Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 4/10/2006 5:34:06 AM EDT
Since it was pitbulls involved, it was a "man who jumped a fence" and not a burglar, theif or prowler.
-------------------------------------------------
www.nbc4.com
Guard Dogs Kill Man Who Jumps Business' Fence

POSTED: 6:57 am EDT April 10, 2006

COMPTON, Calif. -- A man was mauled to death by three guard dogs after he jumped the fence at a metalworking company in Compton Sunday.

Authorities said the man, whose identity has not been released, suffered severe head and back injuries and was pronounced dead on arrival at a hospital.

The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department said the dogs, all pit bull mixes, attacked the man after he jumped the fence at the Cal State Steel Company. Security guards who heard his screams called 911.

Sheriff's deputies arrived to find the man badly mauled and still under attack. They said they were able to order the dogs away without using weapons.


The dogs are at a shelter. They'll be quarantined until county animal control officers decide their fate.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 5:44:12 AM EDT
Hopefully they kill the dogs, which they deserve, being even partially a pit.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 5:46:08 AM EDT

Originally Posted By adair_usmc:
Hopefully they kill the dogs, which they deserve, being even partially a pit.



Well at least they got the guy,he had no buisness being on that side of the fence.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 5:47:24 AM EDT
if he was a thief or potential burglar...he deserved what he got.


the dogs were only doing their job (they were able to be called off without force)


the dogs should be allowed to live
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 5:47:39 AM EDT

Originally Posted By adair_usmc:
Hopefully they kill the dogs, which they deserve, being even partially a pit.



I don't know. Fences are put in place by property owners to keep people out, and this guy wanted in. It kind of sounds like the dogs did their job. Hmmm...
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 5:48:03 AM EDT
It's the dogs' fault. Ban them for the children. These things happen, Jethro. They should be banned from civilian use at least 87 times a day.

But seriously, you know the dogs will take the blame for doing their job.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 5:49:46 AM EDT
I fail to see the problem here. I'm not a pit-bull owner or anything, so I am unbiased, but those dogs did their job. Give 'em a steak and call it a day.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 5:53:34 AM EDT
I don't think they'll have room for steak after "Prowler al la Carte"...
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 5:55:39 AM EDT
If they had guard dog warning signs posted the company gave fair notice. The dude took his chances and lost.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 5:55:48 AM EDT
Yes, ARFCOM recommeds guard dogs to help defend property, as long as they are not big guard dog type dogs because those are just child eating monsters. Best to get a toy poodle, except those are teh gay and who wants to be gay? So, maybe a pack of ferrel cats, except cats are only for shooting or running over. Maybe just a fearsome gerbil then?
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 5:57:29 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/10/2006 5:57:54 AM EDT by adair_usmc]

Originally Posted By Grunteled:
Yes, ARFCOM recommeds guard dogs to help defend property, as long as they are not big guard dog type dogs because those are just child eating monsters. Best to get a toy poodle, except those are teh gay and who wants to be gay? So, maybe a pack of ferrel cats, except cats are only for shooting or running over. Maybe just a fearsome gerbil then?




I would rather have a trained rat.

Link Posted: 4/10/2006 5:57:48 AM EDT
What kind of world are we living in when a criminal can't jump a fence with the intent of commiting crimes without being attacked by guard dogs?
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 5:59:55 AM EDT
Were they assault guard dogs? You know that the world doesn't need any dangerous assault dogs...

Seriously, though, I don't give a damn about the burgler. I'm sure he got what he deserved. I hope the dogs will be alright. It's a shame that they will probably be put down for doing what they were meant to do.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:04:56 AM EDT

Originally Posted By efpeter:
What kind of world are we living in when a criminal can't jump a fence with the intent of commiting crimes without being attacked by guard dogs?



Hell in a handbasket my friend..... hell in a handbasket.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:07:38 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Brohawk:
If they had guard dog warning signs posted the company gave fair notice. The dude took his chances and lost.



The fence common morality is adequate fair notice.

And the only way these dogs would deserve punishment is if they didn't mercilessly attack the moron. And even then, the only punishment deserved would have been retirement from guard duty.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:19:44 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:24:25 AM EDT

Originally Posted By adair_usmc:
Hopefully they kill the dogs, which they deserve, being even partially a pit.



Oh yeah, because they were obviously vicious animals, hell bent on killing. I mean the officers probably had to call them off the burglar 2 or three times.

Don't wanna be eaten by the pit-mixes stalking the steel yard? Don't jump the fence. And if you do jump the fence, try not to smell like food.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:25:33 AM EDT
[Flame suit on] The only thing I see wrong is that the security guards didn’t order the dogs off after they observed that the guy was no longer a threat. If the news article is correct, they just let the dogs chew on him until the deputies arrived. The dogs did their job and shouldn’t be destroyed because the guards didn’t control the situation.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:26:28 AM EDT
The dogs should be shot.

The owners of these animals should go to jail for at least 10-12 years.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:28:55 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
The dogs should be shot.

The owners of these animals should go to jail for at least 10-12 years.



Are you trying to stir shit up again?
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:30:52 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/10/2006 6:33:02 AM EDT by RobarSR60]

Originally Posted By adair_usmc:

Originally Posted By Grunteled:
Yes, ARFCOM recommeds guard dogs to help defend property, as long as they are not big guard dog type dogs because those are just child eating monsters. Best to get a toy poodle, except those are teh gay and who wants to be gay? So, maybe a pack of ferrel cats, except cats are only for shooting or running over. Maybe just a fearsome gerbil then?




I would rather have a trained rat.




You're BOTH wrong. This is the most fearsome rodent there is...

Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:31:26 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
The dogs should be shot.

The owners of these animals should go to jail for at least 10-12 years.



+eleventytrillion
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:31:32 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
The dogs burglar should be shot.

The owners of these animals should go to jail for at least 10-12 years get to keep the carcass--kibble is expensive.




Fixed it fer ya Orifacer.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:32:12 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
The dogs should be shot.

The owners of these animals should go to jail for at least 10-12 years.



Are you trying to stir shit up again?



No, it has as much thought behind it as Markm's 87 posts.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:32:34 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
The dogs should be shot.

The owners of these animals should go to jail for at least 10-12 years.



Are you trying to stir shit up again?



Just expressing my opinion.

I in no way condone the guy trespassing.

Owners should be responsible for their animals and if they kill or maul someone they should be punished.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:35:44 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Grunteled:

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
The dogs should be shot.

The owners of these animals should go to jail for at least 10-12 years.



Are you trying to stir shit up again?



No, it has as much thought behind it as Markm's 87 posts.



Which is infinitely more thought than the diminished brain capacity of a pit bull owner could ever possbile hope to have behind it.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:35:51 AM EDT
i am just curious, if a property owner is allowed to own a few guarddogs that could kill sombody, why cant you just shoot sombody for being on your property,

I dont fualt the dogs, but should the owner be charged with manslaughter, what would of happend if that criminal was a 10 year old kid that was just screwing around.

but given the fact that this buisness is in COMPTON, i am assume that both the owner and victim/criminal, are not upstanding members of society, and that the dogs were probly abused/screwed up as they could be just like in any other pitbull in the ghetto/hood.



Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:39:11 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
The dogs should be shot.

The owners of these animals should go to jail for at least 10-12 years.



Are you trying to stir shit up again?



Just expressing my opinion.

I in no way condone the guy trespassing.

Owners should be responsible for their animals and if they kill or maul someone they should be punished.



So you have no problems with someone breaking into somewhere, injuring themself, and then suing/pressing charges against the property owner for allowing a hazard to exist?

After all, it's not like your toy poodle could bite someone who jumped your fence.....

Do you actually read the things you post? Just curious....Is it just pits or is it all dogs? What about K9s? Dogs that are trained to attack? Should the handler be charged if that amped up Malinois takes a chunk outta the wrong person? Maybe a ADW charge? After all, the handler released an OBVIOUSLY dangerous animal into an unsecured area....
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:40:00 AM EDT



RULE!
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:40:24 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/10/2006 6:41:09 AM EDT by SubnetMask]

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
The dogs should be shot.

The owners of these animals should go to jail for at least 10-12 years.



Are you trying to stir shit up again?



Just expressing my opinion.

I in no way condone the guy trespassing.

Owners should be responsible for their animals and if they kill or maul someone they should be punished.



Ok, cool. I'm "on the fence" as it were (hee hee) on this. Most of me thinks the dogs did what they were supposed to do, but then another part of me thinks death or severe mauling is a pretty severe punishment for criminal tresspass. It's possible that my emotional hatred for theives is clouding my judgement. Come to think of it, we don't even really know why the guy jumped the fence.

Let's say he was a theif. I suppose it could be argued that handing down the death penalty by way of a mauling is a severe punishment, that doesn't fit the crime. So after writing this down and thinking about it, maybe I'm actually agreeing with you and adair_usmc.

I need to hear more.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:45:08 AM EDT

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
The dogs should be shot.

The owners of these animals should go to jail for at least 10-12 years.



Are you trying to stir shit up again?



Just expressing my opinion.

I in no way condone the guy trespassing.

Owners should be responsible for their animals and if they kill or maul someone they should be punished.



Ok, cool. I'm "on the fence" as it were (hee hee) on this. Most of me thinks the dogs did what they were supposed to do, but then another part of me thinks death or severe mauling is a pretty severe punishment for criminal tresspass. It's possible that my emotional hatred for theives is clouding my judgement. Come to think of it, we don't even really know why the guy jumped the fence.

Let's say he was a theif. I suppose it could be argued that handing down the death penalty by way of a mauling is a severe punishment, that doesn't fit the crime. So after writing this down and thinking about it, maybe I'm actually agreeing with you and adair_usmc.

I need to hear more.



When you tresspass, you are taking risks. If you jump my fence and then jump my pool fence and fall in the water and drown, YOU are at fault. Because YOU are the idiot who jumped the fences and fell in the water.

If YOU jump my fence (presumably 6 foot with barbed wire) and then trip and fall while running away from my assault poodle, gouging your eyeball out and smashing your face in, and then my AP chews through to your jugular while you are unconcious, it isn't the dog's fault, nor is it MY fault that YOU decided to cross a barrier (obviously constructed to keep retards OUT) and then died.

WTF happened to personal responsibility?
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:47:05 AM EDT
how would you feel if it was couple kids who jumped the fence just being kids, would being mualed to death be ok, and justified? point is the owner didnt not have control of the dog

yes they are great guard dogs, but unlike guns, an inproperly trained/ abused guard dog left alone has the potential to harm the wrong person by mistake


once again, it was in compton, what do you expect
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:47:43 AM EDT
Would there be such a stink if it had been Dobermans? They are guard dogs keeping out an intruder like they should.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:49:45 AM EDT

Originally Posted By m4hk33:
how would you feel if it was couple kids who jumped the fence just being kids, would being mualed to death be ok, and justified? point is the owner didnt not have control of the dog

yes they are great guard dogs, but unlike guns, an inproperly trained/ abused guard dog left alone has the potential to harm the wrong person by mistake


once again, it was in compton, what do you expect





Howabout parents resume teaching their crumbsnatchers to STAY OUT OF OTHER PEOPLE'S SHIT? The world is not a playground for little Timmy and Tommy with the matching bump caps and drool bibs. The DOG WAS IN A FENCED AREA. It doesn't get much more controlled than that.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:51:18 AM EDT

Originally Posted By m4hk33:
i am just curious, if a property owner is allowed to own a few guarddogs that could kill sombody, why cant you just shoot sombody for being on your property,

I dont fualt the dogs, but should the owner be charged with manslaughter, what would of happend if that criminal was a 10 year old kid that was just screwing around.

but given the fact that this buisness is in COMPTON, i am assume that both the owner and victim/criminal, are not upstanding members of society, and that the dogs were probly abused/screwed up as they could be just like in any other pitbull in the ghetto/hood.






What exactly does that mean? There are no honest "upstanding members of society" in COMPTON?
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:51:22 AM EDT
Well, according to this poll 63% of ARF's think people who own dangerous animals should be held accountable for the damage caused by their animals.


Simple trespassing should not be a death sentence. I hate thieves etc. also. But the same job could have been done with dogs who bark and are not inclined to basically kill a person. These same dogs could escape into the community and attack a totally innocent person.

If these dogs had protected someone in a deadly force incident I would call them hero's. But that's not what happened in this case. They killed someone for simple trespassing.

Owners of dangerouse animals should be held accountable for their animals behavior.

You would think that all these Pit Bull lovers would support this stance, since they claim Pits are such docile animals who never hurt anybody all on their own. They always claim it's owners not the dogs.

So let the owners be responsible. Simple enough?
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:52:49 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Gravity_Tester:

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
The dogs should be shot.

The owners of these animals should go to jail for at least 10-12 years.



Are you trying to stir shit up again?



Just expressing my opinion.

I in no way condone the guy trespassing.

Owners should be responsible for their animals and if they kill or maul someone they should be punished.



Ok, cool. I'm "on the fence" as it were (hee hee) on this. Most of me thinks the dogs did what they were supposed to do, but then another part of me thinks death or severe mauling is a pretty severe punishment for criminal tresspass. It's possible that my emotional hatred for theives is clouding my judgement. Come to think of it, we don't even really know why the guy jumped the fence.

Let's say he was a theif. I suppose it could be argued that handing down the death penalty by way of a mauling is a severe punishment, that doesn't fit the crime. So after writing this down and thinking about it, maybe I'm actually agreeing with you and adair_usmc.

I need to hear more.



When you tresspass, you are taking risks. If you jump my fence and then jump my pool fence and fall in the water and drown, YOU are at fault. Because YOU are the idiot who jumped the fences and fell in the water.

If YOU jump my fence (presumably 6 foot with barbed wire) and then trip and fall while running away from my assault poodle, gouging your eyeball out and smashing your face in, and then my AP chews through to your jugular while you are unconcious, it isn't the dog's fault, nor is it MY fault that YOU decided to cross a barrier (obviously constructed to keep retards OUT) and then died.

WTF happened to personal responsibility?



The law doesn't allow for it. What if he was just there to ask directions? What if his tire was flat and he was looking for the local AAA office. Maybe he was searching for his lost child or kitty cat.

If it isn't your fence and you jump it anything that happens to you on the other side should be on your head and yours alone. That should be taught from the time you can toddle around.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:53:37 AM EDT
Did these dogs have bayonet lugs?
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:57:46 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
Well, according to this poll 63% of ARF's think people who own dangerous animals should be held accountable for the damage caused by their animals.


Simple trespassing should not be a death sentence. I hate thieves etc. also. But the same job could have been done with dogs who bark and are not inclined to basically kill a person. These same dogs could escape into the community and attack a totally innocent person.

If these dogs had protected someone in a deadly force incident I would call them hero's. But that's not what happened in this case. They killed someone for simple trespassing.

Owners of dangerouse animals should be held accountable for their animals behavior.

You would think that all these Pit Bull lovers would support this stance, since they claim Pits are such docile animals who never hurt anybody all on their own. They always claim it's owners not the dogs.

So let the owners be responsible. Simple enough?



These dogs weren't running the street. If they had been, I'd be agreeing with you. But if you ignore my beware of dog signs and vault my 7 foot block wall into my yard, then YOU are the idiot. YOU are responsible for your injuries and any damage to MY property. If my dog bites you on the street, then I am in the wrong. If my dog (ANY BREED) kicks your retarded ass once you break into MY DOMICILE to include my back yard, the YOU ARE THE IDIOT WITH STICHES, and I don't feel even a LITTLE BIT bad for you.

Same thing goes for the retards who try to rob people with a toy gun--if you get shot, it's because YOU'RE a MORON.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:58:52 AM EDT
how do you know that they were only going to trespass? how do you know the next fence he jumped over wasnt going to be owned by a little old lady or a single mom with little kids? what do you think he would have done if somebody had walked in on him while he was robbing their house? the what if shit goes both ways...you assume a person CLIMBING over a fence was meaning good....well i assume the were up to NO good
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 6:59:30 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/10/2006 7:03:42 AM EDT by Grunteled]

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
Well, according to this poll 63% of ARF's think people who own dangerous animals should be held accountable for the damage caused by their animals.


Simple trespassing should not be a death sentence. I hate thieves etc. also. But the same job could have been done with dogs who bark and are not inclined to basically kill a person. These same dogs could escape into the community and attack a totally innocent person.

If these dogs had protected someone in a deadly force incident I would call them hero's. But that's not what happened in this case. They killed someone for simple trespassing.

Owners of dangerouse animals should be held accountable for their animals behavior.

You would think that all these Pit Bull lovers would support this stance, since they claim Pits are such docile animals who never hurt anybody all on their own. They always claim it's owners not the dogs.

So let the owners be responsible. Simple enough?



If the dogs had gotten loose and attacked someone, I'd side with you (except it's a civil matter in my mind not a criminal one unless you directed their behaviour). However, as far as I'm concerned if you tresspass YOU expose yourself to any life-threatening hazards that exist there. If they kill you... too bad, break your leg, too bad.... rip your face off, too bad. The law may require you to make your property safe and secure for trespassers but that doesn't make me think it's right.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 7:02:01 AM EDT
Tag....
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 7:02:11 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Grunteled:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
Well, according to this poll 63% of ARF's think people who own dangerous animals should be held accountable for the damage caused by their animals.


Simple trespassing should not be a death sentence. I hate thieves etc. also. But the same job could have been done with dogs who bark and are not inclined to basically kill a person. These same dogs could escape into the community and attack a totally innocent person.

If these dogs had protected someone in a deadly force incident I would call them hero's. But that's not what happened in this case. They killed someone for simple trespassing.

Owners of dangerouse animals should be held accountable for their animals behavior.

You would think that all these Pit Bull lovers would support this stance, since they claim Pits are such docile animals who never hurt anybody all on their own. They always claim it's owners not the dogs.

So let the owners be responsible. Simple enough?



If the dogs had gotten loose and attacked someone, I'd side with you (except it's a civil matter in my mind not a criminal one unless you directed thier behaviour). However, as far as I'm concerned if you tresspass YOU expose yourself to any life-threatening hazards that exist there. If they kill you... too bad, break your leg, too bad.... rip your face off, too bad. The law may require you to make you property safe and secure for trespassers but that doesn't make me think it's right.



+1
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 7:02:11 AM EDT
I can not see how the dogs could be held responsible for doing what the property owner expected of them. I am sure signs were likely posted that there were dogs on the property. I was raised around pitbull's, my dad would not bring anything else home.

As a child I was never bitten or harmed by any of the pits we had. BUT these dogs should be viewed as a loaded firearm. They are a danger to the stupid. I remember visiting my brother once at his apartment.

My brother LOVES pitbull dogs and has had three of them. Upon visiting his apt I walked on in and his extreamly large pitbull was sitting in the living room while my brother was in the shower.

I knew this dog very very well but had not been around in awhile. Once I entered he looked at me for a min then got up and rushed me.

I thought of running back out the door but I trusted the dog. I was beginning to get second thoughts when he jumped on me pinning me to the door and proceeded to lick the skin of my face.

This dog made me realize that its not the breed that determines how the dog reacts to people but the owner. My brother trained this dog with his fist's. I can remember him giving the dog a right hook to the jaw that made me wince.

I told him it was not wise to do such to the dog, but he responded "He acts stupid some times". I even remember him giving the dog body shots that made me want to fight my brother. I felt bad for that dog. He never once though to raise tooth or claw to my brother though.

Sorry to get off topic, would you not expect your dog of any breed to defend you if needed? Those dogs should be returned back to the owner and put back on duty.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 7:02:56 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Gravity_Tester:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
Well, according to this poll 63% of ARF's think people who own dangerous animals should be held accountable for the damage caused by their animals.


Simple trespassing should not be a death sentence. I hate thieves etc. also. But the same job could have been done with dogs who bark and are not inclined to basically kill a person. These same dogs could escape into the community and attack a totally innocent person.

If these dogs had protected someone in a deadly force incident I would call them hero's. But that's not what happened in this case. They killed someone for simple trespassing.

Owners of dangerouse animals should be held accountable for their animals behavior.

You would think that all these Pit Bull lovers would support this stance, since they claim Pits are such docile animals who never hurt anybody all on their own. They always claim it's owners not the dogs.

So let the owners be responsible. Simple enough?



These dogs weren't running the street. If they had been, I'd be agreeing with you. But if you ignore my beware of dog signs and vault my 7 foot block wall into my yard, then YOU are the idiot. YOU are responsible for your injuries and any damage to MY property. If my dog bites you on the street, then I am in the wrong. If my dog (ANY BREED) kicks your retarded ass once you break into MY DOMICILE to include my back yard, the YOU ARE THE IDIOT WITH STICHES, and I don't feel even a LITTLE BIT bad for you.

Same thing goes for the retards who try to rob people with a toy gun--if you get shot, it's because YOU'RE a MORON.



So if this pack of Pit Bulls had been out on the street and killed someone, would you support jailing the owners?

Link Posted: 4/10/2006 7:06:33 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/10/2006 7:08:29 AM EDT by Grunteled]

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:

Originally Posted By Gravity_Tester:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
Well, according to this poll 63% of ARF's think people who own dangerous animals should be held accountable for the damage caused by their animals.


Simple trespassing should not be a death sentence. I hate thieves etc. also. But the same job could have been done with dogs who bark and are not inclined to basically kill a person. These same dogs could escape into the community and attack a totally innocent person.

If these dogs had protected someone in a deadly force incident I would call them hero's. But that's not what happened in this case. They killed someone for simple trespassing.

Owners of dangerouse animals should be held accountable for their animals behavior.

You would think that all these Pit Bull lovers would support this stance, since they claim Pits are such docile animals who never hurt anybody all on their own. They always claim it's owners not the dogs.

So let the owners be responsible. Simple enough?



These dogs weren't running the street. If they had been, I'd be agreeing with you. But if you ignore my beware of dog signs and vault my 7 foot block wall into my yard, then YOU are the idiot. YOU are responsible for your injuries and any damage to MY property. If my dog bites you on the street, then I am in the wrong. If my dog (ANY BREED) kicks your retarded ass once you break into MY DOMICILE to include my back yard, the YOU ARE THE IDIOT WITH STICHES, and I don't feel even a LITTLE BIT bad for you.

Same thing goes for the retards who try to rob people with a toy gun--if you get shot, it's because YOU'RE a MORON.



So if this pack of Pit Bulls had been out on the street and killed someone, would you support jailing the owners?




Nope. Civil issue. Same as if my shit-head kid stole my car and ran someone down, or my poorly maintained tree falls on someone and kills them. Maybe I could have secured the keys better, or cut the tree down earlier but I'm not a criminal for the actions of another entity unless I directed them to take the actions they did.

ETA: I'd support suing the person into the ground, but not jailing them, and that is assuming the dogs had never been involved in an incident before.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 7:06:33 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:

Originally Posted By Gravity_Tester:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
Well, according to this poll 63% of ARF's think people who own dangerous animals should be held accountable for the damage caused by their animals.


Simple trespassing should not be a death sentence. I hate thieves etc. also. But the same job could have been done with dogs who bark and are not inclined to basically kill a person. These same dogs could escape into the community and attack a totally innocent person.

If these dogs had protected someone in a deadly force incident I would call them hero's. But that's not what happened in this case. They killed someone for simple trespassing.

Owners of dangerouse animals should be held accountable for their animals behavior.

You would think that all these Pit Bull lovers would support this stance, since they claim Pits are such docile animals who never hurt anybody all on their own. They always claim it's owners not the dogs.

So let the owners be responsible. Simple enough?



These dogs weren't running the street. If they had been, I'd be agreeing with you. But if you ignore my beware of dog signs and vault my 7 foot block wall into my yard, then YOU are the idiot. YOU are responsible for your injuries and any damage to MY property. If my dog bites you on the street, then I am in the wrong. If my dog (ANY BREED) kicks your retarded ass once you break into MY DOMICILE to include my back yard, the YOU ARE THE IDIOT WITH STICHES, and I don't feel even a LITTLE BIT bad for you.

Same thing goes for the retards who try to rob people with a toy gun--if you get shot, it's because YOU'RE a MORON.



So if this pack of Pit Bulls had been out on the street and killed someone, would you support jailing the owners?




You can hang a great big fat ROGER on that. But you jump a fence into a swarm of killer chihuahuas or even a trained attack tiger, and not only are you an imbecile, but you are at fault for your OWN FUCKING INJURIES.

I've said it before---if my dogs bit someone OUTSIDE my property, I would shoot the fucking dog on the spot. But in my backyard, where my dogs consider it their TERRITORY, behind the block wall and locked gates, you jump the fence and ignore the signs, and YOU are the idiot.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 7:09:05 AM EDT

So if this pack of Pit Bulls had been out on the street and killed someone, would you support jailing the owners?


I see your point, but this is a fallacious argument.

Regardless of any argument for or against animals doing what animals do when intruders challenge their territory:

This Is Why I Don't Enter Other Peoples Property Without Permission.

This Is ESPECIALLY Why I Don't Jump Over Any Fence But My Own.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 7:09:14 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Grunteled:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
Well, according to this poll 63% of ARF's think people who own dangerous animals should be held accountable for the damage caused by their animals.


Simple trespassing should not be a death sentence. I hate thieves etc. also. But the same job could have been done with dogs who bark and are not inclined to basically kill a person. These same dogs could escape into the community and attack a totally innocent person.

If these dogs had protected someone in a deadly force incident I would call them hero's. But that's not what happened in this case. They killed someone for simple trespassing.

Owners of dangerouse animals should be held accountable for their animals behavior.

You would think that all these Pit Bull lovers would support this stance, since they claim Pits are such docile animals who never hurt anybody all on their own. They always claim it's owners not the dogs.

So let the owners be responsible. Simple enough?



If the dogs had gotten loose and attacked someone, I'd side with you (except it's a civil matter in my mind not a criminal one unless you directed their behaviour). However, as far as I'm concerned if you tresspass YOU expose yourself to any life-threatening hazards that exist there. If they kill you... too bad, break your leg, too bad.... rip your face off, too bad. The law may require you to make your property safe and secure for trespassers but that doesn't make me think it's right.



You do realize if you boobytrap your property and a trespasser is severly injured or killed you are responsible? And will be sent to jail.


But you guys take up the Pit side no matter where the attacks happen, inside fences or out in street.

Again if you choose to own an animal be it a Pit, Tiger, Lion or whatever that mauls or kills someone the owner should go to jail.
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 7:12:06 AM EDT

The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department said the dogs, all pit bull mixes, attacked the man after he jumped the fence at the Cal State Steel Company. Security guards who heard his screams called 911.


this place sounds like a large industrial type business, i assume the fences were pretty damn high, being in Compton. I guarantee it has prolly been hit b4, the fact the owners needed guard dogs and guards
the guy just happened to jump a fence, pleeeeez
Link Posted: 4/10/2006 7:12:14 AM EDT

Originally Posted By adair_usmc:

Originally Posted By Grunteled:

Originally Posted By SubnetMask:

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
The dogs should be shot.

The owners of these animals should go to jail for at least 10-12 years.



Are you trying to stir shit up again?



No, it has as much thought behind it as Markm's 87 posts.



Which is infinitely more thought than the diminished brain capacity of a pit bull owner could ever possbile hope to have behind it.



Ironic statement coming from a 'devil dog'....Let me be the first one with diminished brain capacity to tell you to go fuck yourself.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top