Dog halts thief and now faces death

cowzerp

sup_dude wrote: »

I know, pitbulls are bred to be nasty but all dogs can take off a persons' hand if they really wanted to, or at least do serious damage.

EDIT: I mean there's ones that are bred to fight (which is wrong on every level)

Fact is Pitbulls have the same bit force as Labrador's, also anyone who knows dog's know that Pitbulls are great people dog's and where bred to not be aggressive to humans, but like any dog they will protect their homes and rightly so.

Also i would bet almost anything it was not even a pitbull, Pitbulls are very rare and any dog that bites and is not an obvious lab, poodle or whatever is called a pitbull, sell's papers.

Labrador bites person does not have the same ring to it.

Cookie_Monster

KKkitty wrote: »

A new law should be brought out stating that if you knowingly trespass and are attacked by a family pet on your head or in this case hand be it. A dog sees anyone strange coming into its owners property what is it going to do but attack to protect its home.

won't somebody please think of the children postmen!!!

meoklmrk91

I honestly don't think that the breed has much bearing here, any dog be it a Jack Russell, a Pitbull or a Lab is usually protective of their territory and their families, maybe not to this extent but when faced with such a situation who knows how any dog would react.

My own dog is a big happy eejit pretty much all the time, but if its late at night and he hears something that he knows isn't right he changes quick as flash, barking, growling and wanting to scout out the area. I don't encourage this, I haven't trained him to do this but he does it instinctively. I highly doubt he would bat an eyelid if someone hopped over my back wall, but the minute he comes inside to go to sleep at night it's like he goes straight into protection mode.

I honestly don't believe that a dog should be put to sleep if it is defending the property of it's owner, I count it as reasonable force to be honest the very same as me giving someone a clatter over the head with something. But for this reason if faced with an intruder my dog certainly wouldn't be facing down a thief who broke into my property because I will not have him PTS for doing what dogs instinctively do which is protect their property and their pack.

I honestly don't have an ounce of sympathy for this man, he stole, to what lengths would he have gone to to get what he wanted from the security man, possibly to the same extent of the dog, possibly not who knows. But he shouldn't have been stealing and he got what he had coming as far as I am concerned.

Pottler

fatmammycat wrote: »

What are you talking about? Pittys are renowned for NOT attacking their owners, that's why they're are used as fighting dogs, they're dog aggressive, not human aggressive.

I have one, he uses a lump of concrete as a chew toy, nothing else stands up to his jaws but he is gentle as a lamb with my children and the most loyal animal I have ever known. He's kipping on the couch 10 feet away as I type, head on my sons lap. He would probably also rip off an intruders hand, but that's ok, that's why he's there. Pity the dog in the OP didn't rip off the thiefs head - buy that dog a steak.

John_Rambo

Naomi00 wrote: »

pitbulls were bred as a war dog

They were bred as a pit dog, to be pitted with bulls or other dogs. They are actually good with human interaction. That's how they got their name, like the German Shepard got the name Germany (from where they were from) and Shepard (what they did) Who told you they were bred as war dogs?

Ave Sodalis

cowzerp wrote: »

Fact is Pitbulls have the same bit force as Labrador's, also anyone who knows dog's know that Pitbulls are great people dog's and where bred to not be aggressive to humans, but like any dog they will protect their homes and rightly so.

Also i would bet almost anything it was not even a pitbull, Pitbulls are very rare and any dog that bites and is not an obvious lab, poodle or whatever is called a pitbull, sell's papers.

Labrador bites person does not have the same ring to it.

That's what I'm saying, except I'm tired so simplified it down :pac:

KKkitty

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

KKkitty wrote: »

A new law should be brought out stating that if you knowingly trespass and are attacked by a family pet on your head or in this case hand be it. A dog sees anyone strange coming into its owners property what is it going to do but attack to protect its home.

won't somebody please think of the children postmen!!!

How many actual postmen get attacked by dogs each year?

kenmc

Didn't they change the law recently to allow reasonable force to defend your property? Surely that'll cover the dog for this, no? Seems reasonable to me.
Just hope the dog hasn't picked up a smack habit as a result of this

woodoo

Jimoslimos wrote: »

All dogs have the capability to rip a man's hand off, just like all humans have the capability of causing serious injury/death to others. It becomes a problem when owners can't control that agression, or when the breed is bred for that purpose.

I disagree. Not all dogs could rip a mans hand off. It takes some serious jaw strength to leave a mans hand dangling. All dogs could lacerate a hand yes but not rip a hand off.

woodoo

2qk4u wrote: »

I have a miniature poodle and a staffordshire bull terrier, guess which one wants to attack everything that moves, the tiny poodle, I know she is not as big or as strong but she would bite you in an instant. Is there a place for tiny dogs in society ?

To be honest if i came into your house and was attacked i would fancy my chances against the poodle but not against the bull terrier and that is the essential difference.

Naomi00

fatmammycat wrote: »

What are you talking about? Pittys are renowned for NOT attacking their owners, that's why they're are used as fighting dogs, they're dog aggressive, not human aggressive.

Ok, first of all I'm not trying to be all dramatic or anything, I just always thought it was generally known that they are a very dangerous dog. There's been cases in England of seemingly friendly pitbulls turning all of a sudden and killing people.

Just googled pitbull attacks to check, and there is any amount of articles, blogs, websites etc about it, most of them seem to be attacks on owners and their kids. It's pretty horrific stuff, so I won't post it here but it all comes up if you search it.

Feisar

Morally I reckon happy days, the scumbag got what he deserved.

Legally, had the householder who's garden this occurred in done the same i.e. cut the burglars hand of as he was making his escape via the garden, wouldn't they face legal proceedings?

As far as I know one can only defend themselves. There is no right to detain/pursue/use excessive force.

While I know a dog only has its teeth it seems to me that while a home owner is bound by the law to the extent they are allowed defend their property as long as it's a dog that does the damage all's OK?

kenmc

Naomi00 wrote: »

Ok, first of all I'm not trying to be all dramatic or anything, I just always thought it was generally known that they are a very dangerous dog. There's been cases in England of seemingly friendly pitbulls turning all of a sudden and killing people.

Did you ever try to find out if it's the dogs fault, or the owners fault?

GaryIrv93

Fair fcuking play to that dog - it had the b.a.l.l.s to go after a dangerous thief which was was over twice his size, something that most of us would never have the courage to do. Putting it down for protecting it's owners home from criminals is a disgrace, don't care how badly the thief was injured. :mad:

Dyr

Jimoslimos wrote: »

Kids are pretty stupid and do daft things, (I know I was one), so paying little heed to a parent's warning means they are fair game for a mauling?

If that had been the case, I'd be pretty disfigured by now. Fact is most kids learn by 1 part accident, 1 part parental guidance.

If your kid was running out on roads then its a moron and you're a moron for letting it. Its not going to be the drivers fault when they become an agent of Darwinsim. Same with Gardens and dogs, I knew full f**ing well that hopping into peoples gardens was verboten when I was a kid

EGAR

I doubt that the pic in the article is of the actual dog. It has cropped ears which is more of an American *thing* and illegal in Ireland.

If I had a Euro every time a dog was described as a Pit Bull by the media when in fact it was not, I'd be rich.

I'd love to see a pic of the actual dog.

Jimmy Bottlehead

Naomi00 wrote: »

fatmammycat wrote: »

What are you talking about? Pittys are renowned for NOT attacking their owners, that's why they're are used as fighting dogs, they're dog aggressive, not human aggressive.

Ok, first of all I'm not trying to be all dramatic or anything, I just always thought it was generally known that they are a very dangerous dog. There's been cases in England of seemingly friendly pitbulls turning all of a sudden and killing people.

Just googled pitbull attacks to check, and there is any amount of articles, blogs, websites etc about it, most of them seem to be attacks on owners and their kids. It's pretty horrific stuff, so I won't post it here but it all comes up if you search it.

Sorry but unless you've owned a pitbull or have experience with them, you're talking out of your arse.
People vilify certain dog breeds out of ignorance, and while I have little doubt you're doing it with good intentions, you're doing nothing but harm the reputation of the breed.

woodoo

Have a look at pittbull attacks owner in Brazil. If that was a poodle i think he would have dealt with it fairly quickly.

Jimoslimos

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

Is a dog somehow less important than a human being? :mad:

Simply, yes - and I shouldn't need to justify that.

Another scenario, if the Gardaí were performing a raid on a drug-dealers house, which was protected by an aggressive dog - in carrying out their duties can they/would they be able to kill the dog?

John_Rambo

Jimoslimos wrote: »

Another scenario, if the Gardaí were performing a raid on a drug-dealers house, which was protected by an agressive dog - in carrying out their duties can they/would they be able to kill the dog?

Yes.

BOHtox

Doc Ruby wrote: »

That is one fugly dog. But no seriously this is what dogs were meant to do, protect the tribe, the poor little creature was only acting according to its training and breeding. It should get a nice run on the beach and a good steak dinner.

The dog was sprayed with Pepper Spray. I'd like someone to take a picture of you after getting pepper sprayed!

Naomi00

[QUOTE=Jimmy Bottlehead;78229343]Sorry but unless you've owned a pitbull or have experience with them, you're talking out of your arse.
People vilify certain dog breeds out of ignorance, and while I have little doubt you're doing it with good intentions, you're doing nothing but harm the reputation of the breed.[/QUOTE]

Wtf? I didn't want to get too involved in this but some of the replies are crazy.

I know someone who had a half-pitbull dog who was a really nice friendly dog. However the same person had to rescue a stranger who was being mauled by a different pitbull by killing the dog, it wouldn't let go of the person even though they didn't do anything to provoke it.

I didn't think people were so ignorant about things like this, if someone really did like these type of dogs then for the dog's sake they should be trained in dog-handling, accept what their dog is capable of and keep their dog somewhere where it will not come into contact with the public. There are people in other places who can do that and that's fine if it works.
The people posting on this saying that these dogs are 'harmless' are deluded. You can't deny what they're capable of and are only putting other people at risk.

Articles etc on attacks: http://www.google.ie/#hl=en&gs_nf=1&cp=17&gs_id=2f&xhr=t&q=pitbull+attacks+owner&pf=p&sclient=psy-ab&oq=pitbull+attacks+o&aq=0&aqi=g4&aql=&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=7d34b9ab07af510e

Of course there's dogs who won't attack people in their life but you can't bet on it. There seems to be a lot of reports about attacks on kids and babies, you can't seriously blame them for being attacked now can you?

Daniel S

Surely the dog could "run away and escape" for a while at a friends house and then "find his way home" when it all blows over? Just in case like.

GaryIrv93

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

Is a dog somehow less important than a human being? :mad:

Well, eh, yes.

GaryIrv93

Jimoslimos wrote: »

Simply, yes - and I shouldn't need to justify that.

Another scenario, if the Gardaí were performing a raid on a drug-dealers house, which was protected by an aggressive dog - in carrying out their duties can they/would they be able to kill the dog?

If a dog attacks and seriously injures an innocent person who did nothing to provoke the attack, then that's a lot different than this dog, who attacked a criminal who tresspassed onto it's owner's property. The dog however followed it's instincts and did what it was probably trained to do. Many people have dogs for this particular reason. This dog may be being put down even after the whole incident, which doesn't make much sense. Not like it's continuing to maul the guy.

Only if it was absolutely nescessary IMO should a Gardai team kill a dog in that scenario. If the dog was that viscious, then maybe so, if not, then simply capture the dog, not kill it.

Jimoslimos

Bambi wrote: »

If your kid was running out on roads then its a moron and you're a moron for letting it. Its not going to be the drivers fault when they become an agent of Darwinsim. Same with Gardens and dogs, I knew full f**ing well that hopping into peoples gardens was verboten when I was a kid

Bad example, roads aren't full of homicidal maniacs waiting for pedestrians to absent-mindedly step out so they can mow them down.

When I was a kid I did a fair amount of garden hopping and trespassing into fields etc. Children have a different perception to risk than adults. It's why I said kids learn part guidance/part experience. For all the warning about the hot stove you don't heed it until you get burnt.

Jimoslimos

GaryIrv93 wrote: »

If a dog attacks and seriously injures an innocent person who did nothing to provoke the attack, then that's a lot different than this dog, who attacked a criminal who tresspassed onto it's owner's property.

No, Gardaí performing a raid on a property and a thieving scumbag breaking and entering are very similar in the mind of the dog - they can't be expected to distinguish between the two.

Dyr

woodoo wrote: »

Have a look at pittbull attacks owner in Brazil. If that was a poodle i think he would have dealt with it fairly quickly.

You ever seen a standard poodle? They're fairly big, powerful dogs. Only vicious dog my family owned was a damned poodle.

Jimmy Bottlehead

[

Jimmy Bottlehead wrote: »

Sorry but unless you've owned a pitbull or have experience with them, you're talking out of your arse.
People vilify certain dog breeds out of ignorance, and while I have little doubt you're doing it with good intentions, you're doing nothing but harm the reputation of the breed.

Naomi00 wrote: »

Wtf? I didn't want to get too involved in this but some of the replies are crazy.

I know someone who had a half-pitbull dog who was a really nice friendly dog. However the same person had to rescue a stranger who was being mauled by a different pitbull by killing the dog, it wouldn't let go of the person even though they didn't do anything to provoke it.

I didn't think people were so ignorant about things like this, if someone really did like these type of dogs then for the dog's sake they should be trained in dog-handling, accept what their dog is capable of and keep their dog somewhere where it will not come into contact with the public. There are people in other places who can do that and that's fine if it works.
The people posting on this saying that these dogs are 'harmless' are deluded. You can't deny what they're capable of and are only putting other people at risk.

Articles etc on attacks: http://www.google.ie/#hl=en&gs_nf=1&cp=17&gs_id=2f&xhr=t&q=pitbull+attacks+owner&pf=p&sclient=psy-ab&oq=pitbull+attacks+o&aq=0&aqi=g4&aql=&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=7d34b9ab07af510e

Of course there's dogs who won't attack people in their life but you can't bet on it. There seems to be a lot of reports about attacks on kids and babies, you can't seriously blame them for being attacked now can you?

Your argument doesn't hold up. I could Google anything and find a story to back it up. Child attacked by hamster, child killed by lightening, etc.
In most cases where a dog attacks an innocent human, you'll find the fault lies with the human and their treatment of the dog.
You say that "you can't deny what they're capable of" but quite simply, you, me and everyone else is capable of damaging or killing another human being, or an animal. What a creature is capable of doesn't matter.
This irrational fear over certain breeds is ridiculous - again, I don't think you're being malicious at all, but you're just wrong to vilify these breeds. It's akin to saying all black people are evil, its madness to tar an entire race (or dog breed) with a brush like this.

BornToKill

Doc Ruby wrote: »

That is one fugly dog. But no seriously this is what dogs were meant to do, protect the tribe, the poor little creature was only acting according to its training and breeding. It should get a nice run on the beach and a good steak dinner.

He doesn't need the steak dinner - he already ate.

GaryIrv93

Jimoslimos wrote: »

No, Gardaí performing a raid on a property and a thieving scumbag breaking and entering are very similar in the mind of the dog - they can't be expected to distinguish between the two.

No, what I meant by that post was that if a dog attacks an innocent member of public who let's say was walking on the path beside (not inside) the property and was simply minding his/her own buisiness, then I hate to say it, but that's a bit more of a valid reason for the dog to be put down. In the case where Gardai try to raid the place or whether a scumbag was on the property then an attack from the dog (if you know it's there) is to be expected. A dog will defend it's property whether it's owned by a criminal gang or not, so it's completely right to simply break in and kill it when it's only doing what it's been told or trained for.

Jimoslimos

Lets try a different scenario.

I'm out walking in this fine area of Finglas when I am confronted by a gang of scumbags wishing to disposess me of my belongings. I run and scale the nearest wall in an attempt to escape......see where I'm going with this?

greendom

Jimmy Bottlehead wrote: »

Sorry but unless you've owned a pitbull or have experience with them, you're talking out of your arse.
People vilify certain dog breeds out of ignorance, and while I have little doubt you're doing it with good intentions, you're doing nothing but harm the reputation of the breed.

So why are they banned in the UK ?

Jimmy Bottlehead

greendom wrote: »

Jimmy Bottlehead wrote: »

Sorry but unless you've owned a pitbull or have experience with them, you're talking out of your arse.
People vilify certain dog breeds out of ignorance, and while I have little doubt you're doing it with good intentions, you're doing nothing but harm the reputation of the breed.

So why are they banned in the UK ?

For the same reason that (for example) homosexual activity was illegal - fear and ignorance.
Like I said before, applying a ban to breeds is no different than villifying a race of people. It's ridiculous. But sure it's easier to just blame an entire breed instead of looking at some of the idiots who own the dogs.

GaryIrv93

Jimoslimos wrote: »

Lets try a different scenario.

I'm out walking in this fine area of Finglas when I am confronted by a gang of scumbags wishing to disposess me of my belongings. I run and scale the nearest wall in an attempt to escape......see where I'm going with this?

You've still got to accept the risks involved in entering other people's property, even in that kind of emergency. If I was in that situation as you mentioned, I'd get in and out the other side of the property as quickly as possible, dog or no dog.

Hank Scorpio

woodoo wrote: »

Have a look at pittbull attacks owner in Brazil. If that was a poodle i think he would have dealt with it fairly quickly.

Man I wish I didn't watch that, disturbing

ToddyDoody

'dibs on the corpse'.. honestly i've seen how its done, quick and painless. Emotionally devastating if you love the dog tho. Give it time, and a new dog

Whispered

I think that had it been a lab or a retriever the idea of the dog being PTS would not have come up at all. It would be all about the hero dog protecting it's home, catching the nasty criminal.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

it's standard procedure for any dog that attacks a person (apart from police dogs of course)

Not in my experince.

Five weeks ago my dogs alerted me to someone in the garden, three scumbags had broken into the car and were trying to push it away.

Of course the dogs were released, caught one in the car and got stuck into him.

when the dogs seen us run down the road after the other's they chased them down too.

Although no one lost a hand, more the pity tbh, the guards had no problem in me letting the dogs out.

Richo is a Pitbull male and Ruby is a Staffordshire Bull Terrier.

They know their place in the pack and would lay down their lives for me.

cyrusdvirus

Chances are that the dog in this case isn't even a bullbreed.

And Naomi000, not being smart, but you really should state when you are offering your opinions and when you have verifiable facts.
i think everyone should play the game in this link.

http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html

Dubit10

Pitbulls should be banned period.

Jesus Shaves

Dubit10 wrote: »

Pitbulls should be banned period.

I'd say you must be a genius

working fool

The owner should have declared their back garden to be under sharia law !
To which a thief will have their hands removed

CrackisWhack

As much as I love dogs, that dog should probably be put down, Its clearly a very dangerous animal if it can rip off a grown mans arm, It's a tragic accident waiting to happen.

As people have said, kids get up to all kinds of mischief and if the dog escaped from the back garden somebody could be badly hurt or even killed.

greendom

Jimmy Bottlehead wrote: »

For the same reason that (for example) homosexual activity was illegal - fear and ignorance.
Like I said before, applying a ban to breeds is no different than villifying a race of people. It's ridiculous. But sure it's easier to just blame an entire breed instead of looking at some of the idiots who own the dog's.

Ok I don't have enough information so I'll take that on face value. However, once a dog of whatever breed has attacked and maimed a person in that way, (however odious the person in question is) then the dog has to be put down.

ScouseMouse

working fool wrote: »

The owner should have declared their back garden to be under sharia law !
To which a thief will have their hands removed

Thats pure genius that is !

Seriously though. Two comments.

Fair play to the dog - one less scumbag

BUT

What if it was a child retrieving a football ?

Jimmy Bottlehead

greendom wrote: »

Ok I don't have enough information so I'll take that on face value. However, once a dog of whatever breed has attacked and maimed a person in that way, (however odious the person in question is) then the dog has to be put down.

I genuinely don't agree with that.

We've a small mongrel at home, you couldn't meet a friendlier, happier dog. We've a cat, and the two of them wrestle and play all the time and never hurt each other beyond a small accidental scratch or bump.

However, if someone aggressively came into our apartment and acted in a threatening manner, I've little doubt that she would turn into a very aggressive animal indeed, and it's what I would expect of her and applaud her for.
If she were to maim an intruder, there is no way she should be put to sleep for it. Her action would be for the same reason I'd happily put a dent in an intruder's head - protection of the home/territory and safety of the family/pack. Just because a dog acts in a reasonable manner in an appropriate situation is no reason to suddenly deem it mental and end it's life.

allibastor

you find that most cases of dog attacks are done by dogs who have been badly treated.

i know this will sound as a generalization but every time you read about a dog attacking a kid or a person in the UK its always from a council estate or something like that. now not that all people in council estates mistreat their dogs, but thing like the dog environment and daily exercise levels can also lend to aggressive behavior. if the dog is used as something people see as the equivalent to holding a gun or a knife then its is not the dogs fault as it is trained to be like this.

I once had a friend who had two staffs. he used to get them to make loads of noise when he wanted them to to scare people and the general like of this, what a wanker. three years later he was surprised when one cornered his child when the child was screaming. the dog did not attack thankfully but it had been trained to have an intimidating factor to it, and when it perceived a possible threat from the child's action it reacted in the way it was shown.

all dogs, like all people have the potential to do great damage, they will instinctively go to do the most damage that they can if they are threatened, be it go for throat or hands/arms to best give themselves the advantage.


and to be fair, if you are a scumbag and live your life as such you should expect these kind of things to happen, god love Ireland we always seem to favor the preparator of crime rather than the victim.

Kolido

The fact that the guy was a thief and scumbag is irrelavent as the dog isn't to know this.
If the home owner injured the guy to the same extent under the same circumstances, what would the verdict be? Was the attack provoked, self defence? I know the guy was trespassing but was the dog or home in danger?
You can't let a dog attack someone if a person can't.

allibastor

Kolido wrote: »

The fact that the guy was a thief and scumbag is irrelavent as the dog isn't to know this.
If the home owner injured the guy to the same extent under the same circumstances, what would the verdict be? Was the attack provoked, self defence? I know the guy was trespassing but was the dog or home in danger?
You can't let a dog attack someone if a person can't.

do you know if the dog was provoked? were you there? for all we know the guy had made a move to kick the dog out of the way or not. for all we know he was very threatening to the dog and his territory.