Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Boy, 7, dies four days after being savaged by pit bulls
Daily Mail ^ | 4/8

Posted on 04/11/2013 1:06:28 PM PDT by Arthurio

A seven-year-old boy has died four days after being savaged by two pit bull mix dogs belonging to his neighbour.

Tyler Jett was dragged from his bike as he cycled home from school.

He was just yards from his home in Calaway, Florida, when the two dogs, an Alapha blood bulldog and brindle bulldog, escaped and pounced on him.

Family members hearing his screams ran from their home and managed to pull the dogs off him.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Local News; Pets/Animals
KEYWORDS: 4leggedcuisinart; breedofpeace; bulldog; doggieping; dogofpeace; dogs; expected; expecteddoggieping; florida; landshark; meth; methlab; methlabradors; notpitbull; pitbull; pitbulls; thedogbreedofpeace
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-75 last
To: Smokin' Joe

LOL

Nah.

She just had a really goofy sense of humor.

I can’t complain about her care for the dog.

She lived on a huge farm and Rowan had free run of the whole place, including the barn’s hay loft where she loved to climb and run on the bales.

That dog rode around in a Mercedes convertible.

She had a really good, long life.

“What’s in a name?”, I guess.

:]


51 posted on 04/12/2013 12:36:36 AM PDT by Salamander (Like acid and oil on a madman's face, reason tends to fly away.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Salamander

At least the ‘ending’ was happier than the beginning!


52 posted on 04/12/2013 12:37:41 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

Very much so.

As far as I could tell, Rowan totally forgot her hard times in less than a month.

She acted as if she’d ~always~ been somebody’s beloved, pampered pet.


53 posted on 04/12/2013 12:55:20 AM PDT by Salamander (Like acid and oil on a madman's face, reason tends to fly away.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Salamander

>Only when _the people_ pay their due price will it end.<

No lawyer pleading this scum’s case down to “negligence”. This was manslaughter. That little boy is dead. That mother lost her baby to some POS’ dangerous, free roaming dogs.


54 posted on 04/12/2013 6:19:59 AM PDT by Darnright ("I don't trust liberals, I trust conservatives." - Lucius Annaeus Seneca)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Darnright

You’re darn right.


55 posted on 04/12/2013 6:22:19 AM PDT by Salamander (Like acid and oil on a madman's face, reason tends to fly away.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac
Always have a sharp pocket knife.

I do the same.

Just realize that the leftists would have you arrested for carrying and using a concealed weapon.

56 posted on 04/12/2013 6:25:24 AM PDT by ThomasMore (Islam is the Whore of Babylon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ThomasMore

How would they know that it was concealed?

Having come from my house at the sound of my screaming son I could have picked the knife up on the way out.


57 posted on 04/12/2013 6:52:43 AM PDT by Pontiac (The welfare state must fail because it is contrary to human nature and diminishes the human spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Arthurio
I came up with the checklist awhile ago and since have noticed that almost ALL dog attacks that result in massive injury or death are 3/4 or 4/4.

#1) Large and/or aggressive breed of dog.

There are particular breeds that are more likely to be aggressive - and way more dangerous IF they are aggressive. The larger and more powerful your dog - the more you need to make sure they are not aggressive and under your absolute control at all times.. which brings us to #2.

#2) Running loose, often >1 running loose.

If the dog is under your control it is unlikely that an attack will happen or progress to the point of massive injury or fatality. Dogs in a pack mentality (>1 running loose) are way more dangerous. Two dogs are not twice as dangerous - more like danger to the 2nd power. Three dogs are not three times as dangerous - more like danger to the 3rd power. If you have more than one dog, especially large and/or aggressive dogs; it is VITAL that you not allow them to run loose or be at all negligent if they can break out at will. Filling in the hole under the fence with loose dirt is not keeping your dog secure - it is inviting another incident of them running loose.

#3) Previous reports of aggressive behavior.

Usually there are warning signs that the dogs are aggressive towards humans and/or other dogs, ignore them at your (and your neighbors) peril.

#4)(THE BIG ONE.) Unreasonable expectation of passivity from the owner - often despite #3 above.

If the owner is aware of the danger they will not allow the dog to run loose EVER, they will not allow their dog around other dogs or people where they are able to attack them, they will not be the typical “we had no way of knowing our three massive aggressive dogs would climb under the fence AGAIN, go running loose, and would attack and kill a child!”

I am the former owner of a very aggressive Bull Mastiff dog, appropriately named “Fury”. #1 was already checked off the list. I never allowed her to escape alone and she was always under my direct and immediate control #2 was not going to happen. She had numerous incidents of aggressive behavior - almost always against dogs - but their owners were not exempt. #3 was already checked off the list. I was doing my damnedest to NEVER have an unreasonable expectation of passivity from her!!!

If people who owned large/aggressive dogs were more diligent - lives would be saved. I agree with the posters on this thread who think that manslaughter charges are warranted in situations like these. I figure that legally your dog is an extension of you - if your dog damages property it is as if you damaged the property - if your dog attacks a person - it is as if you attacked that person - and if your dog kills someone - you are guilty of creating the situation that killed them.

58 posted on 04/12/2013 7:56:51 AM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

>If people who owned large/aggressive dogs were more diligent - lives would be saved.<

Amen. I had a Belgian Malinois who lived to be 15 1/2. I never, ever ASSumed he “won’t bite”. He never bit anyone, because he was never out of a family member’s control, nor was he allowed around stupid people who might have teased him.

I have no doubt whatsoever that he would have bitten, especially had someone been foolish enough to come into our home unannounced.


59 posted on 04/12/2013 10:15:08 AM PDT by Darnright ("I don't trust liberals, I trust conservatives." - Lucius Annaeus Seneca)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote
And a tragic page featuring the death of a child is simply not enough to give pit defenders pause out of respect for lost life.

Yet it is a perfect opportunity for a bunch of liberals to slam pits with their DU type lies when pits weren't even involved.

Yep, the libs using these pages to slam a breed of dog are no different than Jesse Jackass spouting his crap. What is it like to look in the mirror and see Jesse staring back?

60 posted on 04/12/2013 1:00:38 PM PDT by Eaker (Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life. — Robert A. Heinlein.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
You might want to investigate the influence of sex and reproductive status to decide if it should be included in your list of factors involved in dog attacks.

"Of the 41 fatal dog attacks from 2000-2001, there were 28 deaths from a single dog attack and 13 deaths from a multiple dog attack. Of the 28 single dog attacks; 26 were male and two were female.

Of the 26 fatalities caused by a single male dog from 2000-2001, it was found that 21 of these dogs were not neutered. (The reproductive status of the remaining five male dogs could not be determined)."

~~

"Other studies have documented that unneutered dogs are 2.6 times more likely to bite than neutered dogs; and male dogs are 6.2 times more likely to bite than female dogs." (4)

Fatal Dog Attacks: The Stories Behind the Statistics - By Karen Delise (pg. 13-14)

61 posted on 04/12/2013 5:51:41 PM PDT by kanawa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: kanawa

Not surprising considering that in our species 90% of violent crimes are committed by men. But while that is interesting, such is usually not included in news reports.


62 posted on 04/12/2013 5:59:27 PM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: kanawa

And of course by “family dog” the media usually means intact, unsocialized, unvetted and untrained dog living on a chain in the backyard. It is fact that dogs living in such conditions become aggressive. (One more reason chaining should be outlawed.) Dogs are social creatures and become frustrated (to put it mildly) when they are kept in such an environment. How many of those stories mention in passing that the dog/dogs “broke from their chain(s)”. Very revealing.

Oh, and for those not paying attention: this was not a Staffordshire Terrier.... but a bulldog (or at least one was). For those who believe every dog involved in a bite is a Terrier/commonly considered to be a “pit bull”, now you know.

Prayers for the family.


63 posted on 04/12/2013 6:36:33 PM PDT by JLLH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: JLLH

Correction: both were bull dogs.


64 posted on 04/12/2013 6:39:57 PM PDT by JLLH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: JLLH

The article title and text describes the dogs as pit bull mixes “

A seven-year-old boy has died four days after being savaged by two pit bull mix dogs belonging to his neighbour.”


65 posted on 04/12/2013 6:57:13 PM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

Yes, and then the article identifies them clearly as “bull dogs”: see Kanawa’s earlier post #31 — and the other is described as being a “brindle bulldog”. Not a Terrier at all.


66 posted on 04/12/2013 7:01:10 PM PDT by JLLH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: JLLH

Pit bull mix allows for other breed mentions - particularly if some of the appearance of the dog looks like another breed. I think it’s just wishful thinking to insist that it’s not a pit bull mix by focusing on the other breed mixed in.


67 posted on 04/12/2013 7:15:30 PM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

No, it’s wishful thinking to think that the media would get the breed identified correctly. More like they don’t know the diff. and it never occurs that someone else might. As for the “mix” part, that’s really hard to prove....and highly doubtful the owner would know the mix himself.


68 posted on 04/12/2013 7:39:31 PM PDT by JLLH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: JLLH

No - I am not into conspiracy theories re the breed of dog. Insurance companies long ago developed special contract riders excluding specific breeds of dogs known to incur the greatest costs in damages to people. Pit bulls, and related dog breeds, are there in a dollars and cents context; the insurance companies won’t cover damages caused by those breeds (dogo argentino, presa canario,6 cane corso, tosa inu, fila brasileiro and presa mallorquin. Each of these breeds is either a pit bull derivative or was derived from ancestors similar to pit bull ancestors.) Wolf hybrids also cause disproportionate human losses (injury/death).

In the 8-year period from 2005 to 2012, pit bulls killed 151 Americans, about one citizen every 19 days. Sorry, I don’t buy the mistaken identity defense.


69 posted on 04/12/2013 11:05:29 PM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

You can buy anything you want or not — makes no difference. The fact remains that the media id EVERYTHING as a “pit bull” — and when the retraction comes, it’s buried on page 7 or further back. Coincidence? No, I don’t think so. Furthermore, considering the number of “mixes” in this country it’s astonishing that everything can get so ahem — “accurately identified” in this country. Again, conspiracy? No, but agenda — most definitely. Finally — and there’s really no point in going beyond this post because your sources of info. are suspect, breed i.d. is a very tricky thing and considering the number of times the media gets it wrong, and only OCCASIONALLY corrects their records, one cannot possibly have valid stats on which breeds are the “most dangerous”, “bite the most”, etc... Nor is “pit bull” a valid breed, by the way — further complicating the problem. I never cease to be amazed at the number of conservatives on this site who, after vitiating the media on numerous occasions for not being truthful with anything else, suddenly do an about face when it comes to dog bites and assume that “just this once” they got it right — even when they have clearly stated otherwise. As if the media suddenly became the great arbiters of truth!! Now THAT’S FUNNY!!


70 posted on 04/13/2013 6:08:27 AM PDT by JLLH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: JLLH

I referred to the insurance companies - you deflect to the media. How about medical staff? Are they agenda driven liars too? Why aren’t there more ER physicians supportive of this breed? I researched this issue before I began posting about it. I read the stories (and saw horrific photos) of flesh stripped off bone so that the child’s hand still had flesh but the forearm bones were bare. Does that sound like the result of a normal dog bite to you? After he was sent via helicopter to a more advanced medical center, the first medical team of doctors, nurses and other assistants all gathered in an open medical bay, drew the curtain around the group, and quietly cried. All part of the conspiracy/agenda, eh?
There are a variety of resources which identify pit bull mixes and pits as the unpredictable aggressive breed they are; fans of the breed insist that only fans of the breed can identify them.
Your sources of info are suspect - they tend to show up on websites detailing the killing of yet another child by a pit bull and post pictures of a pit bull licking a child’s face...as if that were appropriate. Posting a picture of a pit bull liking a child’s face gives us all an idea what the scene of the child’s death looked like shortly before the dog attacked it. It gives us a close up view of how the child had once trusted the dog that would later rip it’s face off. It shows us the disparity in size - how the child’s head would fit in the dog’s mouth etc. It sometimes gives the impression that licking the child made the dog hungry to taste it’s flesh. But, your sources like to post such pictures wherever another child dies in the teeth of one or more pit bulls.


71 posted on 04/13/2013 10:38:05 AM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: ransomnote

OK - one last post and then I’m done because you clearly want to believe that all bully breeds (though I’m not sure you even know what is included in that group) are Satan incarnate. Frankly, there are NO valid stats to indicate which “breed” of dogs bite more. Why? Because the so-called “data” is based (yes, even among medical personnel) largely on self-reported i.d. — i.e. the dog was identified based on how someone thought it looked. Such “id” is, of course, invalid and preposterous as most DNA analyses will show — and do all the time. What IS valid, and HAS been shown to be the case is that the media RARELY identify the breed of dog accurately. Indeed, it is not in their interests to do so. This is an important point because the medical personnel and websites dedicated to show how “evil” a certain breed or breeds of dog(s) are in comparison to others rely on media reports for their —ahem— “statistics”. Given that there was no DNA analysis done on the dogs to confirm whether or not the “type” was actually within the group under discussion, and given that most dog bites go unreported and are not serious enough to warrant a hospital visit and that the bites under consideration were self-selected and not taken in a random sampling, and given that no other factors were taken into consideration (such as being intact, chaining, being untrained), and you have a whopper of a skewed view of “bully breeds” run amok. And don’t think for one second that medical personnel or insurance companies are “experts” when it comes to dog identification. They are relying on the same agenda-driven nonsense — courtesy of the media reports. As for your view that the pictures posted of bully breeds loving on their owners takes place “seconds before the dog rips the owner’s face off” you have no basis for that statement, but you do show your—bias. ‘Nuff said.


72 posted on 04/13/2013 10:49:45 AM PDT by JLLH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: JLLH

Yeah, I’ve read your kind of propaganda before. ‘Nuff said.


73 posted on 04/13/2013 11:59:30 AM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Arthurio

Not a pit bulls are good post, although I do believe that the reasons they are such a problem is because of too many ahole people.

I have two friends who are veterinarians. Both are not afraid of pits unless they exhibit suspicious or bad behavior. Both will not work on Rottweillers that are unfixed males unless their owners bring them in muzzled. Both have told me they have been bitten without warning by these types. My two vet friends don’t know each other.


74 posted on 04/14/2013 4:07:38 AM PDT by sakic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Stories about this are currently about two thirds of the way down the page. . .

http://blog.dogsbite.org/

Manslaughter charges have been filed against Edward Daniels II after his two dogs brutally attacked Tyler Jett, ultimately causing his death. Daniels was already charged with felony tampering of evidence and drug charges that arose during the investigation. Greg Wilson, Chief Assistant State Attorney for the 14th Judicial Circuit, said, "In any type of animal case where the death of another person occurred, [manslaughter] is the highest you could go."

Edward Daniels II, 21, faces up to 15-years if convicted of manslaughter. On March 28, just days before his dogs got loose (again) and attacked Tyler, Bay County Animal Control cited Daniels for allowing his dogs to run loose and terrorize neighbors. That citation put Daniels on notice that his dogs were dangerous and that he needed to properly secure his animals. Daniels failed to do so and as a result, a child was horribly mauled and died due to injuries inflicted by his dogs.

The WMBB video showed images of both attacking dogs.


75 posted on 04/26/2013 7:26:22 PM PDT by deks ("...the battle...liberty against the overreach of the federal government" Ken Cuccinelli)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-75 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson