The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

You know how utility workers protect themselves from dogs? An umbrella.

not kidding

http://www.bite-terminator.com/order.html

You know how utility workers protect themselves from dogs? An umbrella.

During the 2007 ice storm, PSO took care of dogs in the back yard by driving on by.  While I couldn't expect them to give an exact time of arrival, I did expect they could knock on the door to make sure the dogs were inside.  I was told on the phone that after the crew showed up, they couldn't waste the time to knock on the door.  They could take the time to drive here and then leave without doing anything.

During the 2007 ice storm, they were going house to house, one after another.  I doubt the people on the field were given a list along their route of everyone's contact numbers.  Even if they were (which is wishful thinking), your phone number on file with the power company may be your home # or cell # while you are currently in hearing range of the opposite.  What do you expect?

Workers' safety is much more important than your own personal convenience or Fido.

In the case of an officer responding to an emergency or threat call, they cannot simply say "This looks like a dog may attack me" and turn around and leave (and/or go on a wild goose chase to establish contact with the dogs owners) - Time is a factor.  If you call the cops and say someone is about to kick your door down and rape you, they may have to open fire on Fido.

Not all of the pet dog shootings in recent history have been in response to "If you call the cops and say someone is about to kick your door down and rape you". 

I never knew criminals announced their intentions other than in superhero movies.
"Hey, open up, I want to rape you. If you don't open up, I'll kick your door down and the cops can't stop me because they will be scared of your dog."

"Hey, open up, I want to rape you.

How bout role reversal. Criminal shoots K-9 dog set loose on him.
Total different set of circumstances and charges. It's still a dead dog.

Good thing it wasn't one of the kids locked in the pet crate...

You dont need to cage a 7-year old to shoot them, just kick in the door and fire away.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g_pIuAhdzGl-lCCGzVbN5VxEYHrwD9FOSOGO3

Makes you wonder if the TV cameras were a factor in the poor judgement used by the cops in this case. It's one thing acting out scripted adrenaline-laced heroics, quite another when those aren't blanks in the gun and real lives are at stake.

Well since it was a pit bull they should have been shot at birth so the officer should be given a medal for trying to do what the owners should have done or the vet.

Well since it was a pit bull they should have been shot at birth so the officer should be given a medal for trying to do what the owners should have done or the vet.

Great logic!!! They need to snuff out roosters too, they are mean little bastards.  I think perhaps they could go after the entire geese population as well.  Ever been pecked all to hell if you get too close to their nest?

/snark

Oh, and melt down all the guns too because they spontaneously attack people all the time without input from their owner.

Guns don't kill people, bullets do.  Just get rid of all of the ammo and we will be good. :D

Bayonets can kill and pistol-whipping too.  Melt 'em down.  NOW!

If you don't have a pistol to pisto-whip people, then you will be forced to use your cell phone.  Then everyone would complain to apple that their Iphones aren't made tough enough to beludgeon someone without sustaining considerable damage.

I wonder how the reception is on the iPhone 4 when they are being used for iPhone-whipping?  You suppose Apple tested them for that?

Catoosa PD shoots between the eyes:

http://www.fox23.com/news/local/story/Catoosa-PD-Shoots-Kills-Dog/1xJEd-0tSUqsadQCRkJBRg.cspx

My mailman just carries pepper spray...

Catoosa Police says they are trained to shoot an aggressive animal once in the head if they are threatened

After winding up in a couple of scary sprints with dogs on my bike, one of my cycling buddies told me to shout "NO!" and/or "STOP!" at an attacking dog.  The couple or three times I've tried it, it's worked so far.  Beats the hell out of trying to find a place to safely put a pistol or pepper spray on a bike.
I'm wondering if the cop thought to try that before he "mechanically euthanized" the dog?

Keep those pets on a leash.....

Or this....

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGUyMFPJRnU[/youtube]

That doesn't seem to be a particularly effective way to get dog to stop barking.

HYDRO — People are questioning whether police could have found an alternative to killing a man's poodle while he was in jail for breaking the dog out of the pound.

The ruckus started about two weeks ago when 73-year-old Edwin Fry used bolt cutters to free the dog, Buddy Tough, and left on his riding lawn mower with the animal on his lap.

Police arrested Fry at gunpoint a few miles from the city kennel and took the dog, Buddy Tough.

Fry said he couldn't pay the $100 it would take to free his dog legally and didn't want the animal put down.

(With Fry still in jail,) Hydro's police chief told a local newspaper publisher the dog was held for three days, placed in a box and killed with carbon monoxide from the exhaust pipe of a police car.

Read more: http://newsok.com/death-sentence-for-mans-poodle-stirs-debate-in-hydro/article/3509123?custom_click=headlines_widget#ixzz13lfAZQUc

Proof positive I live in the most backward state in this nation.  Wow...

Blue Ash police say the officers handled the situation according to department policy.

Honestly? Maybe if this were a pit bull, but a chihuahua?

I see you buy into the theory that all dogs of a particular breed are vicious.  How do you feel about other races of people?

I see you buy into the theory that all dogs of a particular breed are vicious.  How do you feel about other races of people?

Funny, I saw that comment as if they were dealing with an aggressive dog it would be understandable for them to use this kind of force on a formidable one like a pitt bull, not one that would be lucky to break skin when it bit.

I saw it as a stereotypical assumption that a breed of dog is always vicious and totally uncalled for.  If ZYX had said something along the line of a large threatening dog, I would have let it pass.  I still would have probably given the dog the benefit of doubt regarding being surrounded by threatening strangers on his/her property. 

Certainly a large dog can inflict more damage than a small one.  Any animal when cornered will try to defend itself. Dogs will also try to defend their property.  There have been several instances where the police were a bit to quick on the draw to eliminate a "threatening" pet. 

Our family has had German Shepherd dogs for 50 years. My mother has been active in dog Obedience Training for showing in AKC (and more recently UKC) Obedience trials a few years more than that.  In the 60s, German Shepherds and Dobermans had a really bad, mostly undeserved as a breed, reputation.  Within a breed, any particular blood-line (family) can have undesirable traits.  Individual dogs can be made to be vicious by training.  That is not reason to condemn the entire breed. It's actually more of a reason to condemn the dog's owner.  I remember a picture at "dog school" in the 60s of the young (4?) daughter of one of the trainers biting the leg of a Doberman.  The caption was: "Really now, which one is vicious".

I really do see prejudice against a breed of dog as similar to racial prejudice among humans.  There was no attempt to hijack the thread with my comment.

I do not see this as being similar to comparing races of people, but more like comparing a six year old with a stick to a six foot three 250 pound man.

If I had a vicious dog coming at me the breed would make a world of differance as to how I dealt with it, even large dogs.  I know that Pit Bulls were bred as fighters, hence their name, while German Shepherds have a more recent history of police dogs and Dobermens have a bloodline meant for attack/gaurd dogs.  Because of this, when each attack I know they will have a different threat level.  I know that what would stop the other two breeds would not always stop the Pit.  Can you honestly tell me that the difference in breeds does not make a difference in the level of threat a dog present when it is attacking? 

Other than that if you try to tell me that a dogs breeding does not effect it's tendancies at all than you are trully mislead.  Both nature and nurture play a part in these things.  Or do you also think that wolves, brought up from birth in captivity, will always be a good house pet?

Oh, and just to point out, Chihuahuas have a lot higher vicious nature than other dogs.

The consequences of the bite are obviously different.

Exactly, so where was the need to shoot the dog three times??

A vicious dog is a vicious dog.  A large vicious dog can certainly inflict more harm than a small one.   You may wish to consult with the AKC regarding "Pit bulls" and their breeding. The official name is along the line of Staffordshire Terrier, not Pit bull. (On Wikipedia they list 3 breeds often called "Pit Bulls".)  I would consider "Pit Bull" to be along the same level as "Junk Yard Dog".  Some unscrupulous breeders have certainly bred a line of undesirable dogs.  I believe that you still misunderstand the difference between a breed of dog and the particular blood line or family.  Wolves are not domesticated. They are NOT dogs.  Some are tame but that is not the same as domesticated.  Wolves do not make good pets.

An attack/guard dog is usually a highly trained dog, not a vicious dog.

Regarding Chihuahuas, the training director at the dog school where we started (in 1959) pointed out that small dogs are frequently like small people.  They have a need to prove their capabilities.  You are actually more likely to be bitten by a small dog than a large one.  The consequences of the bite are obviously different.

According to the Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes are responsible for 74% of attacks that were included in the study, 68% of the attacks upon children, 82% of the attacks upon adults, 65% of the deaths, and 68% of the maimings. In more than two-thirds of the cases included in the study, the life-threatening or fatal attack was apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal in question. Clifton states:

If almost any other dog has a bad moment, someone may get bitten, but will not be maimed for life or killed, and the actuarial risk is accordingly reasonable. If a pit bull terrier or a Rottweiler has a bad moment, often someone is maimed or killed--and that has now created off-the-chart actuarial risk, for which the dogs as well as their victims are paying the price.

Clifton's opinions are as interesting as his statistics. For example, he says, "Pit bulls and Rottweilers are accordingly dogs who not only must be handled with special precautions, but also must be regulated with special requirements appropriate to the risk they may pose to the public and other animals, if they are to be kept at all."

German Shephars are my large dog of choice.   It is all a matter of responsible ownership, while keeping breed tendancies in mind.  Cops need better training when dealing with dogs, period.  They use whatever justification they can in order to have free target practice on a live animal.  There are some attacks that  present a clear and present danger, and of those I would understand a response like this, but by and large it is beyond what is needed.

I agree with what I quoted above.  Perhaps you don't remember when German Shepherds had a reputation similar to what Pit Bulls have now.  My first favorite German Shepherd was a dog brought to obedience school because the dog discovered it was fun to kill the owner's pigs.  That dog went one to become a top performer in AKC Obedience trials and stopped killing pigs.  (Regularly got scores of 197 to 199-1/2 out of 200.  That dog and our Mini Poodle often took 1st and 2nd at a trial.)

Sometimes a particular dog goes bad in spite of a good upbringing.  Some unscrupulous breeders may find that desirable and perpetuate that.  If one of your kids turns out to be a Jeffery Dahlmer or something equally hideous, it would be unjust to call all Custosnoxs killers.

But if you look at the numbers from the oppossing site, it paints a different picture

http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html

The breeds most likely to kill

In recent years, the dogs responsible for the bulk of the homicides are pit bulls and Rottweilers:

"Studies indicate that pit bull-type dogs were involved in approximately a third of human DBRF (i.e., dog bite related fatalities) reported during the 12-year period from 1981 through1992, and Rottweilers were responsible for about half of human DBRF reported during the 4 years from 1993 through 1996....[T]he data indicate that Rottweilers and pit bull-type dogs accounted for 67% of human DBRF in the United States between 1997 and 1998. It is extremely unlikely that they accounted for anywhere near 60% of dogs in the United States during that same period and, thus, there appears to be a breed-specific problem with fatalities." (Sacks JJ, Sinclair L, Gilchrist J, Golab GC, Lockwood R. Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998. JAVMA 2000;217:836-840.)

The Clifton study of attacks from 1982 through 2006 produced similar results. According to Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes were responsible for 65% of the canine homicides that occurred during a period of 24 years in the USA. (Clifton, Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 to November 13, 2006; click here to read it.)

Other breeds were also responsible for homicides, but to a much lesser extent. A 1997 study of dog bite fatalities in the years 1979 through 1996 revealed that the following breeds had killed one or more persons: pit bulls, Rottweilers, German shepherds, huskies, Alaskan malamutes, Doberman pinschers, chows, Great Danes, St. Bernards and Akitas. (Dog Bite Related Fatalities," Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, May 30, 1997, Vol. 46, No. 21, pp. 463 et. seq.) Since 1975, fatal attacks have been attributed to dogs from at least 30 breeds.

The most horrifying example of the lack of breed predictability is the October 2000 death of a 6-week-old baby, which was killed by her family's Pomeranian dog. The average weight of a Pomeranian is about 4 pounds, and they are not thought of as a dangerous breed. Note, however, that they were bred to be watchdogs! The baby's uncle left the infant and the dog on a bed while the uncle prepared her bottle in the kitchen. Upon his return, the dog was mauling the baby, who died shortly afterwards. ("Baby Girl Killed by Family Dog," Los Angeles Times, Monday, October 9, 2000, Home Edition, Metro Section, Page B-5.)

In Canine homicides and the dog bite epidemic: do not confuse them, it has been pointed out that the dog bite epidemic as a whole involves all dogs and all dog owners, not just the breeds most likely to kill.

In all fairness, therefore, it must be noted that:

Any dog, treated harshly or trained to attack, may bite a person. Any dog can be turned into a dangerous dog. The owner or handler most often is responsible for making a dog into something dangerous.
An irresponsible owner or dog handler might create a situation that places another person in danger by a dog, without the dog itself being dangerous, as in the case of the Pomeranian that killed the infant (see above).
Any individual dog may be a good, loving pet, even though its breed is considered to be potentially dangerous. A responsible owner can win the love and respect of a dog, no matter its breed. One cannot look at an individual dog, recognize its breed, and then state whether or not it is going to attack.
To learn more about dog attacks, see Why dogs bite people To learn about how to take some of the bite out of the dog bite epidemic, see Attorney Kenneth Phillips' 10-point plan for Preventing Dog Bites.

But we are just going around in circles restating our opinions, so I think I'm going to jump off of this merry-go-round and let the sleeping dog lie.

Cops need better training when dealing with dogs, period.  They use whatever justification they can in order to have free target practice on a live animal.  There are some attacks that  present a clear and present danger, and of those I would understand a response like this, but by and large it is beyond what is needed.

Interesting section from your source.

When it comes to "I needs to get me a mean dog for protection.", I wonder how many such ignorant people would choose something like a toy poodle, a Lab, the Pomeranian mentioned above, or any dog that is not menacing by its visual appearance alone.  It probably skews the statistics.

That department gave it's blessings to an officer holding the dog while another shot it with a Taser, so it may be a matter of policy, or the department atmosphere than a choice made by a "bad apple".

Oh, I know the site I posted is skewed, was just simply posting it as a counter to the one skewed the other direction.  

I was referring more to the fact that the statistics are skewed (in addition to both our sites) since the size and reputation of the dog make the reputation self-perpetuating. 

Looks like we both jumped with a bungee cord.   :D

That was me hollering over my shoulder as I went off

Pretty deep canyon.  I'm still listening for the "thud" ahead of me.   ;D

After they lost their home in a tornado, a dog catcher used a shotgun to kill their dogs:

NEWCASTLE, Oklahoma -- Despite the release of a police report, a Newcastle couple says they still have questions about what led up to the deadly shooting of their two dogs.

Bryan and April Stout put their dogs, Snuggles and Jack, with friends while they tried to get back on their feet after their home was destroyed in the May 24th tornado. According to a police report, the dogs escaped their kennel.

Animal Control Officer Tim Claypool lost his footing and says the dogs surrounded him. He says he kept them at bay with pepper spray and a catch pole. He called dispatch and requested a police officer be sent to his location.

Claypool waited until Newcastle police officer Chris Holden arrived to tranquilize one of the dogs, but says after 15 minutes the drug did not take effect.

He states in the report, he had to make a decision for the safety of the citizens because they were near a busy barber shop and farmer's market. Animal Control Officer Claypool says Newcastle Police Chief Gary Norman gave him authorization to use Officer Holden's 12 gauge shotgun to shoot both dogs.

"He acted within the scope of his employment as in the realm of his training that he's been given," Chief Norman said.

The report does not say the dogs attacked anyone.

Sad story, but the dogs apparently had this guy pinned for what sounds like 30 minutes and more humane methods to deal with the threat (traquilizers) failed.  What were they left to do?  Get attacked or worse yet, wait till the dogs got bored and decided to terrorize a four year old child?

Loyal to the end -- dog killed guarding it's owner hit by a car.

(http://kotv.images.worldnow.com/images/17293358_BG4.jpg)

As much as I hate to see a dog shot, I think the police did the right thing.  I can only hope that if something happens to my mom with our German Shepherd with her that "Danny" will let someone help her.

I might have easily conceded to that if the story hadn't changed from what was first reported.  In the wee hours, the first broadcasters on the scene reported what they were told:  That the dog was simply in the way... no attack, etc...  As the day progressed so did the story, to something more boiler-plate in it's justifications as the Facebook crowd registered their disgust at the shooting.

It's a shame no one thought to ask meter readers or letter carriers how they make it through their day without shooting someone's pet.

I cant confirm the video that frame was taken from was posted to KOTV's site then taken down, but the comments seem to suggest that.  It sure would have eliminated a lot of second-guessing, though, including how the injured man managed to not get shot.

ANADARKO - The Anadarko Police Department said it is investigating the shooting death of a dog Friday. Neighbors tell FOX25 a police officer shot the dog to death for no reason, pointing the shotgun at it from inside the squad car.
Carol Nix said the dog was not aggressive or bothering anyone when the officers came and killed it.

"I said 'you just shot him?' and he said 'oh yeah,'" Nix said Saturday.

See the rest of her story here: Neighbors say police shot a dog to death for no reason
http://www.okcfox.com/story/23494788/neighbors-say-police-shot-a-dog-to-death-for-no-reason

While the internal investigation continues, the department told us it could not comment. But Chief David Edwards said not everyone agreed with Nix's eyewitness account.
"Well, I started crying because it upset me," Janie Pettit said.
Pettit thinks she was the only one who saw the shooting first hand. Pettit said she watched from her front door as the squad car pulled up to confront the dog. Others came outside after the gun shot.

"I thought he was going to try to talk to the dog or something but he didn't he just shot the dog and the dog ran," she said.
Investigators questioned Pettit Monday morning. Pettit said she told police in her statement the shooting was not justified.

"He shouldn't have shot it. He shouldn't have shot it because it didn't pose a threat. It wasn't threatening to anybody," Pettit said.
Animal rights group, Citizens Against Animal Cruelty, out of Norman, have found the dog's owner, Jr. Ramos.
"He's devastated. He does not understand why they shot his dog," the group's director Jenny Patten said.

Patten is upset too.
"This is basically a breed-specific murder. If that had been a collie, a lab, that wouldn't have happened, but being a pit bull, it was his death sentence," she said.

Patten hopes this investigation will lead to disciplinary action and change. She wants officers to receive training on how to deal with dogs at large.
Patten and her group are also helping Ramos fight a citation officers issued to Ramos.

He said he had just gotten off work on Friday to come home and discover his dog got loose. After searching around Anadarko for about an hour, he got to the neighborhood just in time to see his dog shot. While carrying his dead dog, he said officers lectured him about the breed, then wrote him ticket for having a dog at large.

"We will go to court with him. There are three or four of us who will be in court with him and stand up for what happened to this dog. It's wrong," Patten said.

“I raised my girls to trust police officers,” said Brittany Moore back in April. “That if they ever got lost, to find a police officer and they would help them. Now they don’t trust them.”
Moore spoke those words at the state capitol in Colorado, during a rally on behalf of legislation meant to reduce incidents in which police officers shoot family pets. Her testimony underscores a serious problem for anyone who supports good law enforcement (which everyone should).

"The trouble is that police officers all too often don’t understand dog behavior.  Just as biased news reporting is not just bad journalism but also bad for journalism, because it undermines trust in the press, poor policing is bad for law enforcement because it undermines trust in law enforcement."

Moore’s German Shepherd, Ava, was shot in 2011 by an officer who claims the dog bared its teeth and lunged. Moore says otherwise. “The rawhide bone fell from Ava’s mouth and she made the most awful sound that I have ever heard, and then immediately fell to the ground. She tried to get up one last time, but her hind legs wouldn’t work because her spinal cord was severed. . . . Our golden retriever went over and was nudging Ava trying to help her. Ava fell back on the ground and laid there and died slowly. . . . I will never forget the sound of my daughter’s torturous cries that night.”

Unfortunately, Moore’s story is not unusual. Cases of cops shooting dogs happen with discouraging frequency. According to a Justice Department report, “in most police departments, the majority of shooting incidents involve animals, most frequently dogs.”   The shootings happen despite the fact that “dogs are seldom dangerous,” rarely bite, and even when they do, “the overwhelming majority of dog bites are minor, causing either no injury at all or injuries so minor that no medical care is required.”

The trouble is that police officers all too often don’t understand dog behavior. As the report (“The Problem of Dog-Related Incidents and Encounters”) explains: “an approaching dog is almost always friendly. A dog who feels threatened will usually try to keep his distance.”

Yet because officers often don’t know that, you get situations such as the one a couple weeks ago in North Carolina, where a Mooresville police officer shot a dog being trained as a service animal after it wandered onto his property.

Then there was the case — reported the same day — in Leander, Texas: Police officers serving a warrant went to the wrong house, then shot the family pet, Vinny. Or another recent case in which a Los Angeles officer shot a dog outside the owner’s home for reasons “not immediately clear,” according to news accounts. Or another recent case in which a St. Louis police officer shot his partner (yes, really) while aiming at “what they said was an aggressive-looking dog.”

Aggressive-looking? That’s an awfully low standard for pulling a trigger, isn’t it?

There are two opportunities to address this issue: after an unnecessary shooting, or before one.
After-the-fact remedies include lawsuits — with all the attendant expense, turmoil and negative publicity those can entail. (Brittany Moore has filed a federal lawsuit over the death of Ava.) Another remedy involves criminal prosecution. In December a Denver, Colo., police officer was charged with aggravated animal cruelty — a felony — after he shot a dog that had been restrained on a catch-pole.

Prosecutions are better than impunity, and they might send a message. But they represent a far-less-than-optimal solution.
The best answer is to train police officers on how to avoid shooting family dogs. That’s what Leander authorities did, bringing in trainer Jim Osorio after Vinny got shot. “I teach them dog behavior, types of aggression, how to approach dogs, and what types of tools are out there other than a firearm,” Osorio told Texas TV station KVUE.

Here in central Virginia, Henrico County trains officers on dog behavior through video, demonstrations and instruction from animal-control officers. But not all departments around the state are so enlightened. So Virginia lawmakers should introduce a measure like the Dog Protection Act that passed in Colorado last year.

The measure stipulates that Colorado policy is “to prevent, wherever possible, the shooting of dogs by law enforcement officers.” It requires every officer to be trained in handling domestic animals. The training is provided by a webinar created by volunteers — including animal-welfare experts — that costs the state nothing. And the law requires officers to let pet owners or animal-control personnel “control or remove a dog from the immediate area in order to permit a local law enforcement officer to discharge his or her duties” whenever that is feasible.

David Balmer, a Colorado state lawmaker who co-sponsored the measure, says the key to winning passage was cooperating with law-enforcement agencies — rather than simply trying to ram a mandate down their throats.
“We met with sheriffs and police departments from across Colorado,” he says, “incorporating their suggestions into the early drafts of our bill. At the beginning, we faced stiff opposition from law enforcement. As we met with them over and over, they eventually dropped their opposition and began helping us write the bill.”

The Colorado bill would make a good model for the commonwealth — and, for that matter, the country. It would save some dogs’ lives. It would keep some departments from getting sued — and perhaps keep a couple more partners from getting shot. And it would increase people’s trust of the police they see on patrol. What’s not to like?

That was an ugly story. I ask myself every day why I still live in this state. My answers are not as strong as they used to be since good jobs are evaporating and I'm nearing retirement.  At least I live in the more sophisticated, green, cosmopolitan part of the state but it seems that also is deteriorating as fast as the streets.

You don't find a loose Pit Bull to be an issue?

Here are just SOME of the Pitt Bull attacks I found that happened THIS WEEK:

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-boy-dies-pit-bull-attack-colton-20130923,0,3523949.story
http://www.ksdk.com/news/article/399788/3/Dog-euthanized-after-attacking-Alton-girl
http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/pit-bull-shot-after-attacking-teen-girl-in-milwaukee-b99105247z1-225002182.html
http://www.waow.com/story/23548965/2013/09/27/pit-bulls-attack-deputy-in-drunken-driver-stop
http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region_southeast_valley/gilbert/gilbert-dog-attack-four-pitbull-mix-dogs-impounded-at-maricopa-county-animal-care-and-control
http://www.thv11.com/news/article/280907/2/Toddler-attacked-by-pit-bull-now-doing-well
http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2013/sep/24/scotia-man-hospital-pit-bull-sought/
http://www.permianbasin360.com/story/two-teens-injured-in-pit-bull-attack/d/story/tjva3bTZBk2-00twD3cKsw
http://www.wzzm13.com/news/article/268466/14/Pit-bulls-get-out-of-yard-and-attack-man
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/09/27/antioch-pit-bulls-involved-in-mauling-of-boy-to-be-euthanized/
http://www.cbs7kosa.com/news/details.asp?ID=49191

These are all different attacks and I only got through six of the 18 pages on a Google News search of Pitt Bull Attacks filtered for this week only. I didn't include all the killed dog stories and I only included attacks that looked like they happened this week.

http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/2013-chicago-murders

Benjamin Hart, professor emeritus at the UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine and an animal behaviorist, said he wasn't surprised by Iona Keanaaina's assessment of Kava.

"It's quite common for a pit bull to show no signs of aggression," Hart said Wednesday. "People will call it a nice dog, a sweet dog, even the neighbors - and then all of a sudden something triggers the dog, and it attacks a human in a characteristic way of biting and hanging on until a lot of damage is done."

Hart said pit bulls are responsible for about 60 percent of dog attack fatalities each year, which is "way out of proportion" compared with other breeds. Pit bulls make up less than 5 percent of the American dog population.

Here are just SOME of the Pitt Bull attacks I found that happened THIS WEEK:

A couple years ago, you could find stories about arsonists burning black churches almost every day.
It turned out to be a reporting trend and not an actual crime trend.
http://www.csmonitor.com/1996/0710/071096.us.us.2.html

Sometimes you have to look past pop trends:
The unceasing bark of her pit bull is the only reason Tina McDaris noticed smoke coming out of her neighbor's home late Thursday morning.
http://www.fox23.com/mediacenter/local.aspx?videoid=4363624


When I was a kid, it was German Shepherds that were the boogey-dogs

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L53sAVRZUE4[/youtube]

The Pit Bull isn't the problem, the bucking owners are the problem. Unfortunately, jackasses who train them to be aggressive are attracted to them like vultures to a carcass.

Regardless, if your first response to seeing a dog, and said dog is not latched onto a part of your body, is to pull out your service weapon and shoot it, you should be fired immediately. Regardless of the breed. This idea that cops can go around discharging their weapons when they aren't being fired upon has got to go away. Police forces in this country are becoming more like paramilitary units. Why are we OK with devolving into a third world country?

Don't get me wrong, I'm wary of pits, especially if they're off leash. But again, it's not the breed, it's the owners who train them to be that way. Police dogs are also trained to bite the smile out of people, yet we don't shoot them when they retire. Go figure.

Benjamin Hart, professor emeritus at the UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine and an animal behaviorist, said he wasn't surprised by Iona Keanaaina's assessment of Kava.

"It's quite common for a pit bull to show no signs of aggression," Hart said Wednesday. "People will call it a nice dog, a sweet dog, even the neighbors - and then all of a sudden something triggers the dog, and it attacks a human in a characteristic way of biting and hanging on until a lot of damage is done."

When I was a kid, it was German Shepherds that were the boogey-dogs

Just because Pitt Bulls are not a leading cause of death or injury does not mean that there is not related predictable and common risk that can and should be mitigated. Homicide is way, way down the list of risks too, should we ignore murder because it's not a leading cause of death?

Which state would you like to live in that you can afford?

Which state would you like to live in if you could afford living anywhere?


(Other than the State of Confusion  ;D)

1. I don't know
2.Hawaii
3. My State of Confusion is seceding from the Union.

Most people cannot correctly determine a breed of dog any more than they can correctly identify the first three presidents of the US. And, pits are mixed with many other breeds either purposely or randomly. Shall we shoot all undetermined, but likely, pits and pit mixes? Shall we use the final solution on the breed?

What about the argument that its not the dog that kills, but the owners that raise and board the dog? Very similar to the gun argument.

I personally don't care to have the breed or be around them, but any dog can attack and most can kill either alone or in groups. Nothing excuses a man with a badge and a gun shooting a dog for no reason.

Regardless, if your first response to seeing a dog, and said dog is not latched onto a part of your body, is to pull out your service weapon and shoot it, you should be fired immediately. Regardless of the breed. This idea that cops can go around discharging their weapons when they aren't being fired upon has got to go away. Police forces in this country are becoming more like paramilitary units. Why are we OK with devolving into a third world country?

Don't get me wrong, I'm wary of pits, especially if they're off leash. But again, it's not the breed, it's the owners who train them to be that way. Police dogs are also trained to bite the smile out of people, yet we don't shoot them when they retire. Go figure.

A cop shot a dog the other day. Again.

Maybe you’ve seen the video — it was all over the Internet, complete with the dog’s grisly death spasms. Hawthorne, Calif., resident Leon Rosby was using his cellphone to record a standoff between police officers and armed robbers. At the end of the standoff, officers headed Rosby’s way. He put his dog, a Rottweiler named Max, in his car, then placed his arms behind his back to be cuffed. (He’d had run-ins with the law before.)

As the officers began taking Rosby into custody, Max jumped out the car window and approached. At first he sniffed the ground and paced, agitated but not threatening. When an officer made a move toward Max, he jumped and snapped.

So the officer killed him.

This was just a few days after police officers in the Chicago suburb of South Holland went to the house of Randy Green to investigate a report of an unleashed dog. While the Green family slept inside, the officers watched their dog, Grady, rest on the front porch.

After 20 minutes, according to the Greens’ lawsuit, “Grady approached Officer (Chad) Barden,” at which point Barden — who, the lawsuit contends, had a dog-catcher pole in his vehicle — shot him.

That incident followed by just a few days another one, also caught on video, in which two El Monte, Calif., officers entered — without notice — the fenced yard of Chi Nguyen and shot one of the family dogs when it approached.

The San Gabriel Valley Tribune reports “there were four children present at the home when the shooting occurred, and a children’s pool party was taking place in a front yard across the street, according to the family and the video.” El Monte police spokesman Dan Buehler said the officer “followed policy.”

That’s precisely the problem.

Across the country, both state laws and departmental policies seem to let police officers use deadly force as a first resort against family pets that often present little or no threat. In one infamous 2010 case from Missouri, an officer shot and killed a dog that had been subdued and held on a catch-pole. In another, an officer shot D.C. resident Marietta Robinson’s 13-year-old dog, Wrinkles, after Robinson had confined the dog to her bathroom.

Last year, police officers chasing two suspects in Lake Charles, La., shot a dog named Monkey that barked at them. In Henrico County last July, police officers went to the home of a homicide victim to notify the family of the slaying. When the family dog ran toward them, the officers shot and killed it. In Danville four years ago, a police officer shot and killed a 12-pound miniature dachshund. For growling at him.

Danville’s chief says the officer followed policy.

Police officers receive extensive training about the use of force when it is applied against humans. But how many departments provide training on dealing with pets? Very few, says the Humane Society. This despite the fact that, according to a Justice Department paper (“The Problem of Dog-Related Incidents and Encounters”), 39 percent of U.S. homes have dogs.

More than half of dog owners “consider their dogs family members,” it continues, “and another 45.1 percent view them as companions or pets.” Less than 1.5 percent view them as property.

Do we really need systematic training to combat a few isolated incidents, however unfortunate? The question rests on a false premise. Civil liberties writer Radley Balko notes that over a nine-year period, Milwaukee officers killed 434 dogs — about one every eight days. And that’s just one city. Across the country, according to Justice, “the majority of (police) shooting incidents involve animals, most frequently dogs.”

But surely those shootings occur because the animals themselves pose a serious threat, right? Nope. The Justice Department says not only that “dogs are seldom dangerous” but that even when they are, “the overwhelming majority of dog bites are minor, causing either no injury at all or injuries so minor that no medical care is required.”

As Balko writes, “If dangerous dogs are so common, one would expect to find frequent reports of vicious attacks on meter readers, postal workers, firemen and delivery workers. But according to a spokesman from the United States Postal Service, serious dog attacks on mail carriers are vanishingly rare.”

Yet serious — deadly — attacks against dogs are all too common. They shouldn’t be. And the solutions are obvious: Departmental policies, backed by state law, should require police officers to use lethal force against companion animals only as a last resort.

Officers should receive training in safe and non-lethal methods of animal control — and in dog behavior: “An approaching dog is almost always friendly,” according to the Justice Department; “a dog who feels threatened will usually try to keep his distance.”

Finally, lawmakers should require an investigation of every dog shooting, to avoid what the public too often gets now: a knee-jerk defense of the officer involved and a callous dismissal of the family’s suffering.

After all, if a child ran at a policeman with a knife the officer might fire in self-defense — yet nobody would just let it go at that. Animals don’t occupy the same moral station as children, but family pets are more than just property. A badge and a gun should not be a license to shoot them at whim.

An Oklahoma family accused local law enforcement of pointing his gun at two young children before shooting and killing one of their dogs, KOKH-TV reported on Friday.

The homeowner, Cindy Wickham, said the incident began when an unidentified Logan County sheriff’s deputy went to her home in Guthrie in response to reports of “screaming” in the area. At the time, Wickham was watching her two young nephews and her two dogs, Charlie and Joker, were in the yard.
Wickham said she told the deputy to stay behind the fenced entryway to the residence, since she wasn’t sure how the dogs would react.

“I said, ‘Don’t come in,’” Wickham told KOKH. “And he just went ahead and went in.”
When the deputy entered, she said, Charlie approached him and began sniffing him. At that point, the deputy allegedly pulled his gun out and pointed it at not only the dog, but Wickham and the two boys.

“It just happened so fast that I couldn’t do nothing, I couldn’t prevent it.” Wickham told KOKH. “The only thing I could do was put my nephews behind my back.”
Shortly afterward, the deputy shot and killed the animal. Neither Wickham nor the boys were injured.

Authorities in Logan County have not commented on the incident aside from saying it is under investigation. However, Wickham said the deputy told her, “The motherf*cking dog bit me” after shooting the dog.

One of Wickham’s neighbors, Kaci Malicoat, backed up her account of the incident.
“I could see [the deputy] waving the gun back and forth at her and the dog,” Malicoat told KOKH.

I have been to Maui Hawaii.  It was very nice but it was expensive.  Housing was out of reach, moneywise.  Food from the grocery store was higher than here but not absurdly so. Gas for the rental car was about 30% higher as I remember (2004).

And Dobermans.

Shot 2 more the following Monday:
http://www.fox23.com/news/local/story/Tulsa-police-shoot-and-kill-dog/an358IUPjkmR3SsfEGcudg.cspx

Does Tulsa just not have a functioning Animal Control department?

This was posted to Facebook. Absolutely horrible.

It's all about target practice for these A-Holes with guns.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2672405/The-dramatic-moment-dog-owner-berates-officers-shooting-beloved-pet-dead-backyard.html

Earlier this week a second Baltimore police officer was suspended in a shocking case in which he and another cop allegedly slit a dog's throat.


The Baltimore Sun reported that officer Thomas Schmidt has been placed on a paid administrative leave along with fellow officer Jeffrey Bolger who has been charged with animal cruelty.


The pair allegedly held down and cut the throat of a Shar-Pei, with officials saying there was no reason to kill the dog if it was already restrained.


Schmidt is a 24-year veteran of the Special Operations Section, serving alongside Bolger who was hired in 1992.


The union did not provide information regarding the terms of Schmidt's suspension.


The alleged attack happened on Saturday morning in Brewers Hill, a south-eastern district of the city, after police responded to a report of a woman being bitten.


Deputy Commissioner Dean Palmere said officers gained control of the animal, a seven-year-old Chinese Shar-Pei, with a dog pole and an officer used a knife to cut the dog's throat.


Late last night, Detective Jeremy Silbert issued a statement identifying that policeman as Bolger.


Announcing that internal affairs were investigating the killing, Mr Palmere called the incident 'outrageous and unacceptable'.

Witnesses told police that as Bolger got out of his vehicle, he said: 'I'm going to f*****g gut this thing.'


He waited until colleagues got control of the dog before bending down and slashing its throat with a knife, witnesses said. It bled to death before animal control arrived, police told the Baltimore Sun.

Worse was the Baltimore cop that slit the throat of a dog restrained with a noose.

It's all about target practice for these A-Holes with guns.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2672405/The-dramatic-moment-dog-owner-berates-officers-shooting-beloved-pet-dead-backyard.html

Another Tulsa cop shoots another dog the next day, but this time with a happier ending:

We could compare it to the Jerome Ersland pharmacy robbery shooting:  the first shot was self-defense...the coup de grâce was murder.
BUT if our D.A. is too cowardly to charge an OHP tweaker for gunning down a random person while picking up his ho at the crack hotel, he's certainly not going to irritate the FOP with a rash of animal cruelty offenses.

We could compare it to the Jerome Ersland pharmacy robbery shooting:  the first shot was self-defense...the coup de grâce was murder.
BUT if our D.A. is too cowardly to charge an OHP tweaker for gunning down a random person while picking up his ho at the crack hotel, he's certainly not going to irritate the FOP with a rash of animal cruelty offenses.

Oh I wasnt expecting "justice" beyond a quiet payout of taxpayer money to the victims, but at least the local media didnt just brush it off.

"They were sniffing each other and the man pulled his dog back and his hind legs didn't move. So it reared up and the other dog moved forward and the man reached back behind him and pulled out a silver revolver, bent down and shot the dog"
http://www.kjrh.com/news/local-news/off-duty-tulsa-cop-shoots-kills-neighborhood-dog


"He reached for his pistol, leaned over, and shot Titus point blank in his neck. And then as he falls to the ground, flipping around, he leaned down and shot him again in the head, kicked him to see if he was dead, he wasn't, so then he shot him again in the side." 
She says another officer who responded told her that if it had been a private citizen who had opened fire on her dog, he would have probably made an arrest, but a TPD spokesman told KRMG that because the officer was off duty and did not use his deparment-issued weapon, the case would be treated as if he was any private citizen.
http://www.krmg.com/news/news/local/-duty-officer-shoots-kills-dog-midtown-tulsa/nhLjx/

And there was this, just about a year and a half later... NOTICE OF TERMINATION OF ACTIVE PROBATION SUPERVISION

A TPD spokesman told KRMG that because the officer was off duty and did not use his deparment-issued weapon, the case would be treated as if he was any private citizen.[/font]

Why should he have to report to the probation officer once a month?   He still is on "probation," he just doesn't have to check in now.

It's interesting just how bad a shot most cops are....I'm not quite sure whether that is a scary thing because they can't shoot, or would be scarier if they could....

Either way, I guess I'm wondering about the wisdom of seriously un-trained people running around with guns when they can't manage properly!  Too often, there is a bigger array of animate targets surrounding the area that are at serious risk from out of control gunfire!

Policeman Kevin Dupre describes using a 6-month old puppy for target practice:
“I raised my duty weapon to the ready position pointed at the growling dog’s head. As soon as I lifted my pistol, the dog began coming up the hill, continuing to growl and display its teeth. The other dog began backing away. I fired three shots at it. It rolled back into the ditch and died.”

What. The. Hell.

To clarify:

The home owner did nothing wrong.
The home owner was not accused of a crime.
The dog did nothing wrong.
The dog did not leave his property.
The deputy went onto the homeowner/dog's property.

This results in a family pet being shot and left for dead?

In what world is that right?
In what world is it not animal cruelty to shoot an animal and leave it?

What. The. Hell.

To clarify:

The home owner did nothing wrong.
The home owner was not accused of a crime.
The dog did nothing wrong.
The dog did not leave his property.
The deputy went onto the homeowner/dog's property.

This results in a family pet being shot and left for dead?

In what world is that right?
In what world is it not animal cruelty to shoot an animal and leave it?

There is one small point to all this that I didn't see mentioned.  There are leash laws in Owasso and surrounds.  The dog was out running loose in the street.  She should have had the dog restrained and none of this would have been an issue.

There is one small point to all this that I didn't see mentioned.  There are leash laws in Owasso and surrounds.  The dog was out running loose in the street.  She should have had the dog restrained and none of this would have been an issue.

The sheriff responded Friday regarding the dog that was left bleeding at the home for the owner's children to find. "I'm not getting into the dog ambulance business. We can't do that," Rogers County Sheriff Scott Walton said.

What an A-hole

I believe he's the same doucherocket that appeared in the Tulsa Gold commercials a few years back.

The dog was in the street?

Can you cite that?

Why is it the title Sheriff seems to corrupt people who once seemed to be pretty good cops?  Three in this area the position seems to have absolutely corrupted I can think of in recent memory:

Larry Fugate in Creek Co., Glanz in Tulsa, and Walton in Rogers.  Is there a sense of entitlement that comes with the position or what?

There is one small point to all this that I didn't see mentioned.  There are leash laws in Owasso and surrounds.  The dog was out running loose in the street.  She should have had the dog restrained and none of this would have been an issue.

The dog was on its own property. The Deputy pulled into the homeowners long driveway and pulled up towards the house and the deputy got out. The dog was barking and as the officer continued towards the house. The dog then starting moving at the officer and he shot the dog. The dog was 100 yards from any property border when it was shot. The dog never touched the officer. This is from the Sheriff's own version of events (and the homeowners security camera). There are no leash laws on your own property. I also question whether or not there are leash laws in Rogers County outside city limits - I highly suspect NOT.

The officer should have gotten back in his car, like the postman, UPS, FedEx, Girl Scouts or any other host of visitors surely do and none of this would have been an issue.

"Excuse me ma'am. From time to time our officers may be investigating a non-violent crime that was long ago over and for which you were not a suspect, but in the course of that investigation we may come onto your property. So we're going to need you to remove all fences, undo your locks, chain your dogs up, pick up the cat poop, and make sure to have a pot of coffee on at all times. Otherwise we will knock down your fence, bust your locks, shoot your dog, staple your cats butt shut, and take whatever we dang well please. K Thx Bai."

And if we are gonna try to convict people of murder for killing a police dog - have seen news items about this in the past - where are the assault charges against this guy??

The dog was on its own property. The Deputy pulled into the homeowners long driveway and pulled up towards the house and the deputy got out. The dog was barking and as the officer continued towards the house. The dog then starting moving at the officer and he shot the dog. The dog was 100 yards from any property border when it was shot. The dog never touched the officer. This is from the Sheriff's own version of events (and the homeowners security camera). There are no leash laws on your own property. I also question whether or not there are leash laws in Rogers County outside city limits - I highly suspect NOT.

The officer should have gotten back in his car, like the postman, UPS, FedEx, Girl Scouts or any other host of visitors surely do and none of this would have been an issue.

"Excuse me ma'am. From time to time our officers may be investigating a non-violent crime that was long ago over and for which you were not a suspect, but in the course of that investigation we may come onto your property. So we're going to need you to remove all fences, undo your locks, chain your dogs up, pick up the cat poop, and make sure to have a pot of coffee on at all times. Otherwise we will knock down your fence, bust your locks, shoot your dog, staple your cats butt shut, and take whatever we dang well please. K Thx Bai."

Something similar happened a week earlier... guy getting his face eaten is charged with "mistreating a police dog" when he tried to pull the dog off.

I have seen cases in which the dog was set upon a suspect, the dog grabbed the suspects leg as it was trained, and the suspect tried to kick the dog loose as is ones reflex.  The underlying charges were dropped (it was the wrong person), but they kept pressing the "assaulting a police officer" charge.  I left that firm before the case concluded...but I thought that was manifestly unfair.  Even if my own dog started biting my leg for some reason, my reflex would be to try and kick it off.

A QuikTrip security guard shot at a dog after a man, who was allegedly attempting to steal beer, ordered his dog to attack the guard.

A man entered the store and allegedly attempted to steal beer. The man allegedly ordered his dog to attack when confronted by the security guard in the parking lot. Witnesses reported and surveillance video indicated that the dog chased the guard around the parking lot before the shot was fired.

https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/quiktrip-security-guard-shoots-at-dog-after-man-allegedly-orders/article_99f0d458-afe1-56ab-b45c-73aef9e72517.html


How much would A&E pay for that video?