# Mother Explains Fatal Pit Bull Mauling



## MA-Caver (Jun 12, 2005)

OH C'MON!!! (see bold) This article had me stunned with what the mother did and *said* concerning the death of her son. I mean why lock the boy in the basement... jeez lock the damn dogs in the basement. Seems that the dogs had more value to her than the boy... as evident by her fatalistic statement of the incident. 


> SAN FRANCISCO - The mother of a 12-year-old boy killed in his own home by one of the family's two pit bulls says she had been so concerned about one of the dogs that she shut her son in the basement to protect him.
> 
> Maureen Faibish said she ordered Nicholas to stay in the basement while she did errands on June 3, the day he was attacked by one or both of the dogs. She said she was worried about the male dog, Rex, who was acting possessive because the female, Ella, was in heat.
> 
> ...


Oh but NOW she wants to put the dog down... well geez I guess it's better than letting the dog have another chance at biting someone. 
This is irresponsible parenting and pet-ownership all in one. IMO


----------



## arnisador (Jun 12, 2005)

I just read this on Yahoo! myself. I don't know what to say. It wasn't her son's time to go...she made a stupid decision and he paid for it. I hope they find some way to prosecute her--just a suspended sentence, maybe, but something that clearly says "You were wrong."


----------



## MJS (Jun 12, 2005)

Boy, talk about an un-fit mother.  This person should not even have kids!!  A few things caught my eye here.



> 1- The mother of a 12-year-old boy killed in his own home by one of the family's two pit bulls says she had been so concerned about one of the dogs that she shut her son in the basement to protect him.



But here she says:




> My kids got along great with (the dogs). We were never seeing any kind of violent tendencies."



I'm confused about those statements.  Sounds like she is contradicting herself.

Next, she puts her SON in the basement??? Ummm...I think its the dogs that should have been in the basement!

And then we have her statement of her saying that it must have been his time to go?????

And no charges have been filed.  This woman IMHO needs to spend some time in jail.

Mike


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 12, 2005)

MACaver said:
			
		

> OH C'MON!!! (see bold) This article had me stunned with what the mother did and *said* concerning the death of her son. I mean why lock the boy in the basement... jeez lock the damn dogs in the basement. Seems that the dogs had more value to her than the boy... as evident by her fatalistic statement of the incident.
> 
> Oh but NOW she wants to put the dog down... well geez I guess it's better than letting the dog have another chance at biting someone.
> This is irresponsible parenting and pet-ownership all in one. IMO


This woman should be charged with manslaughter and child endangerment. I don't take issue with pitbulls as a breed, but I do take issue with the majority of pitbull owners. In my area it's easy to spot a criminal, 9 times out of 10 they own pitbulls, and the dogs are smarter than the owners.  If we have a dog bite in our town, it's by a pitbull owned by one of these dirt bags, and they make excuses for the dog every single time (those kids were teasing the dog, blah blah blah).  I told a lady, I didn't blame her dog, I blamed HER.  I told her she didn't deserve to have kids or a dog.


----------



## shesulsa (Jun 12, 2005)

There are a lot of things wrong with this whole scenario.

 1. Why lock a 12-year-old boy in basement while she runs errands? This is plenty old enough for him to accompany her on any legal, upstanding errand she has to run.

 Options: Lock the ****ing dogs OUT, take the boy with her, put dogs in dog run or tie them to a tree, get rid of the monsters (dogs) ....

  2. The kid had some kind of _major head injury_?  What?!?  

 Options: I suppose it's feasible that he was bitten and mauled and either tripped and fell hitting his head, or passed out from trauma or blood loss and hit his head ... but rather than indicate he was mauled to death, the article (such as it is, an article) states he had a 'massive head injury' ... wtf?

 3. The male dog was implicated as being the culprit of the mauling, however the officer shot and killed the female. She was never worried before about violence and these dogs so ... but thinks of the male as the murderer of her son.

 Options: Perhaps the male attacked until the boy was down and the female attacked the officer. Perhaps the female killed the boy. Perhaps both of them attacked the boy until he staggered and hit his head. Perhaps Mommy Dearest killed her son and left him there for the dogs to maul and the female was protecting the body when the officer got there ....

  She's lying about something.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 12, 2005)

shesulsa said:
			
		

> There are a lot of things wrong with this whole scenario.
> 
> 1. Why lock a 12-year-old boy in basement while she runs errands? This is plenty old enough for him to accompany her on any legal, upstanding errand she has to run.
> 
> ...


Even if every single word she says is the absolute truth, she still deserves to go to prison for a very long time.


----------



## shesulsa (Jun 13, 2005)

sgtmac_46 said:
			
		

> Even if every single word she says is the absolute truth, she still deserves to go to prison for a very long time.


 Agreed.


----------



## MA-Caver (Jun 13, 2005)

sgtmac_46 said:
			
		

> Even if every single word she says is the absolute truth, she still deserves to go to prison for a very long time.


Ya well it'd be interesting to follow this particular case and see what happens with it. I also agree that the woman should go to prison as well.


----------



## shesulsa (Jun 16, 2005)

More articles on the incident:

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/columnists/scott_herhold/11907544.htm?source=rss&channel=mercurynews_local


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/06/15/BABADIGEST3.DTL&feed=rss.news


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/06/12/MNGJND7G5L1.DTL&feed=rss.news


----------



## The Kai (Jun 16, 2005)

Did she think that propping a shovel against the door would stop a 12 year old kid???


Tragic accident??   Let's see having two of the most vicious animal on the face of the earth around my family.  More like a Inevitable occurance.  what next a surprise shooting in the pistol juggling family??


----------



## MA-Caver (Jun 16, 2005)

Your sarcasm is noted Kai... (grins). 
What is really odd is just overall the woman's attitude towards the whole event. It's almost like if she came home and found one of the dogs chewed up a sofa pillow or something... "oh darn!... (gently) bad dog bad dog... sigh, oh well just the dog's nature I guess..." 
She stated that she has no regrets ... HUH??  :idunno: 



> This is from one of the articles
> Faibish said she was concerned that the male pit bull, Rex, was acting possessive because the female, Ella, was in heat. Apparently, Nicholas found a way to get the door open and come upstairs. At that point Faibish believes he walked in while the dogs were mating and was attacked by Rex.
> 
> "It was Rex, I know it in my heart,'' Faibish said. "My younger dog (Ella) was in heat and anyone who came near her, Rex saw as a threat. He may have been trying to mate. It was a freak accident. It was just the heat of the moment.''


Oh gee a freak accident in the heat of the moment. 
I've turned corners and come across dogs getting it on ... t'was never attacked ... if they weren't tied then they'd usually break off and split or kept right on going. Oh but they weren't pits so mebbe I just got lucky huh? 

There's something really wrong here.


----------



## Ceicei (Jun 16, 2005)

You know, it is odd.... In the third article that Shesulsa linked from post #9, the mother said she sent her 9 year old son to the store to get snacks (for her 12-year old son). Why not send Nicky himself to get the food?


> Before she left the house, Faibish sent her 9-year-old son to the store to buy Nicholas a soda, bagel and chips. He also had video games to keep him busy.


Next, she lets daughter go to a picnic while she locks her son in the basement and runs some errands.


> For one, she wishes she'd persuaded Nicholas to go to a  picnic with his younger sister, Ashley.



 I still get weird feelings why she would lock a son downstairs if she is so worried about the dogs? She didn't want to lock the dogs down there because she's worried about them destroying stuff in plastic bags?  Priorities seem to be mixed up here.

   And what is up with training the female pitbull to lick off her make-up?  



> ...and woke Maureen Faibish up every morning by licking her face. Ella was trained to lick her makeup off and kiss her ear.


 I think the mom is way too attached to the canines.

   - Ceicei


----------



## Bammx2 (Jun 16, 2005)

Mom should be put down.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 16, 2005)

Bammx2 said:
			
		

> Mom should be put down.


 I heard that.


----------



## mj_lover (Jun 16, 2005)

Bammx2 said:
			
		

> Mom should be put down.


agreed, thats bloody ridiculus.


----------



## AikidoCal (Jun 17, 2005)

arnisador said:
			
		

> I just read this on Yahoo! myself. I don't know what to say. It wasn't her son's time to go...she made a stupid decision and he paid for it. I hope they find some way to prosecute her--just a suspended sentence, maybe, but something that clearly says "You were wrong."


What the so called Mother did was wrong and she has some serious issue, if she has any sense of Motherhood her punishment will be a lifetime of self blame and grief. Regardless of how she tries and justifies or rationalizes it. It really bothers me to hear things like this, the way people treat kids.

This is so horrifing, in a weird way, to comfort myself from this horror of what I read, I think for a second with a Mother like that he might be better off in Heaven. Yet, I am so conflicted with the horrible way he died. I can't image such a horrible parent.


----------



## Jmh7331 (Jun 18, 2005)

Something is definitely fishy here.  I'm not buying the women's (I refuse to call her a mother) story.  Anyway, has anyone ever tried to pull dogs apart when the were "doing it"?  It's almost impossible.  Regardless of how, what, when or why, I think the mother should be locked in a room with a couple pitbulls.


----------



## Bester (Jun 18, 2005)

I'm actually at a loss for words.
This woman, no, this piece of ****, needs to face her failings as a mother.
Let the remaining dog maul her to death, then put it down.
Let her feel what her son who she murdered by neglect and her own stupidity felt as he died.

A slow death. A painful death. One that makes her pray it ends.


----------



## MA-Caver (Jun 18, 2005)

Jmh7331 said:
			
		

> Something is definitely fishy here.  I'm not buying the women's (I refuse to call her a mother) story.  Anyway, has anyone ever tried to pull dogs apart when the were "doing it"?  It's almost impossible.  Regardless of how, what, when or why, I think the mother should be locked in a room with a couple pitbulls.


Given this woman's attitude towards the breed, she'd probably love it. I mean if you are willing to trust a potentially vicious animal to lick off your make up... C'mon! 
Ya, you're right she's lost the privaledge of the honorific "Mother".


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 18, 2005)

MACaver said:
			
		

> Given this woman's attitude towards the breed, she'd probably love it. I mean if you are willing to trust a potentially vicious animal to lick off your make up... C'mon!
> Ya, you're right she's lost the privaledge of the honorific "Mother".


She needs to lose her freedom for several decades to come.  That is justice in this case.


----------



## silatman (Jun 18, 2005)

I dont think she will go to jail its pretty obvious she doesnt have a brain so its going to be pretty easy for the defence to plead insnity in the case.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 18, 2005)

silatman said:
			
		

> I dont think she will go to jail its pretty obvious she doesnt have a brain so its going to be pretty easy for the defence to plead insnity in the case.


I predict she'll not only go to jail, but it will be for greater than a decade.  California has already set a precendent for trying for murder people who willfully keep dangerous animals that subsequently kill a human being.  That very court, as a matter of fact.  This situation is even MORE aggrevious than the last case, and I think it will likely resulted in this woman (rightfully) losing her freedom for a long time to come.


----------



## Paul B (Jun 18, 2005)

The woman should be put away,no doubt.

The only thing *I* have issues with is labeling a particular breed as viscious. ALL dogs are potentially viscious.Period.

The difference is between recognizing and most importantly putting the kabosh on aggression and domination issues as a pup...especially in large breeds. 

Most people think that it's cute and funny to see a little ankle-biter Yorkie go after someone and start yanking on their pant-leg..Ha Ha. Replace the Yorkie with a Doberman and suddenly it's not funny at all. The same aggressive traits are present in both instances and absolutely must be dealt with. 

When irresponsible owners and a lack of knowledge about basic canine behavioral traits coincide..we have a story like this. It's sad,tragic,but most of all completely preventable. That's my 2 c's.


----------



## arnisador (Jun 18, 2005)

I doubt they'll give her a long sentence--they'll consider it a mitigating circumstance, or a 'sentence partially served', that it was _her_ kid.


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jun 19, 2005)

Paul B said:
			
		

> The woman should be put away,no doubt.
> 
> The only thing *I* have issues with is labeling a particular breed as viscious. ALL dogs are potentially viscious.Period.
> 
> ...


 Oh, I agree.  99.9% of the time it's idiot owners who bear the full blame.


----------



## shesulsa (Jun 30, 2005)

Mother charged with child endangerment.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/06/25/BAGPQDEQIR1.DTL


----------



## shesulsa (Jun 30, 2005)

sgtmac_46 said:
			
		

> I predict she'll not only go to jail, but it will be for greater than a decade. California has already set a precendent for trying for murder people who willfully keep dangerous animals that subsequently kill a human being. That very court, as a matter of fact. This situation is even MORE aggrevious than the last case, and I think it will likely resulted in this woman (rightfully) losing her freedom for a long time to come.


 Things are different in San Francisco.


----------



## rupton (Jun 30, 2005)

sgtmac_46 said:
			
		

> Even if every single word she says is the absolute truth, she still deserves to go to prison for a very long time.


You got that right!  And then to make such a trite and stupid statement like "It's Nicky's time to go, when you're born you're destined to go and this was his time." ?!?!?!?! That's so cavalier it really burns me.  Here's a simple statement that I usually don't say to or about anyone but it seems to apply here: FREAKIN' IDIOT!!!!


----------



## shesulsa (Jul 5, 2005)

Hmmmmmmm.  I went a-Googling for an update on this case and found this on our Dear Ms. Faibish et al:



> <snip>
> 
> His grandchildren who live in the building can do no wrong and run, rollerskate, scream, jump off furniture, beat each other, and generally trash the place from dawn until 10 p.m. everyday, but don't complain....or you'll incur the wrath of
> his psychotic daughter, mother of the kids (Maureen Faibish).
> ...


 http://www.ripoffreport.com/view.asp?id=11440&view=printer


----------



## MA-Caver (Jul 5, 2005)

Model citizens.


----------



## BaiKaiGuy (Jul 5, 2005)

I'm glad she got charged, she deserves it.  She is a sad and sorry excuse for a mother, and I can honestly say if the case came my way I'd turn it down.  She should be a chew toy for police attack dogs in training...


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 6, 2005)

shesulsa said:
			
		

> Hmmmmmmm. I went a-Googling for an update on this case and found this on our Dear Ms. Faibish et al:
> 
> 
> http://www.ripoffreport.com/view.asp?id=11440&view=printer


And her father, the Slum lord extraordinaire. I think I know this woman (or a couple dozen just like her.) They didn't mention anything about her pitbulls...probably just ran out or space, or the dogs were the LEAST of the buildings problems.

If this woman manages to avoid prison, i'd like to ask her to volunteer to help train my K9 Zane.


----------



## shesulsa (Sep 22, 2005)

A news story that fell off the radar:

 http://www.sfexaminer.com/articles/2005/07/29/news/20050729_ne04_mauling.txt

http://www.sfexaminer.com/articles/2005/06/24/news/20050634_ne01_mauled.txt


----------



## MA-Caver (Sep 22, 2005)

> The charges carry a possible prison sentence of two to six years, with an additional four years since the alleged child endangerment resulted in death.
> 
> Although Harris wouldn't discuss the evidence that lead to the charges, she said witness interviews as well as physical evidence were involved.
> 
> ...


Two to six years with an additonal four years... just doesn't satisfy the mind does it?


----------



## Cruentus (Sep 23, 2005)

sgtmac_46 said:
			
		

> This woman should be charged with manslaughter and child endangerment. I don't take issue with pitbulls as a breed, but I do take issue with the majority of pitbull owners. In my area it's easy to spot a criminal, 9 times out of 10 they own pitbulls, and the dogs are smarter than the owners.  If we have a dog bite in our town, it's by a pitbull owned by one of these dirt bags, and they make excuses for the dog every single time (those kids were teasing the dog, blah blah blah).  I told a lady, I didn't blame her dog, I blamed HER.  I told her she didn't deserve to have kids or a dog.



One word on this: blame the owners not the dog breed.

Unfortunatily, the idea of owning a "pit bull" appeals to the criminal element out there. These people are trying to create an "image" of some sort, and they pick that particular breed to abuse. 

But the key here is that these dogs are raised poorly, and treated poorly, and they grow up mean. THis would happened with most breeds of working dogs treated in the fashion that these types treat their "pit-bulls." Also, note that many times the media reports a "pit-bull" mauling, they aren't even pure bred pit-bulls - and some cases they aren't pits at all.

If raised properly, however, I am well convinced that American Pit Bull Terriers are one of the best breeds of dogs you could have. They are great companions, great with kids, and are all around a good family dog.

As you may have guessed, I own a young pit-bull myself. However, I tell most people that he is an American Staffordshire Terrier because that sounds a lot less threatening.


----------



## heretic888 (Sep 23, 2005)

Tulisan said:
			
		

> As you may have guessed, I own a young pit-bull myself. However, I tell most people that he is an American Staffordshire Terrier because that sounds a lot less threatening.



 :lol:  :lol:  :lol:


----------



## shesulsa (Nov 23, 2005)

An interesting happening on the books in Frisco:

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2005/11/16/news/state/111505193909.txt

Abstract:


> City supervisors passed a new set of laws Tuesday requiring spaying and neutering of pit bulls five months after the fatal mauling of a 12-year-old boy by his family's pit bulls.
> 
> The decision came in the face of a threat of a ballot initiative to overturn a tough new state dog law. It is the latest move in the contentious debate about how to regulate pit bulls after the death of Nicholas Faibish in June.                     "This will serve as a model for other cities in how to responsibly craft laws and policies that deal with dog aggression," said Supervisor Bevan Dufty, who wrote the ordinances. "We needed to do something."


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Nov 23, 2005)

Tulisan said:
			
		

> One word on this: blame the owners not the dog breed.
> 
> Unfortunatily, the idea of owning a "pit bull" appeals to the criminal element out there. These people are trying to create an "image" of some sort, and they pick that particular breed to abuse.
> 
> ...


 Exactly.  Though, i'll also add one thing most people don't understand about dogs and temperament.  Along with poor raising, poor treatment, and limited socialization that results in mean dogs, we can't underestimate the effect of junk breeding.   If I have a junk pit-bull that's a little crazy and my dope head buddy has another pit-bull that's a little crazy, and we breed them together, because we're not only idiots, but we NOTHING about dog breeding and temperment....SURPRISE, we end up with dangerous animals.

Breedings from backyard breeders of pitbulls, who's only concern is breeding big, muscular 'tough' dogs, with bad temperaments and questionable stability at best, is resulting in a bunch of junk examples of pitbulls that are not only dangerous to the public, but dangerous to legitmate owners and breeders of pitbulls.

I think this statement follows in line with the article Shesula quoted above.  Those people who can't responsible own a dog like a pitbull have ZERO business breeding them.

I wouldn't be opposed, at least in the abstract, to the argument that perhaps states should require licensing for anyone seeking to breed dogs.  A thorough understanding of animal husbandry and genetic traits would be a good start.


----------



## shesulsa (Nov 23, 2005)

And the SF/SPCA's position:

http://www.sfspca.org/WhereWeStand/wherewestand_0507.shtml


----------



## The Kai (Nov 23, 2005)

Buying and owning a pit bull and defending the animal's temperment,   is like owning a Hummer and explaining it's fuel efficency!!


----------



## Cryozombie (Nov 23, 2005)

We just had an episode of that in the town my office is located in... a pair of Pitbulls escaped from a fenced in yard and mauled either 6 or 8 people.


----------



## Cruentus (Nov 24, 2005)

Once again, people who know little about dogs and who can't distingush crap from their *** thinking that breed specific legislation is the answer. The answer is not attempting to force a breed to become extinct, whether through genocide or forced neutering/spaying or otherwise.

The answer is very simple... owners need to be responsible for their dogs by law. So if a dog goes on a mauling spree, the owner faces criminal charges, not just civil suits. These people who are negligent with their dogs get put away, and the people who are not negligent have the rights to own whatever dog they want. Simple solution if you ask me.

As to Dog breeding, I agree with SgtMac on his statement. I'd like to add that most dogs called "pit-bulls" in the media that are in these maulings are not full breed pit bulls from good stock. Often times they are mixed breeds that can have much poorer temperments then a full bred from good stock (lab-pit mixes are common, for example, and are genetically prone to have much poorer temperments then a full bred). 

And last thing: Todd, I think that you need to actually read a book on pit bulls that reviews the breed objectively before you make comments on the subject. 

Paul


----------



## Cruentus (Feb 20, 2006)

I am going to rehash this thread because I came accross this movie that I thought was very good and that I think that some of you should take a look:

http://www.americanpitbullterrier.org/pitbull_content.html

BTW...my dog will be 8 months this week, and is exceling in obedience at the moment. I am very proud of him... at some point when I have time to spar, which is less and less lately, I'll post pics....

Paul


----------



## Touch Of Death (Feb 20, 2006)

That woman should get the death penalty. 
Sean


----------



## Jonathan Randall (Feb 21, 2006)

Tulisan said:
			
		

> I am going to rehash this thread because I came accross this movie that I thought was very good and that I think that some of you should take a look:
> 
> http://www.americanpitbullterrier.org/pitbull_content.html
> 
> ...


 
Sorry you are so busy, because I always love to read your posts.

If all dog owners were as conscientious as you are, there probably would be far less maulings like this.


----------



## Cruentus (Feb 21, 2006)

Man....I just reread that story. I am shocked and even pissed as to how irresponsable that owner was on so many levels. 

* Something about training dogs to anyone interested:*

Something I wanted to mention is that lack of proper training for working animals is also a major problem. There are too many "armchair" trainers out there who watch the "dog whisperer" and think that they are going to be the next Ceasar Milan with there working dog. They try to use read about or watched methods based on research that asserts the owner as the "Alpha" dog, and instills a "pack mentality" among a household. This requires the humans of the house to be "more dominant" then the dog. 

This is not only ridicules, but unreliable for a working breed and can be detrimental to the development of the dog or the safety of the household. Dogs have been domesticated for hundreds, if not thousands of years. Being compliant to humans is instilled in their genetics. Instilling a pack mentality based off dominance is MOVING BACKWARDS, in my opinion. Dogs understand one thing the best: what benifits them. They do what benefits them. So, if they are trained through positive reinforcement to know that by listening to members of the household, they will get the best benefits, then it builds off the domesticated side of the dog produces a well trained and safe animal that doesn't rely on "dominence." 

"Pack mentality" training works to a degree because when dogs run in a pack, by obeying the "dominate" pack member, they get the best benefits, ie what is best for them. HOWEVER, the problems with this can be huge. Dogs in a pack are ALWAYS trying to get a better position in the pack. There are no equals in a pack, one dog is always above another. Position is gauged by who is most dominant, and dominance is determined by fear and intimidation. If you are going with the theory that you are the "dominant" owner, then you have to ALWAYS BE DOMINANT with your dog, and you have to train your animal with the use of fear and intimidation rather then positive reinforcement. If you or another family member shows weakness around a working breed, your likely to lose your dominant position. This means that with a kid in the house, you could have a working breed see the kid as a subordinant with drastic results. When you hear of dogs "turning" on their owners, it is usally a case of a dog challenging the owner for the dominant position because the owner showed weakness of some kind. What a crappy way to run your household, and not very loving of an environment that I would envision I would want my dog to be in, if you ask me.

Anyways, I am sure that there is a lot more then bad training going on in the household of the mentioned story, considering that pure bred American Pit Bull Terriers are far less likely to maul someone then other working breeds (the pics of the dog that I saw lead me to believe that these weren't pure bred animals, btw). Usually, there is something else going on that the media fails to catch...

Paul


----------



## SAVAGE (Feb 21, 2006)

Mom should be locked in a basement with her two dogs with a raw steak tied aroungd her throat!

This sort of thing makes me mad!


----------



## Bigshadow (Feb 21, 2006)

Tulisan said:
			
		

> I am going to rehash this thread because I came accross this movie that I thought was very good and that I think that some of you should take a look:
> 
> http://www.americanpitbullterrier.org/pitbull_content.html
> 
> ...


That was a great flash video!   I have always thought that people made them that way.  I agree with you on that.

As for the woman, in the original post, she is a horrible parent and most likely a horrible pet owner.


----------



## White Fox (Feb 24, 2006)

I hear this all the time Pit Bulls are living weapons. But hey that world is filled with many daft people.


----------



## theletch1 (Feb 24, 2006)

White Fox said:
			
		

> I hear this all the time Pit Bulls are living weapons. But hey that world is filled with many daft people.


Trouble is that it has become something of a status symbol (at least around here) to have a pit that HAS BEEN TRAINED to be dangerous for certain groups.  As long as this particular fad exists then pits will have the rep that they have.  I remember when Dobermans were the four legged weapon of choice and before that the German shephard.


----------



## DeLamar.J (Feb 26, 2006)

arnisador said:
			
		

> I just read this on Yahoo! myself. I don't know what to say. It wasn't her son's time to go...she made a stupid decision and he paid for it. I hope they find some way to prosecute her--just a suspended sentence, maybe, but something that clearly says "You were wrong."


How about letting a pit bull go at her for a few minnutes. Locking someone in a cell for a period of time, and then considering a wrong done right is stupid. 3 hots and a cot for a year and everythings ok, thats bull.
The punishment is supposed to fit the crime, but all the punishment ever is, is confinement, or death. Why no inbetween? Confinement does not fit the crime. Letting a pit bull go after her for a few minnutes is a punishment that fits the crime.
There also is a deeper subject in this issue, and that is the issue of people having children. I dont think that having a child should be a right. There are way to many people that are not capable of being responsible parents, and the innocent child pays the price. I think people should have a liscense to have a child. You should be screened, and it should be determined by professionals rather or not you are able to support the child. Your income, criminal record, medical history, ect should all come into play. Hell, they test people to get a drivers liscence, isnt bringing an innocent child into the world a more important issue that people should be tested on before they are allowed to do.


----------



## MA-Caver (Sep 22, 2008)

At first I thought this was a follow up to the initial article/post but turned out to be something different but still related or relevant.



> *Woman whose dogs mauled neighbor gets 15 to life                *
> 
> By PAUL ELIAS, Associated Press Writer                                                                 _1 hour,  12 minutes ago_
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080922/ap_on_re_us/fatal_dog_mauling;_ylt=AsucA1zPpt9muiCaSO6kTk5H2ocA
> ...


Part of me saying that 15 to life is a bit harsh but then again a dog CAN be construed as a "lethal weapon" and while letting a dog like these roam around without supervision is like leaving a loaded gun lying on the coffee table while kids run in and out of the house. Just asking for it. 
But this lady apparently doesn't give a damn one way or the other... 


> In denying Knoller's plea for probation, Woolard noted that Knoller didn't call 911 or otherwise try to help Whipple during the 10-minute attack. The judge said Knoller knew the dogs were dangerous, ignored numerous warnings to train them and hasn't expressed remorse for the attack.
> "She has blamed the victim and has held her dogs in higher regard than humans," Woolard said.


 I like dogs (and cats) but that's all they are to me... just domesticated animals that can or not be useful in whatever capacity. If a dog crosses the line then they gotta go. Especially when it comes to attacking/killing a human, they're not going to be able to reform. They clearly saw the woman as weak, defenseless and didn't have the reasoning to deny their instincts. The woman doesn't care one way or the other. 
I agree with the victim's survivors here: 


> "It is *very hard* to find forgiveness for someone who doesn't accept responsibility," Smith said.


 Very hard indeed. 
Maybe the woman ought to be attacked by her own dogs and see how she feels... "oh they didn't mean it" is what she'll probably say.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Sep 22, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> Even if every single word she says is the absolute truth, she still deserves to go to prison for a very long time.



Well, she did say,



> *"It's Nicky's time to go," she said in the interview. "When you're born you're destined to go and this was his time."*



Time to go, I guess.


----------



## teekin (Sep 23, 2008)

MA-Caver said:


> At first I thought this was a follow up to the initial article/post but turned out to be something different but still related or relevant.
> 
> 
> Part of me saying that 15 to life is a bit harsh but then again a dog CAN be construed as a "lethal weapon" and while letting a dog like these roam around without supervision is like leaving a loaded gun lying on the coffee table while kids run in and out of the house. Just asking for it.
> ...


 
I can pretty much guarentee that those dogs were pushed/encouraged to be aggresive towards humans. The dogs paid with their lives for the woman's pathology. You can do the same thing with a poodle or a Yorkie. The diffrence is a Pittie can kill you right damn quick, a Yorkie takes a bit longer. Can they be turned around? Yup, I've done it and have the scars to prove it. Dogs are not born bad, have you Ever met a bad puppy? Ever?
People **** them up, and the dogs pay with thier lives.
 The best possible punishment for psycho-beeyotch is to stay locked up, being told when to get up, what to eat, how to dress, when to exercise and on and on. And keep denying her parole. Off my soap box.:tantrum:
lori


----------



## Jade Tigress (Sep 23, 2008)

I recall that story being on the news. If I remember correctly she *siced* the dogs on the woman, let them out the apartment into the hall and watched them maul her. That's no dog out of control, that's murder.


----------



## Twin Fist (Sep 23, 2008)

this story is a true WTF moment in american life.

The whipple case? that dog owner deserves every day she spend behind bars.


----------



## girlbug2 (Sep 23, 2008)

Cruentus said:


> Once again, people who know little about dogs and who can't distingush crap from their *** thinking that breed specific legislation is the answer. The answer is not attempting to force a breed to become extinct, whether through genocide or forced neutering/spaying or otherwise.
> 
> The answer is very simple... owners need to be responsible for their dogs by law. So if a dog goes on a mauling spree, the owner faces criminal charges, not just civil suits. These people who are negligent with their dogs get put away, and the people who are not negligent have the rights to own whatever dog they want. Simple solution if you ask me.
> 
> ...


 
Every thing you have said is, I believe, true. However the one vital piece of information left out is that pit bulls, unlike other powerful breeds, have their origins in specifically being bred to kill not only other animals but human beings for sport. No doubt there are lines that have this viscious streak bred out, but as you have said, the junk breeders far outnumber the responsible breeders. These days, the junk bred dogs are the rule and good citizens like yours are the exception. 

So is it any wonder the breed has a bad rep? 

No need to call names of anybody who (justifiably) thinks badly of your favorite dog breed. They have good reasons for it.


----------



## teekin (Sep 23, 2008)

Girlbug, Pits were and are bred to "pit fight" other dogs. They are bred to be DOCILE to humans. The god breeders must be able to handle and condition the dogs, as well as break them apart during a fight without getting mauled. If a dog shows signs of mental instability it is culled ( shot in the head). These are the Real breeders. The Ganstas and waanabe hacks breed the mutts that are taught to attack or beaten into viciousness. 
 The only dogs that were bred to hunt humans in modern times as far as I know were the South Africans. The Filas. Those will kill you D-E-A-D. Count your lucky stars you have not heard of those yet.
Lori


----------



## MA-Caver (Sep 23, 2008)

Grendel308 said:


> Girlbug, Pits were and are bred to "pit fight" other dogs. They are bred to be DOCILE to humans. The god breeders must be able to handle and condition the dogs, as well as break them apart during a fight without getting mauled. If a dog shows signs of mental instability it is culled ( shot in the head). These are the Real breeders. The Ganstas and waanabe hacks breed the mutts that are taught to attack or beaten into viciousness.
> The only dogs that were bred to hunt humans in modern times as far as I know were the South Africans. The Filas. Those will kill you D-E-A-D. Count your lucky stars you have not heard of those yet.
> Lori


I've had the misfortune of living in an apartment complex where the balcony over looked the back yards of the houses nearby. I say unfortunate because sometimes the butt-uglies would come out and lay in the sun. But MORE unfortunate and related to this thread was the time I watched two (hispanic) gangstas (they were gangstas because of the gang signs used to greet one another and the colors that were popular in that area) living in one of the houses below ... had a third to come over and tease and whip the malamute that belonged to the gang member's house. 
He used a t-shirt with a knot (undoubtedly weighed) and "sneaked over" the fence and attacked the dog with the improvised whip. Kept trying to hit the dog in the head. The dog became more agitated and more vicous but chained up, snapping and snarling horribly at the guy trying to whip it. The "stranger" gang member retreated on cue as the owner of the dog came out of the house shouting. The owner walked up to the dog and praised the animal. Giving it a treat and playing with it. I watched all this from my 2nd floor balcony whilst having a smoke (non-smoking apt.). 
Now granted this was a Malamute/Husky breed and not a pit. And the idea was probably training the dog to attack any "unauthorized" persons coming into the yard. 
It is the METHOD of the madness in the training of these animals. One would imagine that they use this same method on any type of large dog. This was not a one time training deal either. Several times I heard this training taking place. My room-mate saw it as well, drawn to the sounds of the dog snarling and barking and snapping. HE thought it was cool. I thought it was cruel and un-neccesary increase in the dog's instinctive protectiveness of the pack. 
Given the opportunity I'd imagine that the dog would've not just attacked/bitten an intruder but mauled and possibly would've killed an intruder. 
I did not call the SPCA or Humane Society on this and wished that I had but at the time the thought hadn't occurred to me.


----------



## teekin (Sep 23, 2008)

You got it Mr. Caver! Thats just how it's done. Killer there was once a sweet fluffy 8 week old puppy who would lick your face with his warm pink tounge. It tokk time and real effort to turn him into a killer. He will bite and face the horrors of the gas chamber. The gangsta's will get a new puppy and start all over again. Mabbe someone will call the SPCA this time and I'll get my hands on the pooch before he's insane. 
 (Speaking of insane, Diva, aka Apocalypse Poodle, seems to want out.)
lori


----------



## MA-Caver (Sep 23, 2008)

Grendel308 said:


> You got it Mr. Caver! Thats just how it's done. Killer there was once a sweet fluffy 8 week old puppy who would lick your face with his warm pink tounge. It tokk time and real effort to turn him into a killer. He will bite and face the horrors of the gas chamber. The gangsta's will get a new puppy and start all over again. Mabbe someone will call the SPCA this time and I'll get my hands on the pooch before he's insane.
> (Speaking of insane, Diva, aka Apocalypse Poodle, seems to want out.)
> lori


only if CHEW lets you....


----------



## teekin (Sep 24, 2008)

CHEW wouldn't know what just hit.

 Diva and I are just alike. Nothing so tiny and cute, with such wide soft smiling eyes could be of any danger to a big strong man like you!:angel:
lori &diva


----------



## MA-Caver (Sep 24, 2008)

Grendel308 said:


> CHEW wouldn't know what just hit.
> 
> Diva and I are just alike. Nothing so tiny and cute, with such wide soft smiling eyes could be of any danger to a big strong man like you!:angel:
> lori &diva


R'uh-oh is the gauntlet being thrown? Battle between Chew and Diva? Whatever happens... it's Lisa's fault. 

(but that's ANOTHER THREAD that needs to be created and not carried on here... :wink1: )


----------

