Skip to comments.Pit Bull Attack Leaves One Toddler Dead
Posted on 02/18/2014 12:54:08 PM PST by Arthurio
A pit bull attack left a 2-year-old girl in critical condition Monday morning and after being admit to a local area hospital, the girl died as a result of her injuries.
According to KWTX, the 2-year-old girl was from Temple Texas and has been identified as Jevaeh Mayes. Corporal Christopher Wilcox told reporters that officers were dispatched at around 11:30 am Monday morning to a home in the 800 block of East Avenue E. with reports of a dog bite.
KBTX stated that the dog which allegedly bit the girl was a pit bull that the family had been watching for a friend. The dog was in the backyard at the time of the alleged attack. 2-year-old Mayes had wandered into the backyard and was reportedly bit by the pit bull at that time. The girls parents say they didnt know that their daughter had wandered out into the backyard.
Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/1138307/pit-bull-attack-leaves-one-toddler-dead/#VJ9aPo0AxU28kPd2.99
(Excerpt) Read more at inquisitr.com ...
In before “It’s the owner, not the breed”!
If the news was fair and balanced, they would report such attacks by other dog breeds as well. Pit bulls do attack humans less frequently than most other dog breeds.
Would like to look at the stats for that. Pit bulls still rank #1 for kills.
True that but pits are much more likely to maim or kill.
Chet99 is back
Cowardly Cops prefer to kill harmless and defenseless animals like Collies and Labrador Retirevers.
This particular paragraph says to me the "parents" must spend a lot of time wresting for use of a single brain cell.
- Watching a pit bull "for a friend" when a toddler is in the house????
- The parents "didn't know their daughter had wandered out into the backyard???"
This is going to haunt those parents for the rest of their lives... as it should.
What is the rate of death, serious injury, dismemberment and scars for pit bulls vs other breeds?
Most = >50%. What is the source of your information?
<>If the news was fair and balanced, they would report such attacks by other dog breeds as well.<>
You mean news like this:
Arizona neighborhood terrorized by feral packs of abandoned CHIHUAHUAS
East Temple is a bad part of town. Dangerous. . .even without the pit bull threat.
This can’t be! They’re such a sweet, harmless breed. I’m told this all the time - between attack stories.
Pit bulls are more or less the canine equivalent of assault weapons. The definition of which breeds are included is very loose. Often means any large scary dog.
Statistics on dog bites are collected with a very wide degree of reliability.
Any statistic as to number of bites or deaths caused by a particular breed is pretty meaningless without qualification by number of those dogs of that breed in US or percentage of dogs of that breed.
IOW, if (to make up some numbers) 25% of fatal bites are by “pit bulls,” but pit bulls are only 1% of all US dogs, they’re a lot more dangerous than the raw numbers or ranking would indicate.
“Funny how liberals never talk about banning pit bulls...”
Well, I don’t know if it is liberals, but there is fairly frequently talk of banning pit bulls, they may in fact be banned in some localities.
I encountered a female pit bull in our local kitchen store when the owner brought her on a leash into his office through the shop. I just stood stock still with my left hand slightly held off to my side. She came up, sniffed me, determined that I was ok, and we became friends. A little petting going on. Hope I didn’t interfere with her training as a watch dog.
>>>If the news was fair and balanced, they would report such attacks by other dog breeds as well. Pit bulls do attack humans less frequently than most other dog breeds.<<<
Roughly two thirds of all dog attack fatalities involve Pit Bulls, which make up only about 5% of the dog population.
The vast majority of the hundreds of other dog breeds either never kill humans or kill them only, very, very rarely (like 1 in 20 years or more).
Most stories about dogs killing humans are about Pit Bulls, because most of such killings are BY Pit Bulls.
From the site www.dogsbite.org
Pitbulls: 263 deaths
Rottweiler: 81 deaths (next closest)
My vet is quite clear, pit bulls need to become extinct and that can be done by making breeding and selling illegal. He believes they are this dangerous.
I believe pit bulls are most accurately characterized as a group of breeds, not as a breed as such. And it appears dogs outside this group are very often classified as pit bulls when they’re involved in a severe incident.
IOW, I suspect the numbers are overstated for “pit bulls.”
Not particularly a defender of pit bulls, just trying to keep the record straight.
“Funny how liberals never talk about banning pit bulls....I find that intriguing.”
I guess you never heard about “breed-specific” regulations? It’s the first step...
Pit Bulls like to argue bite stats, not fatalities and argue that a nip on the ankle from a chihuahua is just as bad as a pit permanently disfiguring a child’s face.
Seriously? Do you not watch/listen to the news.
Errr, pit bull apologists
Fair enough. Pit Bulls are a subset of the Bulldog family and bred for their tenacity. I too would like to see the data and how the dog was classified and by whom.
Pit bulls are popular among Holder’s People and urban hipsters
dang I hate those things!
Its the owner.
Never leave children unsupervised around dogs, cats or ferrets.
They may be domesticated but pets can still bite if they feel they’ve have had enough or their space is threatened.
Pet owners have to exercise responsibility. The dog needs to be killed so it can never harm another human being again but the lesson here is people have to make sure pets and children together are under adult supervision at all times. Period.
Nah, they'll just blame whitey.
rjsimmon and I have both asked you for the stats or source of that information. You've ignored us both.
Does this mean there isn't any data to back this up, and you pulled this statement out of your imagination?
I don't care if you're counting breeds according to the AKC, the UKC, the CKC, the NZKC, the ANKC, or the Fédération Cynologique Internationale. Where is your data than >50% of breeds recognized by one of those groups attack humans more than pit bulls do?
Pit bulls can be sweet and loving family dogs.
But not every one wants them as a companion dog and that’s when there’s trouble afoot.
yep — especially drug dealer types. Given the neighborhood this kid was in 10-1 that owner was a drug seller. They selectively pick the meanest dogs they can find, breed those mean dogs to other mean dogs, and it’s not long before you have a problem. I wish just once those d*** dogs would eat their druggie owners.
Just one of the facets of this wonderful family pet.
Well, we can do the math. IF the percentages in that link to Dog Bites are correct, then it’s a good thing Chows, Huskies and Bull Mastiffs aren’t more populous. If there were as many of those breeds as Pit Bulls, and all other things being equal, then Deaths by Husky over the last 31 years would be 2,142, Deaths by Bull Mastiff would be 4,500, and Deaths by Chow would be a whopping 4,662.
For what it’s worth. I don’t have a dog in this fight.
Funny how liberals never talk about banning pit bulls....I find that intriguing.
Plenty of talk about that here in Maryland, so we know its liberals doing the talking.
You may want to do some research on your statement above.
By percentage of the breed as pets in our country, Pit bulls attack more than 1.5 times as much as rotts, 2 times more than german shepherds and then the math really goes off the charts.
Pit bulls make up less than 10% of the pet dog population but account for the vast majority of dog attacks that cause hospitalization and death. That is the truth. I don't know where other numbers come from but these numbers come from the US Center For Disease Control.
The point is that a FReeper stated as fact that "[p]it bulls do attack humans less frequently than most other dog breeds."
I've never seen any data to support that statement. If that is a true statement, then I'd like to know. Knowledge is power, particularly with this controversial subject.
Two FReepers have asked to know the source of that stated fact.
After conducting some research on my own, and after being ignored by the FReeper who made that statement as fact, I now believe there wasn't, isn't, and is unlikely to be any report, statistic, study, or bubble gum wrapper supporting that statement.
“Pit bulls are popular among Holders People and urban hipsters”
motorcycle gang members
meth makers and distributors
It should be illegal to breed these dogs and owners should be required to carry liability insurance the absence of which would then result in forfeiture of ownership.
For starters, google is one’s good friend when looking to debunk myths about pit bulls. Looking at the first couple pages by googling pit bull myths or pit bull myths debunked, for example, can give some insight. The facts are that pit bulls have been owned by criminals and those with tendencies for criminal behavior more often than other dogs and it is the behavior of the owners that made them dangerous. Also, pit bulls are often too difficult to classify for groups like the CDC, which could for example classify American bulldogs and similar breeds as “pit bulls”, for starters. Studies showing the tendencies for aggression in pit bulls relative to other breeds, under the presumption that they are raised by owners who know how to train and work with a dog correctly, buts them below many other breeds, including, for example, poodles and labradors.
A good Doberman is 10x the guard dog a pit is.
True, and a doberman with an owner who isn’t up to the challenge is potentially 10x more dangerous than a pit bull, if not more so.
Assuming that's true (and it might be because other breeds are more common), would you also contend that pit bull attacks are no more serious than the attacks of other dog breeds?
It’s kind of like the fairyland US mainstream media...knockout gamers are colorless, Obama is awesome and the scary guys are Ted Cruz and the Koch Brothers, not Schumer and Soros.
People that can’t raise a doberman right probably couldn’t raise a labrador right and probably shouldn’t own a dog.
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.