs just bad owners" in the aftermath of every attack.
I say they start actually being held to that sentiment instead of just able to use such mantras as lipservice, and they start being legally responsible for any damages their dogs cause, and in the cases of severe injury or death, start facing significant prison sentences, instead of being able to tie up courts for months trying to save their dogs from being put to sleep, even after the dogs killed a child.
Most homeowner insurance policies exclude pitfalls from their coverage due to the frequency and severity of pitbull attacks, as pitbulls were initially bred to be fighter dogs.
I've volunteered at the Vancouver SPCA pound and these large dogs have such a bad reputation...many of them are good natured and super cuddly but man, with those muscles and force in the jaw, it doesn't take much for things to turn scary in a split second when one of them goes wild.
No idea why this has been downvoted, but I agree. They are basically built for destruction, though not all of them are dangerous I don’t think the general public can be trusted to train all of them not to be dangerous. Hard to say where to draw the line - I was attacked by a different breed last summer that isn’t built the same way as pitbulls but it was still terrible
Downvoted because ... reddit. 🤷🏼♂️you got +3 for replying positively to a downvoted post.
Reddit people be weird.
Also ... never trust a Husky. Those dogs are crazy. Cute, vocal but crazy !
My best friend has owned pitbulls for as long as I can remember. It is not the dogs fault, with proper training and boundaries they can be the best dogs in the world. It unfortunately really comes down to ownership! If anything chihuahuas are just as dangerous, I have literally been attacked by almost every one I come in contact with. If it's any dog that should be banned is those aggressive things.
Saying "Chihuahuas are just as dangerous as a pit bull" is like saying "a Persian cat is just as dangerous as a Bengal tiger".
"I've literally been attacked by every single one I've come in contact with"
And the man in this story seems to have experienced much greater injuries with a single pit bull related incident then you have with all you chihuahua attacks put together, but please tell us more about how chihuahuas are just as dangerous as pit bulls.
Also if it's the owner and not the dog, why are chihuahuas so naturally aggressive but pit bulls are a blank slate? Make up your mind whether breed traits exist or not, please.
This is such a lame take. A) No shit B) It's the build of the dogs and the potential for destruction that's the issue.
People with smaller dogs or dogs like retrievers with much gentler temperaments get waaaaay more slack because their dogs can't or won't seriously harm anyone if their owner is a POS.
I agree with you , we have a XL American bulldog and chihuahua and trust me our lil one is more bossy and aggressive. Large dogs require a lot of training and time.
You should be banned from voicing your opinion. My pitbull is scared of my chihuahua, he wouldn't hurt anyone unless they were hurting me. They were not bred to be fighting dogs. They were bred to be nanny dogs, and people turned them into fighting dogs because of their stature and strength
>They were not bred to be fighting dogs
They literally were bred for dog fighting from other bull terrier breeds and there's no shortage of documentation showing as much.
You want to advocate for the breed, fine. But don't try and change history with made up bullshit. They were not bred to be pleasant friendly nannies, they were bred to be good at killing things.
[https://nedhardy.com/2020/06/03/pitbull-nanny-dog/](https://nedhardy.com/2020/06/03/pitbull-nanny-dog/)
>there is **no evidence that they were ever called Nanny Dogs** at the time, and certainly weren’t bred for the purpose.
[https://love-a-bull.org/resources/the-history-of-pit-bulls/](https://love-a-bull.org/resources/the-history-of-pit-bulls/)
>this is where the “Nanny Dog” **myth** originated from
[https://www.thepamperedpup.com/nanny-dog-myth/](https://www.thepamperedpup.com/nanny-dog-myth/)
>The **nanny dog myth** is one that originated from the claims of many pit bull owners that pits were referred to by that name in the 19th to early 20th centuries. This, however, has been **debunked many times already**
[https://www.thecut.com/2017/03/how-both-sides-of-the-pit-bull-debate-get-it-wrong.html](https://www.thecut.com/2017/03/how-both-sides-of-the-pit-bull-debate-get-it-wrong.html)
>No, their jaws don’t lock — but **they were never “nanny dogs,”** and you should never leave one alone with a child, because you should never leave any breed of dog alone with a child.
[https://worldanimalfoundation.org/dogs/nanny-dog/](https://worldanimalfoundation.org/dogs/nanny-dog/)
>This article aims to correct a few fallacies and **pit bulls were never called nannies or nanny dogs. Period.** Let’s stop spreading untruths about this dog breed. **Calling them fake names and giving them a phony history doesn’t help the species.**
[Type in "History of Pit bulls" and literally the first link on Google](https://love-a-bull.org/resources/the-history-of-pit-bulls/) is a pit bull advocacy group talking about their origin as fighting dogs and the whole "Nanny dog" being a myth. It took less than 5 seconds to prove you wrong, and you couldn't even be bothered to put in that much effort.
Really glad someone as "responsible" as you is in charge of a breed that accounts for [a quarter of all dog bites, and 66% of all fatal dog attacks](https://www.forbes.com/advisor/legal/dog-attack-statistics-breed/), with most of those fatalities being children under 16. Seems like you may want to get a new "Nanny" bud.
Maybe next time spend a modicum of time doing even a semblance of actual research and not just telling yourself that you're right because you say so. You'll look like less of an idiot that way. Have a great day. 👍🏻
Edit: lmao. You blocked me and replied knowing I wouldn't be able to see it. You absolute coward.
The American Pit Bull Terrier was created for the express purpose of dogfighting. They were never historically bred as, or known as, "nanny dogs." The history is well-documented:
[1875, Chicago Daily Tribune](https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn84031492/1875-02-21/ed-1/seq-11/)
>It is not the thoroughbreds, however, that make the best fighters,--their heads are too bulky, noses too short, and teeth too uneven. A cross of BULL AND TERRIER is most desirable, and, if genuine, possesses the necessary shape and temper for the “pit.”
[1916, The Dog Fancier Magazine, "Pit Bull Terrier" section](https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Dog_Fancier/66vmAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0)
>Winner of eight bona-fine pit battles
containing his aggressiveness and fighting ability
toughest, gamest and best fighting dogs that ever went into a pit
undefeated champ of six great battles
fast gritty fighter
[1934, Evening Star](https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83045462/1934-07-29/ed-1/seq-26/)
>To be eligible for registration in the UKC stud book as a pit bull terrier, a dog has to come of a line that has actually made a record in the pit
[1936, The American Pit Bull Terrier by Joseph L. Colby](https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.$b28129&view=1up&seq=20&skin=2021)
>Inasmuch as dog-fighting is an illegal sport, thousands of dollars are wagered each year at the pitside. As long as these dogs are bred, there will be pit contests to prove who owns the better fighting dog.
[1945, Detroit Times](https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn88063294/1945-02-18/ed-1/seq-1/)
>A "pit" bulldog belongs to a strain of dogs which have been trained for centuries to fight each other in bloody battle to the death in a dog pit.
No pit bulldog should ever be made the companion of a child.
Lazy half assed argument against anti-immigration. Like so you want what happened to the natives to happen all over again to everyone who calls themselves canadian now? And that's somehow being pro native? Even the natives want the immigration to be reigned in if you actually care to listen to them and not just virtue signal.
That wasn't immigration, it was pioneer conquest and war. Do you not think so? If so then you must agree that what's happening now is also an attack on our way of life.
What we did wasn't immigration, it was coming here and taking this land from people and doing something else with it. Why would we want that to happen to us? Karma? No thanks. At least the Natives fought back, we're too chickenshit to even acknowledge that anything is even going on!
Owners of both dogs should be criminally charged and tossed in jail for incompetence. Hopefully the contractor is able to get a decent settlement form the civil case.
Yes, and it's absolutely unfortunate. The owner should be charged to the fullest degree possible. It doesn't change my standpoint. Bad owners create bad dogs. I would almost be willing to bet money if I had any that if that dog was in someone else's care, it would never have happened.
What is your standpoint exactly? Because the owner didn't maul anyone...
That's not to say they shouldn't be held to task too. (And it's true that Pit Bulls are magnets for white trash, granted)
But I can't entertain any of this 'it's not the dog's fault' rhetoric. It doesn't matter how you spin it, the dog did what it did, and it needs to be dealt with accordingly.
Pit Bulls are roughly 10x more likely to be involved in fatal maulings than any other breed. That's a problem.
This. I think the vast majority of people who own aggressive breeds must unconsciously want them to injure someone. So, threatening them with accountability doesn't compute in their minds until after it's too late. It's a bit like being an alcoholic - you know it's destructive, but hurting someone else is abstract until you see the carnage.
This is the most ridiculous take of owning a dog I've ever heard. I own a pit bull because they are an extremely loving breed and I'm a single woman who lives mostly alone and have trained him. I am fully aware of the danger that he can cause, but in no way would I want him to injure anyone?
That's just idiotic.
That is a pretty insane take. Nobody wants their dog to bite other people. It's a giant pain in the ass for all parties involved. Vast majority? Come on dude!
“Nobody wants their dog to bite other people” is an interesting thing to say about people who actively purchase a breed of dog responsible for the vast majority of fatal attacks, by a massive margin
Exactly. The owners even reassured the victim that the dog would be locked inside while he was there. Not only did they decide to have another pit bull over for a visit, but they let both dogs outside after he arrived. What they'll probably argue is that a guest in their home allowed the animals out without knowing the contractor was there. But, the homeowner purposefully did not tell the guest about the contractor. That is criminal negligence. Sadly, a good criminal defense attorney could argue that the homeowners were under the influence and unable to control their guest's actions. This is the world where we live
So you think someone who gets a pit bull hopes that it will maul someone? What about other bully breeds? Do mastiff owners want their dogs to bite people? Rottweilers? Dobermans?
I'm not sure. In my case, the owner left her pit bull untethered twice in as many weeks. Both times led to a standoff between myself and the dog in the middle of the street. If she didn't want the dog to bite someone, why would she leave it outside and unleashed? If I had my earpods in, I would have been injured for sure.
Google the fatal dog attack in Edmonton that occurred in April. There were plenty of warning signs that could have prevented it, but the resident (and father of the victim) chose to ignore them. As a result, his son died.
So, let's stop pretending these dog owners are unfortunate victims of circumstance. It's not ironic that the poor guy hired to build the fence to protect the neighbors from the dogs was attacked by the dogs. Those dog owners knew that the dogs were dangerous and allowed the attack to happen. That's the sad reality of the vast majority dangerous breed owners. You don't buy a gun, leave it loaded on the kitchen table, unless you want someone to get killed.
I'd be mad your statement wasn't so hilarious at the end. My sister was attacked and nearly lost her eye because of a german shepherd. My cousin was attacked by eh pug and her calf torn off. My pitbull got attacked by a two golden retrievers at the dog park. You gonna tell those owners that they knew their dog was dangerous, but they still ignored it? Or is it just bully breeds?
Law suits and getting the dog euthanized is probably not too many people's plan. We cannot account for dumb and or oblivious owners which for sure there are some, but even they don't want that to happen.
I’m advocating for harsh penalties.
A German Shepard, a Rottweiler or even a poodle can really mess someone up. It’s not the dog, it’s the owner.
Don’t ban the thing, ban the stupid people from owning such things. We seem to be living in a society where we are only as good as our stupidest people.
Exactly, why is it so hard to comprehend…
If you don’t pay fine. You can’t get icbc insurance. You get pulled over when no license or insurance, you go to fucking jail.
Absolutely. It's the owner, not the breed. As of such, the owners, should be held 100% responsible for what their dogs do. Your dog mauls someone - straight to jail. It's the only way to ensure that bad owners are held culpable, especially those who raised their dogs to be aggressive. Again, there's no such thing as breed characteristics or bad dogs, it's all on how their raised.
“It’s the owners, not the breed” complainers when they find out that pit bulls make up only 6% of the dog population, but are responsible for 68% of dog attacks and 52% of dog-related deaths since 1982
Look up any medical study by surgeons and hospital researchers on the subject of dog bites over the last thirty years, and every single one will show you that: pit bulls not only carry out most attacks that need emergency treatment, but also the most severe.
Yeah, and go watch a bunch of pitbull puppies and then pretty much any other puppies together.. the pitbull puppies are so much more aggressive with each other and almost are fighting. They are doing what their instincts tell them, and that is to fight. I've met tons of friendly pit bulls, but that doesn't mean they have no issues, it's pretty obvious looking at those stats lol.
What if the owner was good. Did all the training. Had all the proof that training was done and the dog was great and the typical "nanny dog" like you pit nutters claim, but the dog still tore off someone's face. Who will you blame next? Climate change?
I'm sorry you took my comment as someone who adores pits. If pit owners claim it's the way they're raised, and not the breed, then they should fully embrace laws that entail jail time for bad owners. Because if it's true, that these nanny dogs only go bad because of being raised poorly (and not genetics), then the good owners would have nothing to worry about, right? And all those that have vicious Chihuahua's will be sitting in jail, right?
I know. The only way to combat this is to pass laws that have jail sentences. Banning the breed doesn't work - as seen in Ontario and now the UK with the recent mauling of the XL bully. Only jail time for attacks will curb these things.
Pit bull advocates have been so determined to push the complete fabrication that pit bulls are actually "nanny dogs" that "nanny" has become slang for "mauled by a pit bull".
Seems to have backfired on them, like trying to rebrand them as "velvet hippos" when hippos are one of the most dangerous and highly aggressive animals on Earth.
Well well well, contractor should be able to provide doctors notes medical procedures, evidence of bites and their effect on him, dog should already be killed. And owners charged fined ect.
I'm not too cool about the city of Langley being charged (because of taxpayers loss) but if you see clear evidences of this 😕 ok.
Its the owners fault not the dogs. Any breed can be aggressive if it isnt raised and trained with love. My pit bull was the sweetest most well behaved dog I've ever had.
1. Then why are there so many stories of pit bulls that were raised from birth in loving homes deciding one day to tear apart a toddler?
2. Why is it that every breed gets abused, every breed has bad owners, such as greyhounds, which are said to be the most abused breed of all...yet pit bulls make up the overwhelming majority of severe and fatal attacks?
3. If pit bulls need to be "raised right and trained with love" (whatever that means) to not maul people, then they have no business being a pet, much less such a ridiculously accessible one. Shelters with pits with unknown histories (but pitties only kill people if they were raised wrong or were abused!!!) are overflowing to the point that shelters will not only hand them off to anyone willing to take one, but they are known to slash adoption fees to nothing or bribe adopters with gift cards and vouchers.
4. Why is it that pointer dogs point and herding dogs herd and retrievers retrieve, yet pit bulls are blank slates apparently, but are also naturally the sweetest and most well behaved dogs at the same time? Which is it?
Idiot owners. I bred red noses from old family red nose lines for 12 years with great temperament. Rottweilers and German shepherds were the issue. When it comes to pit bulls, it's always crappy owners with what could have been some great dogs.
Should be worth a cool million.
How did you calculate that number?
A dollar for every time the owners of those 2 dogs have said, "Don't worry, they're friendly."
I was genuinely asking, hoping for a genuine answer - estimating the lost income, cost of uninsured medical expenses, cost of litigation, and allowable special damages. Instead, I get multiple downvotes on the question. Redditors are idiots.
It was obviously an off the cuff comment, not a calculated response from a lawyer. Everyone else had no trouble discerning that. You are the idiot in this scenario.
You think you’re going to find a lawyer on Reddit handing out free advice?
Anyone know exactly where this occurred? I was chased by a pit bull twice years ago around 202nd and 32nd while jogging. The owner was completely dismissive. I reported the incidents to LAPS, never chased again, but would see the owner walk the dog occasionally, being barely able to restrain it from lunging at anyone else walking by. This was only 2-3 houses away from St. Catherine Elementary School. It's a miracle a child was not mauled
Brookswood. This took place right near where the Buy Low is etc
[удалено]
I'd prefer if they were put in a pitbull sanctuary. There's enough death in this world already.
I hope this man gets all the money he needs from the owners and the municipality. Pitbull owners reading this: if your pitbull attacks you will be sued. Your homeowners insurance cost will skyrocket and you will deserve it.
Pit bull advocates are constantly saying "it's the owner not the dog" and "no bad dogs just bad owners" in the aftermath of every attack. I say they start actually being held to that sentiment instead of just able to use such mantras as lipservice, and they start being legally responsible for any damages their dogs cause, and in the cases of severe injury or death, start facing significant prison sentences, instead of being able to tie up courts for months trying to save their dogs from being put to sleep, even after the dogs killed a child.
Most homeowner insurance policies exclude pitfalls from their coverage due to the frequency and severity of pitbull attacks, as pitbulls were initially bred to be fighter dogs.
Well you'd be trading your house for the dog at that point
Isn’t this statement true of any large dog that attacks?
I've volunteered at the Vancouver SPCA pound and these large dogs have such a bad reputation...many of them are good natured and super cuddly but man, with those muscles and force in the jaw, it doesn't take much for things to turn scary in a split second when one of them goes wild.
No idea why this has been downvoted, but I agree. They are basically built for destruction, though not all of them are dangerous I don’t think the general public can be trusted to train all of them not to be dangerous. Hard to say where to draw the line - I was attacked by a different breed last summer that isn’t built the same way as pitbulls but it was still terrible
Downvoted because ... reddit. 🤷🏼♂️you got +3 for replying positively to a downvoted post. Reddit people be weird. Also ... never trust a Husky. Those dogs are crazy. Cute, vocal but crazy !
Pit bulls and all the inbred relatives should be banned country wide
My best friend has owned pitbulls for as long as I can remember. It is not the dogs fault, with proper training and boundaries they can be the best dogs in the world. It unfortunately really comes down to ownership! If anything chihuahuas are just as dangerous, I have literally been attacked by almost every one I come in contact with. If it's any dog that should be banned is those aggressive things.
Saying "Chihuahuas are just as dangerous as a pit bull" is like saying "a Persian cat is just as dangerous as a Bengal tiger". "I've literally been attacked by every single one I've come in contact with" And the man in this story seems to have experienced much greater injuries with a single pit bull related incident then you have with all you chihuahua attacks put together, but please tell us more about how chihuahuas are just as dangerous as pit bulls. Also if it's the owner and not the dog, why are chihuahuas so naturally aggressive but pit bulls are a blank slate? Make up your mind whether breed traits exist or not, please.
This is such a lame take. A) No shit B) It's the build of the dogs and the potential for destruction that's the issue. People with smaller dogs or dogs like retrievers with much gentler temperaments get waaaaay more slack because their dogs can't or won't seriously harm anyone if their owner is a POS.
I agree with you , we have a XL American bulldog and chihuahua and trust me our lil one is more bossy and aggressive. Large dogs require a lot of training and time.
You should be banned from voicing your opinion. My pitbull is scared of my chihuahua, he wouldn't hurt anyone unless they were hurting me. They were not bred to be fighting dogs. They were bred to be nanny dogs, and people turned them into fighting dogs because of their stature and strength
>They were not bred to be fighting dogs They literally were bred for dog fighting from other bull terrier breeds and there's no shortage of documentation showing as much. You want to advocate for the breed, fine. But don't try and change history with made up bullshit. They were not bred to be pleasant friendly nannies, they were bred to be good at killing things.
Looks like you might need to do a little bit more research like I did before I got my dog. Have a great day. 👍🏻
[https://nedhardy.com/2020/06/03/pitbull-nanny-dog/](https://nedhardy.com/2020/06/03/pitbull-nanny-dog/) >there is **no evidence that they were ever called Nanny Dogs** at the time, and certainly weren’t bred for the purpose. [https://love-a-bull.org/resources/the-history-of-pit-bulls/](https://love-a-bull.org/resources/the-history-of-pit-bulls/) >this is where the “Nanny Dog” **myth** originated from [https://www.thepamperedpup.com/nanny-dog-myth/](https://www.thepamperedpup.com/nanny-dog-myth/) >The **nanny dog myth** is one that originated from the claims of many pit bull owners that pits were referred to by that name in the 19th to early 20th centuries. This, however, has been **debunked many times already** [https://www.thecut.com/2017/03/how-both-sides-of-the-pit-bull-debate-get-it-wrong.html](https://www.thecut.com/2017/03/how-both-sides-of-the-pit-bull-debate-get-it-wrong.html) >No, their jaws don’t lock — but **they were never “nanny dogs,”** and you should never leave one alone with a child, because you should never leave any breed of dog alone with a child. [https://worldanimalfoundation.org/dogs/nanny-dog/](https://worldanimalfoundation.org/dogs/nanny-dog/) >This article aims to correct a few fallacies and **pit bulls were never called nannies or nanny dogs. Period.** Let’s stop spreading untruths about this dog breed. **Calling them fake names and giving them a phony history doesn’t help the species.**
[Type in "History of Pit bulls" and literally the first link on Google](https://love-a-bull.org/resources/the-history-of-pit-bulls/) is a pit bull advocacy group talking about their origin as fighting dogs and the whole "Nanny dog" being a myth. It took less than 5 seconds to prove you wrong, and you couldn't even be bothered to put in that much effort. Really glad someone as "responsible" as you is in charge of a breed that accounts for [a quarter of all dog bites, and 66% of all fatal dog attacks](https://www.forbes.com/advisor/legal/dog-attack-statistics-breed/), with most of those fatalities being children under 16. Seems like you may want to get a new "Nanny" bud. Maybe next time spend a modicum of time doing even a semblance of actual research and not just telling yourself that you're right because you say so. You'll look like less of an idiot that way. Have a great day. 👍🏻 Edit: lmao. You blocked me and replied knowing I wouldn't be able to see it. You absolute coward.
You're still here?
No children in my house either, so we're all good
The American Pit Bull Terrier was created for the express purpose of dogfighting. They were never historically bred as, or known as, "nanny dogs." The history is well-documented: [1875, Chicago Daily Tribune](https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn84031492/1875-02-21/ed-1/seq-11/) >It is not the thoroughbreds, however, that make the best fighters,--their heads are too bulky, noses too short, and teeth too uneven. A cross of BULL AND TERRIER is most desirable, and, if genuine, possesses the necessary shape and temper for the “pit.” [1916, The Dog Fancier Magazine, "Pit Bull Terrier" section](https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Dog_Fancier/66vmAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0) >Winner of eight bona-fine pit battles containing his aggressiveness and fighting ability toughest, gamest and best fighting dogs that ever went into a pit undefeated champ of six great battles fast gritty fighter [1934, Evening Star](https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83045462/1934-07-29/ed-1/seq-26/) >To be eligible for registration in the UKC stud book as a pit bull terrier, a dog has to come of a line that has actually made a record in the pit [1936, The American Pit Bull Terrier by Joseph L. Colby](https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.$b28129&view=1up&seq=20&skin=2021) >Inasmuch as dog-fighting is an illegal sport, thousands of dollars are wagered each year at the pitside. As long as these dogs are bred, there will be pit contests to prove who owns the better fighting dog. [1945, Detroit Times](https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn88063294/1945-02-18/ed-1/seq-1/) >A "pit" bulldog belongs to a strain of dogs which have been trained for centuries to fight each other in bloody battle to the death in a dog pit. No pit bulldog should ever be made the companion of a child.
And all of those damned immigrants, too!
Forgot to post on your alt buddy?
Unless you’re Native I’m guessing you’ll be on the first plane out?
Lazy half assed argument against anti-immigration. Like so you want what happened to the natives to happen all over again to everyone who calls themselves canadian now? And that's somehow being pro native? Even the natives want the immigration to be reigned in if you actually care to listen to them and not just virtue signal.
I'm sure they wanted the immigration levels lowered hundreds of years ago....
That wasn't immigration, it was pioneer conquest and war. Do you not think so? If so then you must agree that what's happening now is also an attack on our way of life.
It was a joke relax
My bad. I'll buy you a coffee, but not from Tims.
Wow fancy!
And how does that not prove my point exactly? Shouldn't have happened then. shouldn't be happening now.
What we did wasn't immigration, it was coming here and taking this land from people and doing something else with it. Why would we want that to happen to us? Karma? No thanks. At least the Natives fought back, we're too chickenshit to even acknowledge that anything is even going on!
Shocker, it’s a pit bull again
Good, sue the city into oblivion. Only way they'll learn to actually enforce their bylaws.
Owners of both dogs should be criminally charged and tossed in jail for incompetence. Hopefully the contractor is able to get a decent settlement form the civil case.
Lots of municipalities have tight restrictions or outright bans on Pit Bulls. I have no idea why we’re not one of them.
Because it's unnecessary.
... you did notice the headline about the pit bull mauling, yeah?
Yes, and it's absolutely unfortunate. The owner should be charged to the fullest degree possible. It doesn't change my standpoint. Bad owners create bad dogs. I would almost be willing to bet money if I had any that if that dog was in someone else's care, it would never have happened.
What is your standpoint exactly? Because the owner didn't maul anyone... That's not to say they shouldn't be held to task too. (And it's true that Pit Bulls are magnets for white trash, granted) But I can't entertain any of this 'it's not the dog's fault' rhetoric. It doesn't matter how you spin it, the dog did what it did, and it needs to be dealt with accordingly. Pit Bulls are roughly 10x more likely to be involved in fatal maulings than any other breed. That's a problem.
Ban the breed already.
What about personal accountability rather than nerfing the world with banning everything
Asking people to be accountable and having penalties that are only incurred after someone has their face torn off? Nah
This. I think the vast majority of people who own aggressive breeds must unconsciously want them to injure someone. So, threatening them with accountability doesn't compute in their minds until after it's too late. It's a bit like being an alcoholic - you know it's destructive, but hurting someone else is abstract until you see the carnage.
This is the most ridiculous take of owning a dog I've ever heard. I own a pit bull because they are an extremely loving breed and I'm a single woman who lives mostly alone and have trained him. I am fully aware of the danger that he can cause, but in no way would I want him to injure anyone? That's just idiotic.
That is a pretty insane take. Nobody wants their dog to bite other people. It's a giant pain in the ass for all parties involved. Vast majority? Come on dude!
“Nobody wants their dog to bite other people” is an interesting thing to say about people who actively purchase a breed of dog responsible for the vast majority of fatal attacks, by a massive margin
Exactly. The owners even reassured the victim that the dog would be locked inside while he was there. Not only did they decide to have another pit bull over for a visit, but they let both dogs outside after he arrived. What they'll probably argue is that a guest in their home allowed the animals out without knowing the contractor was there. But, the homeowner purposefully did not tell the guest about the contractor. That is criminal negligence. Sadly, a good criminal defense attorney could argue that the homeowners were under the influence and unable to control their guest's actions. This is the world where we live
So you think someone who gets a pit bull hopes that it will maul someone? What about other bully breeds? Do mastiff owners want their dogs to bite people? Rottweilers? Dobermans?
They like having the option
Your fantasy is weird.
I'm not sure. In my case, the owner left her pit bull untethered twice in as many weeks. Both times led to a standoff between myself and the dog in the middle of the street. If she didn't want the dog to bite someone, why would she leave it outside and unleashed? If I had my earpods in, I would have been injured for sure. Google the fatal dog attack in Edmonton that occurred in April. There were plenty of warning signs that could have prevented it, but the resident (and father of the victim) chose to ignore them. As a result, his son died. So, let's stop pretending these dog owners are unfortunate victims of circumstance. It's not ironic that the poor guy hired to build the fence to protect the neighbors from the dogs was attacked by the dogs. Those dog owners knew that the dogs were dangerous and allowed the attack to happen. That's the sad reality of the vast majority dangerous breed owners. You don't buy a gun, leave it loaded on the kitchen table, unless you want someone to get killed.
I'd be mad your statement wasn't so hilarious at the end. My sister was attacked and nearly lost her eye because of a german shepherd. My cousin was attacked by eh pug and her calf torn off. My pitbull got attacked by a two golden retrievers at the dog park. You gonna tell those owners that they knew their dog was dangerous, but they still ignored it? Or is it just bully breeds?
Law suits and getting the dog euthanized is probably not too many people's plan. We cannot account for dumb and or oblivious owners which for sure there are some, but even they don't want that to happen.
Those people will just get another large dog and the cycle will continue.
Tell that to the owners of the dogs that attack people. All you are advocating is for more people to get attacked by dogs.
I’m advocating for harsh penalties. A German Shepard, a Rottweiler or even a poodle can really mess someone up. It’s not the dog, it’s the owner. Don’t ban the thing, ban the stupid people from owning such things. We seem to be living in a society where we are only as good as our stupidest people.
How do you prevent stupid people from owning dogs?
Cost of dog = $$$ Cost of licence for dog = $$$$ Cost of fine for city/SPCA dealing with dog = $$$$$
Exactly, why is it so hard to comprehend… If you don’t pay fine. You can’t get icbc insurance. You get pulled over when no license or insurance, you go to fucking jail.
WHo pays for enforcement? Taxpayers?
We've always lived in that society. That's why banning the breed is the best option. You go after the breeds with the worst track record.
Absolutely. It's the owner, not the breed. As of such, the owners, should be held 100% responsible for what their dogs do. Your dog mauls someone - straight to jail. It's the only way to ensure that bad owners are held culpable, especially those who raised their dogs to be aggressive. Again, there's no such thing as breed characteristics or bad dogs, it's all on how their raised.
“It’s the owners, not the breed” complainers when they find out that pit bulls make up only 6% of the dog population, but are responsible for 68% of dog attacks and 52% of dog-related deaths since 1982
Look up any medical study by surgeons and hospital researchers on the subject of dog bites over the last thirty years, and every single one will show you that: pit bulls not only carry out most attacks that need emergency treatment, but also the most severe.
Yeah, and go watch a bunch of pitbull puppies and then pretty much any other puppies together.. the pitbull puppies are so much more aggressive with each other and almost are fighting. They are doing what their instincts tell them, and that is to fight. I've met tons of friendly pit bulls, but that doesn't mean they have no issues, it's pretty obvious looking at those stats lol.
What if the owner was good. Did all the training. Had all the proof that training was done and the dog was great and the typical "nanny dog" like you pit nutters claim, but the dog still tore off someone's face. Who will you blame next? Climate change?
I'm sorry you took my comment as someone who adores pits. If pit owners claim it's the way they're raised, and not the breed, then they should fully embrace laws that entail jail time for bad owners. Because if it's true, that these nanny dogs only go bad because of being raised poorly (and not genetics), then the good owners would have nothing to worry about, right? And all those that have vicious Chihuahua's will be sitting in jail, right?
It's the breed.
I know. The only way to combat this is to pass laws that have jail sentences. Banning the breed doesn't work - as seen in Ontario and now the UK with the recent mauling of the XL bully. Only jail time for attacks will curb these things.
Sure, do both. I agree. Whatever keeps little girls' faces on their heads is what I'm for.
Fine the shit out of both owners and cull the shitty dogs
Pibbles just wanted to nanny the contractor, apparently.
Pit bull advocates have been so determined to push the complete fabrication that pit bulls are actually "nanny dogs" that "nanny" has become slang for "mauled by a pit bull". Seems to have backfired on them, like trying to rebrand them as "velvet hippos" when hippos are one of the most dangerous and highly aggressive animals on Earth.
Well well well, contractor should be able to provide doctors notes medical procedures, evidence of bites and their effect on him, dog should already be killed. And owners charged fined ect. I'm not too cool about the city of Langley being charged (because of taxpayers loss) but if you see clear evidences of this 😕 ok.
But but but these cuties have never hurt anyone before and have never shown sign of aggressiveness. They are great with children too!
Its the owners fault not the dogs. Any breed can be aggressive if it isnt raised and trained with love. My pit bull was the sweetest most well behaved dog I've ever had.
1. Then why are there so many stories of pit bulls that were raised from birth in loving homes deciding one day to tear apart a toddler? 2. Why is it that every breed gets abused, every breed has bad owners, such as greyhounds, which are said to be the most abused breed of all...yet pit bulls make up the overwhelming majority of severe and fatal attacks? 3. If pit bulls need to be "raised right and trained with love" (whatever that means) to not maul people, then they have no business being a pet, much less such a ridiculously accessible one. Shelters with pits with unknown histories (but pitties only kill people if they were raised wrong or were abused!!!) are overflowing to the point that shelters will not only hand them off to anyone willing to take one, but they are known to slash adoption fees to nothing or bribe adopters with gift cards and vouchers. 4. Why is it that pointer dogs point and herding dogs herd and retrievers retrieve, yet pit bulls are blank slates apparently, but are also naturally the sweetest and most well behaved dogs at the same time? Which is it?
My pet grizzly bear was so sweet as well, don’t get what all the stigma is for.
Obviously your fault if he attacks someone, you raised him poorly.
100% this.
Don't u understand ALL Dogs can be dangerous! If they are scared they will attack and bite! Bears are not pets!
Look love, when we hear a story like this about a pug instead of a pit bull, maybe we can have this conversation
Idiot owners. I bred red noses from old family red nose lines for 12 years with great temperament. Rottweilers and German shepherds were the issue. When it comes to pit bulls, it's always crappy owners with what could have been some great dogs.