Home Main Category Clubhouse

California pit bull owner charged with murder in fatal mauling

Big ChiefBig Chief Senior MemberPosts: 32,995 Senior Member
Pit Bulls are about as much a gentle breed as is Islam is a religion of peace! Maybe not the best analogy, but the owners should be held accountable fer their mutts!

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/05/31/california-pit-bull-owner-charged-with-murder-in-fatal-mauling/
It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
«1

Replies

  • sherwoodsherwood Senior Member Over taxed in Liberal MarylandPosts: 1,222 Senior Member
    Works for me!!!
    I may be old but I ain't dead!
    DPRMD
  • VarmintmistVarmintmist Senior Member Western PAPosts: 8,233 Senior Member
    All the pit bull owners say "Its not the breed, its the owner." Well, alrighty then, its the owner.
    It's boring, and your lack of creativity knows no bounds.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Under a logPosts: 27,457 Senior Member
    Maybe California had an attack of common sense. Good for them.
    Laws vary from state to state, but when I raised cattle, if one had gotten out in the road and a car hit it, I was liable for both property damage and personal injury. Holding dog owners to the same standard makes sense to me.
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Kaniksu Nat'l Forest, IDPosts: 5,486 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    Maybe California had an attack of common sense. Good for them.
    Laws vary from state to state, but when I raised cattle, if one had gotten out in the road and a car hit it, I was liable for both property damage and personal injury. Holding dog owners to the same standard makes sense to me.

    There's a big difference between financial liability and criminal charges. I was in a car that hit a cow. The farmer had to pay for the car and the EMT exam at the scene. He wasn't charged with attempted murder.
    When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam J. McCleod


  • shotgunshooter3shotgunshooter3 Senior Member Global NomadPosts: 6,071 Senior Member
    Liability for personal injury and property damage I can see, but attempted murder?

    As a side note, if an unleashed pit bull comes my way, I'm going to shoot it before it gets close enough to use those jaws.
    - I am a rifleman with a poorly chosen screen name. -
    "Slow is smooth, smooth is fast, and speed is the economy of motion" - Scott Jedlinski
  • breamfisherbreamfisher Senior Member Living in a van, down by the river.Posts: 14,032 Senior Member
    Involuntary manslaughter, maybe. Murder? Where was the intent?
    I'm just here for snark.
  • PFDPFD Senior Member PNWPosts: 1,840 Senior Member
    And if this had happened in DC and someone used a handgun to kill the dogs then they would have been charged with using an illegally owned weapon to stop a murder. :uhm:
    That's all I got.

    Paul
  • samzheresamzhere Banned HoustonPosts: 10,923 Senior Member
    cpj wrote: »
    Murder? No. manslaughter? Yes.

    Unless the owner turned the dogs loose on purpose, there should be no murder charge.

    The article mentioned that the dogs had attacked people before. In other words, this was preventable. The dogs should have been shot the first time they attacked.

    I agree absolutely.

    Ages ago, in the pre-pitbull era, my Dad shot and killed a huge doberman that was leaping to attack his little grandson, my nephew. My sister was there, saw it "go down" -- the dog was from next door where the idiot drunk neighbor had kept 2 dobes in a cheap pen and never gave them attention, so naturally the dogs were essentially feral.

    The dog had chewed its way out of its pen and was roaming the neighbor's back yard. Dad had already phoned the cops but then my sis drives up, her toddler boy gets out of the car (up the driveway in my folks' back yard area) and the dog growls and runs toward the 5-ft slat fence separating the yards. Dad had come out to warn her to get inside asap but it happened before they could get inside, the dog growled and leaped to clear the fence.

    My sis said she'd never seen anything faster. Dad pulled his 1911 and fired in one motion, drilled the dog straight through midair. Challenging my Dad when he had his 1911 was never a smart thing anyway, as people back in Kentucky where as a young guy, he was a, mmm, "special deputy" would agree.

    Neighbor, a "prominent attorney" blustered about animal cruelty but Dad essentially told him to "do something" to a rope. Cops had already several calls about the dog but the complaints had been quashed by the lawyer. They thanked Dad and laughed, compared gun stories, then drove away.

    So yeah.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Under a logPosts: 27,457 Senior Member
    CaliFFL wrote: »
    There's a big difference between financial liability and criminal charges. I was in a car that hit a cow. The farmer had to pay for the car and the EMT exam at the scene. He wasn't charged with attempted murder.

    The stupid bovine didn't attack you; it was just standing in the way; probably at night. :tooth: <(Superfluous and totally unnecessary emoticon)
    Point is, if you own any animal that is not under your direct control, and especially one known to cause great injury or death for no reason whatsoever, you should be held liable for said actions of said animal. I look it as that personal responsibility thing. The animal didn't know any better, but the owner sure did.
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Kaniksu Nat'l Forest, IDPosts: 5,486 Senior Member
    tennmike wrote: »
    The stupid bovine didn't attack you; it was just standing in the way; probably at night. :tooth: <(Superfluous and totally unnecessary emoticon)
    Point is, if you own any animal that is not under your direct control, and especially one known to cause great injury or death for no reason whatsoever, you should be held liable for said actions of said animal. I look it as that personal responsibility thing. The animal didn't know any better, but the owner sure did.

    Would you expect a murder charge if your bull broke down a fence and gored some jogger?

    My point was that animals escape from their owners. Charging the owner with murder is ****. If the owner left a gate open maybe there is room for a negligent homicide charge. A fitting result would be financial ruin through wrongful death lawsuits.


    This reminds me...I need to remove the collars from my pack of Staffordshire bull terriers.
    When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam J. McCleod


  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Under a logPosts: 27,457 Senior Member
    CaliFFL wrote: »
    Would you expect a murder charge if your bull broke down a fence and gored some jogger?

    My point was that animals escape from their owners. Charging the owner with murder is ****. If the owner left a gate open maybe there is room for a negligent homicide charge. A fitting result would be financial ruin through wrongful death lawsuits.


    This reminds me...I need to remove the collars from my pack of Staffordshire bull terriers.

    Only had one bull that 'went ballistic' and he was provoked. Some young men who should have known better were throwing rocks at his "junk", connected one time too many, and he went through the fence after them. They got into their car just before he arrived. He pushed their car into the ditch and then proceeded on some serious body work on the car's passenger side panels. It was epic. I got him to quit by offering him a bucket of sweet horse feed. He accepted the peace offering, and then went to check on his ladies. He never showed any aggressive behavior after that. I never tolerated a 'mean' bull in the pasture, EVER. They went to the sale barn if they showed any signs of being aggressive.

    It should be the same with aggressive dogs. Either keep them behind a substantial and escape proof fence, or put them down. Letting them roam freely is a disaster waiting to happen. I have killed dogs that have come into my yard with teeth bared, hackles raised, growling and advancing towards me. I am NOT a chew toy, and the dogs made a fatal error in victim selection. I don't care what pedigree they have, if any, nor do I care who the owner might be. And FWIW, dogs chasing the cattle were reactive targets of opportunity. And another FWIW, I didn't hold it against the dogs for being delinquent; but I had choice words for whoever their owners happened to be, whoever they were. Only a few had collars on, and no names on the collars.

    The dogs attacked a jogger having a right to be where she was at the time. The owner of the dogs should be charged with negligent homicide for allowing them to either get out of their fenced area, or to run loose. If someone has a dog or dogs that have shown aggression to strangers, it is their responsibility to contain them or deal with them in whatever manner is necessary to keep them from escaping and running free. I agree that a murder charge is a stretch, and unwarranted.
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    The owner was also charged with possession with intent to sell drugs and had the dogs to protect his crop/stash and if they were specifically trained on purpose to attack anyone near his dope he may get a murder #1 charge...according to the gal on Fox News The Five who was one of the prosecutors in the landmark CA case where the dog attacked and killed a neighbor in an apartment building.

    I think that case in CA was 2nd degree wasn't it?
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • horselipshorselips Senior Member Posts: 3,628 Senior Member
    Everybody seems concerned abut what charges the dog owner should face and what charges he shouldn't, but my attention is on the victim. This poor woman was mauled to death by a vicious predator. Her suffering clamped in those jaws had to be indescribable. What must it feel like to have your body ripped to pieces and eaten while you're still alive?

    Anybody who has ever had anything to do with an animal shelter knows that every dog they take in is subjected to an evaluation to determine its suitability as a pet. Is it aggressive? Can you safely touch and hold it anywhere? If it passes, it goes up for adoption, if not, it is euthanized. The owner of an aggressive dog has an obligation to secure it. No ifs ands or buts, 100% of the time, no mistakes, no "oops, my dog got out." The culpability of the owner cannot be overemphasized.

    If only as a warning to all other owners of aggressive animals, throw the book at him.
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    I say hang the pit bulls with piano wire, in public along with their dirtbag owner.:cuss::devil:

    I'll bet a dog hanging would stir up more emotions/protest than a human hanging:yikes:

    The woman was bitten 150-200 times by the dogs. A horrible way to go fer sure.
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Kaniksu Nat'l Forest, IDPosts: 5,486 Senior Member
    horselips wrote: »
    Everybody seems concerned abut what charges the dog owner should face and what charges he shouldn't, but my attention is on the victim. This poor woman was mauled to death by a vicious predator. Her suffering clamped in those jaws had to be indescribable. What must it feel like to have your body ripped to pieces and eaten while you're still alive?
    Anybody who has ever had anything to do with an animal shelter knows that every dog they take in is subjected to an evaluation to determine its suitability as a pet. Is it aggressive? Can you safely touch and hold it anywhere? If it passes, it goes up for adoption, if not, it is euthanized. The owner of an aggressive dog has an obligation to secure it. No ifs ands or buts, 100% of the time, no mistakes, no "oops, my dog got out." The culpability of the owner cannot be overemphasized.

    If only as a warning to all other owners of aggressive animals, throw the book at him.

    I sympathize with the victim, but this happens millions of times a day all over the world to other species. We tend to forget that we are nothing more than intelligent animals. Humans fall victim to predators quite often. If this was a pack of introduced wolves, most wouldn't be calling for charges against USF&G, even though the agency is wholly responsible for releasing apex predators into areas inhabited by people.

    If blame is to be laid on someone, it should be against government. The victim was forbidden to defend herself by the state, and prohibition causes the accused to employ attack dogs to protect his business.
    When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam J. McCleod


  • samzheresamzhere Banned HoustonPosts: 10,923 Senior Member
    Some people have a strange attitude regarding their pets, and mostly it seems where dogs are concerned. They regard the animal as an extension of their inherent "right" to keep vicious or chancy dogs. I see that all the time on a much smaller scale, apartment dwellers who keep fairly large dogs cooped up all day in a teeny efficiency while they're at work or roaming around. People like this don't seem to have the slightest regard for the animal's welfare and fail to recognize that a good-size dog is miserable if stuck in a small apartment. But no, they "have to" own that big dog regardless.

    Hell, I love dogs myself but regard them as generally sentient animals with feelings of their own. There's no way I could keep a bigger dog where I live, and since I don't care much for teeny dogs, having a cat is the best solution for pet ownership.

    On a larger scale, there are some dog owners who unfortunately regard it as their God-given "right" to keep big dogs despite their inability to provide the necessary loving care that any higher-level animal needs. These pets aren't mere possessions like a big flatscreen TV or a new car -- they have feelings all to themselves, and if not given responsible care, can turn into hazards. It's not the dog's fault. It's the idiotic owner.

    It's also possible that this particular guy actually trained his dogs to be "angry participants" in his drug activities by being ill-trained guard dogs. If so, the guy needs to be sent away for life.
  • FiveSevenFiveSeven Member somewhere out westPosts: 289 Member
    CaliFFL wrote: »
    I sympathize with the victim, but this happens millions of times a day all over the world to other species. We tend to forget that we are nothing more than intelligent animals. Humans fall victim to predators quite often. If this was a pack of introduced wolves, most wouldn't be calling for charges against USF&G, even though the agency is wholly responsible for releasing apex predators into areas inhabited by people.

    If blame is to be laid on someone, it should be against government. The victim was forbidden to defend herself by the state, and prohibition causes the accused to employ attack dogs to protect his business.

    That's a piss poor argument if I've ever heard one. It's the governments fault.......really? Have you been puffing this guys product? To say that releasing wolves, which by the way, were here before we were, is equal to a bunch of attack dog is ludicrous.
    Only the optimists suggest that the future is uncertain. The pessimists have done the math.
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Kaniksu Nat'l Forest, IDPosts: 5,486 Senior Member
    FiveSeven wrote: »
    That's a piss poor argument if I've ever heard one. It's the governments fault.......really? Have you been puffing this guys product? To say that releasing wolves, which by the way, were here before we were, is equal to a bunch of attack dog is ludicrous.

    Sorry buster, but wolves were NOT in the lower 48 for over a century. The bunny huggers wanted to put wolves back into the ecosystem, with no concern for the ruralites that would have to deal with them killing people, pets, and livestock. The USF&G dropped in a larger species that was not previously indigenous. Sounds a lot like a wild/feral pitbull to me.

    According to recent news reports, there are packs of "wolves" in the urban areas killing people and pets. You want to know the dufference? I can shoot any canine on sight without the threat of punishment. Urbanites risk jail and fines for shooting canines while saving themselves or even neighborhood children.

    That is the gift of government that keeps on giving.
    When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam J. McCleod


  • horselipshorselips Senior Member Posts: 3,628 Senior Member
    CaliFFL wrote: »
    I sympathize with the victim, but this happens millions of times a day all over the world to other species. We tend to forget that we are nothing more than intelligent animals. Humans fall victim to predators quite often. If this was a pack of introduced wolves, most wouldn't be calling for charges against USF&G, even though the agency is wholly responsible for releasing apex predators into areas inhabited by people.

    If blame is to be laid on someone, it should be against government. The victim was forbidden to defend herself by the state, and prohibition causes the accused to employ attack dogs to protect his business.

    If you sympathize with the victim, then, ****, sympathize! Your argument is apples and oranges - comparing the risks and dangers we face from WILD, feral predators to the risks and dangers we should never face from DOMESTICATED animals is bogus. Even if this poor lady had been armed, the chances of stopping an attack from multiple very fast moving, relatively small targets are slim.
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Under a logPosts: 27,457 Senior Member
    CaliFFL wrote: »
    Sorry buster, but wolves were NOT in the lower 48 for over a century. The bunny huggers wanted to put wolves back into the ecosystem, with no concern for the ruralites that would have to deal with them killing people, pets, and livestock. The USF&G dropped in a larger species that was not previously indigenous. Sounds a lot like a wild/feral pitbull to me.

    According to recent news reports, there are packs of "wolves" in the urban areas killing people and pets. You want to know the dufference? I can shoot any canine on sight without the threat of punishment. Urbanites risk jail and fines for shooting canines while saving themselves or even neighborhood children.

    That is the gift of government that keeps on giving.


    I'm a ruralite and know how to operate a manual backhoe (shovel). No problemo getting rid of the carcass.

    Since urbanites in some areas can't shoot the canines with a firearm, there are alternatives. A good straight grain hickory shovel handle makes a dandy walking stick that can be carried when walking or jogging. It weighs very little, and when applied at high velocity to the top of the head of an aggressive dog will make them go to sleep permanently. Firearms aren't the only answer to a dog attack. A mattock or ax handle kept handy in the garage is also strong medicine for dogs exhibiting antisocial behavior. It ain't rocket science. And like The Preacher in the movie "Pale Rider" said, "Nothing like a good piece of hickory".
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Dellrose TNPosts: 18,428 Senior Member
    Pack animals play "follow the leader", and when the leader turns into a screaming, bleeding hunk of pulp, its subordinates will generally break off the attack. That usually happens whether the predator in question walks on two legs instead of four, BTW. The mattock handle advice is good, and I've seen them used to good advantage against dogs as well as human garbage. Here's another possibility- - - - -hardwood with a little added capacity to put some hurt on an attacking animal!

    http://bubbastik.com/

    Nothing like a brass horse collar hame to increase the effectiveness of the stick!
    Jerry
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Under a logPosts: 27,457 Senior Member
    Now that's a decent walking stick!

    If you're hard pressed for cash, a piece of Schedule 40 PVC pipe about 6 feet long is a good dog deterrent, too. Not that I'd know about such things. :roll:
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • ghostsniper1ghostsniper1 Banned O HI OPosts: 2,645 Senior Member
    Out of all the dogs I've owned, which were a few pit bulls and one huge Rottweiler (which was the biggest baby,) the meanest of all them was my jack russel terrior. A dog that small and I personally watched her corner both my pit and my rotti. The big dogs get a bad rap by trashy douchebag owners that want to prove their bad.
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Dellrose TNPosts: 18,428 Senior Member
    A Jack Russell might inflict a painful bite, but it's a real stretch of the imagination to believe it would be capable of doing life-threatening harm. It's also difficult to kick a field goal with a Rottweiler or a pit bull. The Jack Russel, not so much.
    Jerry
  • samzheresamzhere Banned HoustonPosts: 10,923 Senior Member
    ghost, that JackRussell must have been some kinda dog! Usually, JRs are pretty docile and well behaved, not getting their dander up unless provoked or ordered to do so by the owner.

    Did the other dogs ever learn to get along with the JR?

    Have to laugh, next door neighbor has 2 midsize "Heinz" dogs, terrier mixed breed, nice dogs really, but both of them are scared, er, poopless by my big orange cat. If my girlfriend or I are "walking" the cat outside on his leash and the dogs come out, they run and hide from my cat. Funny to watch because other than being large (16 lbs and fuzzy) he's a totally laid back dude and very easygoing. Maybe he gave them the evil eye? ha ha
  • CaliFFLCaliFFL Senior Member Kaniksu Nat'l Forest, IDPosts: 5,486 Senior Member
    horselips wrote: »
    comparing the risks and dangers we face from WILD, feral predators to the risks and dangers we should never face from DOMESTICATED animals is bogus. Even if this poor lady had been armed, the chances of stopping an attack from multiple very fast moving, relatively small targets are slim.

    What a crock... You think you should have some guarentee that you will never be attacked by a domesticated animal? Next you will claim that you should never face the dangers of being attacked by another human.

    Her odds may have been slim, but slim odds are better than mauled to death.

    Always go armed and we will talk about dead dogs, not dead people.
    When our governing officials dismiss due process as mere semantics, when they exercise powers they don’t have and ignore duties they actually bear, and when we let them get away with it, we have ceased to be our own rulers.

    Adam J. McCleod


  • samzheresamzhere Banned HoustonPosts: 10,923 Senior Member
    CaliFFL wrote: »
    What a crock... etc etc.

    I agree with you, Cali, although perhaps not so vociferously. Armed or not, domestic animals can be dangerous. And due to the proximity, lots more people are harmed or killed by "tame" domestic animals that wild feral ones.

    After all, many feral animals are very cautious of humans, while domestic animals have lost their fear of people.

    Regarding being armed, having several dogs attack at the same time would be terrible but I'm just guessing that if one of the dogs were blown to kingdom come with a nice firearm (even if not a large caliber), the other dogs of the pack might break off the attack when their alpha leader was dead or badly wounded. They might even turn on their colleague.

    Regardless, it's better to be armed than not. At least you can do something.
  • FreezerFreezer Senior Member Posts: 2,599 Senior Member
    A fitting result would be financial ruin through wrongful death lawsuits.


    You've got to be kidding me! How much is your life worth?

    You talk like a liberal lawyer who's looking for a third of the setelment!

    This is a a fool with six breading pits and two mutts to guard his dope in a house he probably doesn't own and if he does I'd be willing to bet on the condition and value. NO! This fool should have the soft book of Kaliforniastan law thrown at him. I won't get started on our criminal injustice system, it does nothing for the victum.

    The unfortunate part of this story is you get very few details. This is not the guy you want as a neighbor.

    The first case they sited hapened not to far from me. The two hudge dogs were kept in a very small apartment and the neighbors were very afraid of them. Many complaints had been made and nothing was done prior to the attack. Maybe animal control should be held liable too.

    Look at the short story again. Shortly after the attack they went to his house with a warrant. Can you say paper work and judge? How did they know where to go? They let him out of jail while they waited for DNA testing. Really! Four blood soaked dogs and a simple blood typing isn't enough? Do you think he washed the dogs when they came home bloody? Do you think he called the police to say "Hey my dogs did something bad" or do you think he tried to cover it up? I'd hang him. He is the king of that castle ond or captian of his ship. They are his dogs and he is responcible for their actions. 25 to life with no reduction and all his worldly belongings and holding should go to the victum.

    Forget about shooting the dog outside you own yard. There are too few hard to get CCWs in this state. Carry a hickory stick when you jog? Get up off the cough get an ax handle and run with it, then tell me how far you make it before it went into a recycling bin. Beside animals have more rights than me. For example in the Bay Area you don't own a dog, you are it's "guardian".

    If a man's dogs killed my wife he'd have to grow and wings and fly!
    I like Elmer Keith; I married his daughter :wink:
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Dellrose TNPosts: 18,428 Senior Member
    In our neighborhood, the least of that dog owner's worries would be the legal system. He would be far more likely to be found at room temperature in a pool of his own blood, and his neighbors "didn't see nothin'!"
    Jerry
  • Big ChiefBig Chief Senior Member Posts: 32,995 Senior Member
    Dang, this thread is going to the dogs..............:rotflmao::rotflmao::rotflmao:
    It's only true if it's on this forum where opinions are facts and facts are opinions
    Words of wisdom from Big Chief: Flush twice, it's a long way to the Mess Hall
    I'd rather have my sister work in a whorehouse than own another Taurus!
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement