B.C. RCMP say two dogs killed a cat and then mauled a woman and her husband inside their home. RCMP Cpl. Dave Tyreman said a frantic woman called 911 around 8 p.m. last Friday reporting that two dogs had killed her cat and were trying to kill her and her
VANCOUVER � An elderly man was attacked by two pit bull dogs outside a Langley, B.C., dollar store on the same day a family�s pet pit bull mauled a girl in the Vancouver Island community of Saanich.
A woman is in critical condition with horrific injuries and two more people received hospital care after a vicious mauling in a Richmond park by a Rottweiler/pitbull-type dog.
At around 1:15 p.m. on Wednesday, Richmond Mounties rushed to South Arm Park near to Whiteside elementary in the 9200 block of Williams Road after multiple 9-1-1 calls advised that a woman was being viciously mauled by a dog.
It�s believed the 21-year-old victim was trying to lure the now out-of-control dog away from her three-year-old nephew.
The main victim suffered more than 100 bites to her body, a fractured arm and a detached bicep. She is currently undergoing surgery and is listed in critical condition.
Police say the dog belonged to a boyfriend of one of the sisters.
Fort St. John senior attacked by pit bulls could lose use of arms, hands
Elgie said the attack began after her father's partner, Wendy Lee Baker, 51, opened the trailer's door to let in their small dog. The pit bulls charged through the open door and tore the family's 15-year-old cat to pieces.
Bitten several times by the two dogs, Baker managed to lock herself in the bedroom and call 911 while Robin Elgie battled the dogs.
Weakened from blood loss and exertion, Elgie fell back into a chair "and he was just holding up his arms to try and keep them off of his body and away from his throat and neck," his daughter said
The two dogs continued to rip and tear at his arms until RCMP officers arrived.
After four surgeries, doctors have told her they are waiting to see whether her father will recover the use of his arms and hands. But it is unlikely the 66-year-old mechanic and heavy duty equipment operator will ever return to work.
"The dogs took chunks of flesh right out of his arms," she said. "They don't know if he will regain movement in his hands, and if that blood circulation dosen't come back to his hands, they will have to amputate."
"desertdude" said Why would anybody want to keep such ugly and vicious dogs as pets? Weren't pit bulls banned ?
In some places yes, not in others. It's normally done by bylaw which is a municipal responsibility so unless the Province wants to step in and take on this contentious issue we'll continue to see different laws for different areas.
Where I am now there's a bylaw that states all "dangerous breed dogs" must be on leash and muzzled when out in public which is a laugh. When I walk my dogs I see numerous of these "restricted" breed owners ignoring the bylaw because they know it won't be enforced and if their dog kills someone's pet or injures a person at worst they get a fine. Unless someone sues them but even at that they aren't likely to get much punishment.
They're hard to ban, in part because there is no clear delineation of what a pitt bull is. I say make the owners responsible both criminally and civilly. When a dog enters somebody else's property to attack them, there should be no question about guilt.
"andyt" said They're hard to ban, in part because there is no clear delineation of what a pitt bull is. I say make the owners responsible both criminally and civilly. When a dog enters somebody else's property to attack them, there should be no question about guilt.
I would make a list of breeds presumed to be dangerous tho, ie they don't get one bite before they are deemed dangerous. Just compile stats of what breeds cause the most damage (we know what the prime suspects will be) and have them on the list. Also breeds that are rare but very dangerous, where there may be few attacks because they are so rare.
Since there are so many numbnuts out there tho, who will claim their darling would never hurt anybody, make them do as FOG says and be leashed and muzzled when off the owner's property. That includes dog parks (for muzzles). And enforce the law.
"andyt" said I would make a list of breeds presumed to be dangerous tho, ie they don't get one bite before they are deemed dangerous. Just compile stats of what breeds cause the most damage (we know what the prime suspects will be) and have them on the list.
You know, if you said that regarding people, you'd be accused of racism.
"DrCaleb" said I would make a list of breeds presumed to be dangerous tho, ie they don't get one bite before they are deemed dangerous. Just compile stats of what breeds cause the most damage (we know what the prime suspects will be) and have them on the list.
You know, if you said that regarding people, you'd be accused of racism. What kind of comment is this?
"andyt" said I would make a list of breeds presumed to be dangerous tho, ie they don't get one bite before they are deemed dangerous. Just compile stats of what breeds cause the most damage (we know what the prime suspects will be) and have them on the list. Also breeds that are rare but very dangerous, where there may be few attacks because they are so rare.
Since there are so many numbnuts out there tho, who will claim their darling would never hurt anybody, make them do as FOG says and be leashed and muzzled when off the owner's property. That includes dog parks (for muzzles). And enforce the law.
Leashed I agree with for all dogs but not muzzling. It leaves a "dangerous" breed unable to defend itself when attacked by a "non-dangerous" breed.
I also have no problem with holding owners criminally responsible for their dogs actions.
"2Cdo" said I would make a list of breeds presumed to be dangerous tho, ie they don't get one bite before they are deemed dangerous. Just compile stats of what breeds cause the most damage (we know what the prime suspects will be) and have them on the list. Also breeds that are rare but very dangerous, where there may be few attacks because they are so rare.
Since there are so many numbnuts out there tho, who will claim their darling would never hurt anybody, make them do as FOG says and be leashed and muzzled when off the owner's property. That includes dog parks (for muzzles). And enforce the law.
Leashed I agree with for all dogs but not muzzling. It leaves a "dangerous" breed unable to defend itself when attacked by a "non-dangerous" breed.
I also have no problem with holding owners criminally responsible for their dogs actions.
We were looking at muzzles for our ShiPoo, cause of his short snout he would have looked like Hannibal Lector, although I also believe that the owners should be held responsible.
Since most of these attacks seem to happen in the owner's house, ie they attack a family member, or when the dogs get loose, I doubt that leash and muzzle laws will do much. We already have leash laws and it doesn't seem to have an effect. So I think it's time to go after the owners. Write the laws so that it's easy to sue the owners for all damages. But since a lot of these dogs are owned by pukes without two nickels to scratch together, also enact criminal laws. Basically the same as if you improperly store a gun. No excuses about how fify never acted out before, your dog gets out and harms another human or dog and you go to jail. And not for a weekend either.
http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canad ... y-two-dogs
A woman is in critical condition with horrific injuries and two more people received hospital care after a vicious mauling in a Richmond park by a Rottweiler/pitbull-type dog.
At around 1:15 p.m. on Wednesday, Richmond Mounties rushed to South Arm Park near to Whiteside elementary in the 9200 block of Williams Road after multiple 9-1-1 calls advised that a woman was being viciously mauled by a dog.
It�s believed the 21-year-old victim was trying to lure the now out-of-control dog away from her three-year-old nephew.
The main victim suffered more than 100 bites to her body, a fractured arm and a detached bicep. She is currently undergoing surgery and is listed in critical condition.
Police say the dog belonged to a boyfriend of one of the sisters.
3 serious attacks over the space of 4 days. In two cases they attacked family members. But they're just sweeties at heart.
Elgie said the attack began after her father's partner, Wendy Lee Baker, 51, opened the trailer's door to let in their small dog. The pit bulls charged through the open door and tore the family's 15-year-old cat to pieces.
Bitten several times by the two dogs, Baker managed to lock herself in the bedroom and call 911 while Robin Elgie battled the dogs.
Weakened from blood loss and exertion, Elgie fell back into a chair "and he was just holding up his arms to try and keep them off of his body and away from his throat and neck," his daughter said
The two dogs continued to rip and tear at his arms until RCMP officers arrived.
After four surgeries, doctors have told her they are waiting to see whether her father will recover the use of his arms and hands. But it is unlikely the 66-year-old mechanic and heavy duty equipment operator will ever return to work.
"The dogs took chunks of flesh right out of his arms," she said. "They don't know if he will regain movement in his hands, and if that blood circulation dosen't come back to his hands, they will have to amputate."
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/ ... -1.3386120
So make that 4 pittbull attacks in 6 days.
But, chihuahuas bite more people than pitbulls, so no worries. Imagine if that had been bloodthirsty Chihuahuas tearing at his flesh.
Why would anybody want to keep such ugly and vicious dogs as pets? Weren't pit bulls banned ?
In some places yes, not in others. It's normally done by bylaw which is a municipal responsibility so unless the Province wants to step in and take on this contentious issue we'll continue to see different laws for different areas.
Where I am now there's a bylaw that states all "dangerous breed dogs" must be on leash and muzzled when out in public which is a laugh. When I walk my dogs I see numerous of these "restricted" breed owners ignoring the bylaw because they know it won't be enforced and if their dog kills someone's pet or injures a person at worst they get a fine. Unless someone sues them but even at that they aren't likely to get much punishment.
They're hard to ban, in part because there is no clear delineation of what a pitt bull is. I say make the owners responsible both criminally and civilly. When a dog enters somebody else's property to attack them, there should be no question about guilt.
^^ This!
Since there are so many numbnuts out there tho, who will claim their darling would never hurt anybody, make them do as FOG says and be leashed and muzzled when off the owner's property. That includes dog parks (for muzzles). And enforce the law.
I would make a list of breeds presumed to be dangerous tho, ie they don't get one bite before they are deemed dangerous. Just compile stats of what breeds cause the most damage (we know what the prime suspects will be) and have them on the list.
You know, if you said that regarding people, you'd be accused of racism.
I would make a list of breeds presumed to be dangerous tho, ie they don't get one bite before they are deemed dangerous. Just compile stats of what breeds cause the most damage (we know what the prime suspects will be) and have them on the list.
You know, if you said that regarding people, you'd be accused of racism.
What kind of comment is this?
I would make a list of breeds presumed to be dangerous tho, ie they don't get one bite before they are deemed dangerous. Just compile stats of what breeds cause the most damage (we know what the prime suspects will be) and have them on the list. Also breeds that are rare but very dangerous, where there may be few attacks because they are so rare.
Since there are so many numbnuts out there tho, who will claim their darling would never hurt anybody, make them do as FOG says and be leashed and muzzled when off the owner's property. That includes dog parks (for muzzles). And enforce the law.
Leashed I agree with for all dogs but not muzzling. It leaves a "dangerous" breed unable to defend itself when attacked by a "non-dangerous" breed.
I also have no problem with holding owners criminally responsible for their dogs actions.
I would make a list of breeds presumed to be dangerous tho, ie they don't get one bite before they are deemed dangerous. Just compile stats of what breeds cause the most damage (we know what the prime suspects will be) and have them on the list. Also breeds that are rare but very dangerous, where there may be few attacks because they are so rare.
Since there are so many numbnuts out there tho, who will claim their darling would never hurt anybody, make them do as FOG says and be leashed and muzzled when off the owner's property. That includes dog parks (for muzzles). And enforce the law.
Leashed I agree with for all dogs but not muzzling. It leaves a "dangerous" breed unable to defend itself when attacked by a "non-dangerous" breed.
I also have no problem with holding owners criminally responsible for their dogs actions.
True, the best solution is to muzzle all dogs.