Posted on 07/27/2008 4:46:05 PM PDT by MaryFromMichigan
LOL, yes MI has a border with IN. Only about 200 miles of it.
I don’t know where in Indiana, so I looked from Paw Paw to a town in Indiana right over the state line. An hour. More if they traveled over the line.
Too far! and especially with a dangerous dog in the home. Maybe they left the older brother with him and he left little brother, but as it turns out, they left him with an untrustworthy babysitter, if that was the case.
Maybe I’m prejudiced. I actually wouldn’t leave my kids and even leave town until the youngest was 13 and then left with a brother forbidden to leave the younger one, EVER. Of course I didn’t have any man eating dogs either.
An average 10-year-old can be responsible for himself, and watch a movie with a little brother, briefly. But a dangerous dog is something totally different - it’s funny how you never hear about a young child’s (or a passing stranger’s) being attacked by a family’s cat.
Learning experiences ... so these people, depending on their address, might have been no further away than my in-the-city-limits trip to Wal-mart!
I agree - that is unreasonable for a 10-year-old, even without the dog. I was thinking of situations in my North Carolina county, where you can drive 10 minutes to a gas station in South Carolina.
Paw Paw is about 40 miles north of the MI/IN line.
I would suspsect they left the older brother in charge and he might have left to run an errand.
The kid would have been more safe in the company of an underfed and abused Rottweiler.
Could be. And probably everyone would have been fine, absent the dog.
Why is it we never hear of attacks by Golden Retrievers, Border Collies and Bassett Hounds?
Because it doesn’t make good headlines.How come people who jump all over the lamestream media for being biased all of a sudden wholeheartedly believe them when it comes to pitbull stories. Some of these “pitbulls” were found to be different breeds in some similar stoies. At any rate, the parents were dumbasses and their kid has to suffer as a result.
The dog that tops the most aggressive breed list is the dachshund followed by the chihuahua.
I'm sure there are other reasons, but guarding a meth lab would be one.
“Why is it we never hear of attacks by Golden Retrievers, Border Collies and Bassett Hounds?”
They do bite too. The difference is that if a basset hound is having a bad day he can’t rip your face off.
“The dog that tops the most aggressive breed list is the dachshund followed by the chihuahua.”
Aggression means little though when it isn’t coupled with power. A chihuahua can’t kill a grown man. An angry pit can. And according to statistics they do at a higher rate than any other dog. Even if you assume that a good percentage of dogs were misclassified they still are the most dangerous dog breed.
Aggression means little though when it isnt coupled with power. A chihuahua cant kill a grown man. An angry pit can. And according to statistics they do at a higher rate than any other dog. Even if you assume that a good percentage of dogs were misclassified they still are the most dangerous dog breed.
Having owned both pits and chihuahua’s I know that is true but I can say from personal experience, a that while the chihuahua might not kill they can still inflict a good amount of pain.And,yes,I had it coming!
All I ask of the pit bull community is that they STFU about how gentle their dogs really are. All I ask of the insurance industry is that they run an advert about pit bull attacks. All I ask of City and County governments is that they charge pit bull owners more for the licenses to cover the cost of these incessant attacks and to register them.
Pit Bull ownership in the US is often where the "Idiot," "Criminal," and "Sociopath," lines on the graph meet. No need for us to tolerate it, much less subsidize it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.