Boy Killed By Mom's Dogs


dotdotdot

macrumors 68020
Jan 23, 2005
2,381
31
"He never listened, it was his time to die."

Nope, nothing wrong with that mom.

Except, you are basically LECTURING YOUR DEAD SON!

"Stupid! If you listened you would be alive!"

What a moron.
 

buryyourbrideau

macrumors 65816
Mar 1, 2005
1,212
0
Chicago
are you efiin serious.

first this woman should be locked up for endangering her child and locking him downstairs which IMO is child abuse.

and another thing, i a m assuming that the san fran police have seen this womans statements, couldnt they possibly assume that maybe she wanted him to die and was trying to kill him since of what she said, thats what springs into my head
 

ham_man

macrumors 68020
Jan 21, 2005
2,265
0
For some reason I think that this world would be better off if she had been the one mauled, not her son. What a horrible mother...
 

iGary

Guest
May 26, 2004
19,583
0
Randy's House
Oh, pit bulls. I'm really surprised.

Nice dogs. :rolleyes:

I know some people who have very loving, very well behaved pit bulls. I wouldn't leave anything under 4' with them for a second.

Derr.
 

Inspector Lee

macrumors 6502a
Jan 24, 2004
590
0
East Lansing, MI
Not to stereotype or anything, not to umbrella every owner because of a few bad apples but... what is it about people and these dogs (rottweillers, pit bulls, bull mastiffs)?

When they are not making the news because of a killing or mauling, they are showing up at work as starvation cases. 99.999999% of the emaciation cases we handle are the big dogs. Anything under 60% fat is considered malnourished and these big dogs consistently show up and register under 5% fat content.
 

iGary

Guest
May 26, 2004
19,583
0
Randy's House
Inspector Lee said:
Not to stereotype or anything, not to umbrella every owner because of a few bad apples but... what is it about people and these dogs (rottweillers, pit bulls, bull mastiffs)?

When they are not making the news because of a killing or mauling, they are showing up at work as starvation cases. 99.999999% of the emaciation cases we handle are the big dogs. Anything under 60% fat is considered malnourished and these big dogs consistently show up and register under 5% fat content.
The dogs have an underlying aggressive nature. They can snap in a moment. Some never "snap" their entire lives, and are wonderful animals. Others maul people to near death. Sorry, you'll never find me taking the risk.

And yes, a lot of the worst cases have to do with the owner.
 

Inspector Lee

macrumors 6502a
Jan 24, 2004
590
0
East Lansing, MI
iGary said:
And yes, a lot of the worst cases have to do with the owner.
Yeah, it is negligence, ignorance or a tincture of both. And this is the kind of case that amazes me because the animal was familiar with the victim. It wasn't the unknown jogger running by and invading territory.

Animals can smell fear and it scares them. One may not think they are scared, or try to mask their fear but animals can sense it and feel threatened by it. If one is even remotely apprehensive toward a dog, it can pick it up.

And when one is dealing with multiple dogs, the pack mentality comes into play and then all bets are off.
 

wdlove

macrumors P6
Oct 20, 2002
16,570
0
A very sad story and how stupid. Pit Bulls are already know to be overly aggressive. From personal experience with dogs, when a female is in heat that tends to agitate the situation. It makes the male aggressive and possessive. In my situation we had a strong female and was able to control the male.

Can't imagine what the mother was thinking. She should be charged with negligence. Can't even imagine how the boy must have suffered. It's amazing that he made it up to his bedroom. :(
 

jsw

Moderator emeritus
Mar 16, 2004
22,817
37
Andover, MA
I suppose it's possible she was in shock and denial... but nothing changes the fact that she left her child in a life-threatening situation.
 

WithTea

macrumors member
May 11, 2005
38
0
Canada
At least she said she wanted the dog put down...

Okay, I'm out of positives. That woman is nuts. Let's use a shovel to bar my son in with vicious dogs! That's smart! Neglect charges, or something, please.

Didn't Canada (Ontario, Toronto?) ban pitbulls as pets?
 

faintember

macrumors 65816
Jun 6, 2005
1,363
0
the ruins of the Cherokee nation
mad jew said:
It wouldn't really fix anything though. She doesn't sound like a very quick learner.
My logical thoughts:
I agree it would not fix anything, however charges should be pressed when a law has been violated, regardless of the person's ability to learn from their misdeeds. What could she be charged with anyway? Manslaughter or 3rd degree murder sound like good starting points in my book.

My primal thoughts:
I agree, she does not sound like a quick learner. I hope she runs even slower than she learns when that pit bull comes for her.

Sorry if the last few lines sounded really insensitive. I am just...I dunno. Shocked, appaled, angry, confused. This is a really sad case of a human that has no respect for others. Locking her son in a basement while she runs errands? What?

Sad story all around. :(
 

acedickson

macrumors 6502a
Dec 6, 2004
727
0
ATL
iGary said:
The dogs have an underlying aggressive nature. They can snap in a moment. Some never "snap" their entire lives, and are wonderful animals. Others maul people to near death. Sorry, you'll never find me taking the risk.

And yes, a lot of the worst cases have to do with the owner.
Pit Bulls & Rottweilers don't have an aggressive nature towards humans, neither like dogs. I've owned both for years and never had a problem out of either breed. The media has made these breeds into monsters because when they do attack they can cause so much damage. It's not the number of attacks. Dalmations, Poodles, and Chihuahas, just to name a few, have worse temperments than Pitts or Rotts.

I have three small children and, although I'd never leave them alone at this age with them, they were great with the dogs. Small children harass dogs by pulling ears and tails and pinching & hitting. That's, usually, why Pitts & Rotts, as well as small and medium breeds, sometimes attack small children. It's the parents responsibility in those cases to teach the child that's not right.

In this case I think it's, obviously, a result of bad parenting and dog ownership. It matters how you treat & raise these dogs as to how they'll react to children's harassment or act out their frustration/anger to any humans. You can't lump every dog from one breed in together. Dogs, as humans, all have different personalities. Some are born mean, most aren't. Some that aren't are turned by bad owners!

I hate when I hear "Oh it was a Pitt/Rott that explains why they were attacked. It's in their nature". That's totally false. Yes, it happens but it's no more common that other dogs. It may seem like it because we only hear about the large dogs attacking because they do so much damage or kill.

They're extremely loyal and protective dogs. It's usually the dogs treated, or raised, poorly by the owners that attack. Pitts and Rotts that are fought attack much more than the ones that don't.

If there was ever an instance where one of my dogs gets out of line with any memeber of my family, it would be gone. But, I don't see it happening because of the way I raised them.

wdlove said:
Pit Bulls are already know to be overly aggressive.
I disagree. See above.
 

eva01

macrumors 601
Feb 22, 2005
4,714
0
Gah! Plymouth
Inspector Lee said:
Not to stereotype or anything, not to umbrella every owner because of a few bad apples but... what is it about people and these dogs (rottweillers, pit bulls, bull mastiffs)?

When they are not making the news because of a killing or mauling, they are showing up at work as starvation cases. 99.999999% of the emaciation cases we handle are the big dogs. Anything under 60% fat is considered malnourished and these big dogs consistently show up and register under 5% fat content.
I love my doberman pincher, such a nice dog. Well he is extremely nice with kids, loves kids, but adults that come into the house he will bark at which is what i want him to do. My dog is a wonderful pet.

and yes the mother should be put on death row just for being stupid
 

Dr. Dastardly

macrumors 65816
Jun 26, 2004
1,317
0
I live in a giant bucket!
acedickson said:
Pit Bulls & Rottweilers don't have an aggressive nature towards humans, neither like dogs. I've owned both for years and never had a problem out of either breed. The media has made these breeds into monsters because when they do attack they can cause so much damage. It's not the number of attacks. Dalmations, Poodles, and Chihuahas, just to name a few, have worse temperments than Pitts or Rotts.

I have three small children and, although I'd never leave them alone at this age with them, they were great with the dogs. Small children harass dogs by pulling ears and tails and pinching & hitting. That's, usually, why Pitts & Rotts, as well as small and medium breeds, sometimes attack small children. It's the parents responsibility in those cases to teach the child that's not right.

In this case I think it's, obviously, a result of bad parenting and dog ownership. It matters how you treat & raise these dogs as to how they'll react to children's harassment or act out their frustration/anger to any humans. You can't lump every dog from one breed in together. Dogs, as humans, all have different personalities. Some are born mean, most aren't. Some that aren't are turned by bad owners!

I hate when I hear "Oh it was a Pitt/Rott that explains why they were attacked. It's in their nature". That's totally false. Yes, it happens but it's no more common that other dogs. It may seem like it because we only hear about the large dogs attacking because they do so much damage or kill.

They're extremely loyal and protective dogs. It's usually the dogs treated, or raised, poorly by the owners that attack. Pitts and Rotts that are fought attack much more than the ones that don't.

If there was ever an instance where one of my dogs gets out of line with any memeber of my family, it would be gone. But, I don't see it happening because of the way I raised them.


I disagree. See above.
The point I think he was trying to make is when these dogs are aggressive they are do to a bad enviroment that they are raised in. These dogs can be dangerous if not in the proper enviroment. If cared for properlly they are extremely well behaved and trainable dogs (my cousin breeds them and they are blue ribbon show dogs, all of them). They can get a bit rowdy at sometimes but nothing more than playing. But if they are brought up in a bad enviroment they can be very aggresive.
 

CanadaRAM

macrumors G5
acedickson said:
Pit Bulls & Rottweilers don't have an aggressive nature towards humans, neither like dogs. Dalmations, Poodles, and Chihuahas, just to name a few, have worse temperments than Pitts or Rotts.
Right. :(

Strength and capability to do fatal damage have a bit to do with it as well. You don't hear much about people being mauled to death by enraged Chihuauas.
 

absolut_mac

macrumors 6502a
Oct 30, 2003
935
0
Dallas, Texas
acedickson said:
Pit Bulls & Rottweilers don't have an aggressive nature towards humans, neither like dogs. I've owned both for years and never had a problem out of either breed. The media has made these breeds into monsters because when they do attack they can cause so much damage. It's not the number of attacks. Dalmations, Poodles, and Chihuahas, just to name a few, have worse temperments than Pitts or Rotts.
That's a silly statement.

So all of those attacks - most of which are sudden and completely unprovoked - of both adults and young children being mauled to death by pit bulls and rottweilers is due to the dogs placid nature and the media making up stories???? I don't think so.

As for dalmations, poodles etc, their temperament may be worse, but they tend to be more predictable and are less able to inflict major damage.
 

mad jew

Moderator emeritus
Apr 3, 2004
32,194
6
Adelaide, Australia
faintember said:
My logical thoughts:
I agree it would not fix anything, however charges should be pressed when a law has been violated, regardless of the person's ability to learn from their misdeeds. What could she be charged with anyway? Manslaughter or 3rd degree murder sound like good starting points in my book.

But I think charging her, and ultimately punishing her, will do more bad than good if it ends in jail.

My understanding of the justice system is that it is in place to ensure correct behaviour but I don't think that system works or applies in this situation, unfortunately. :(

Maybe I'm being a little idealistic, or just plain lazy, but I don't see the point in charging her if she wont learn from her mistakes. :)
 

eva01

macrumors 601
Feb 22, 2005
4,714
0
Gah! Plymouth
CanadaRAM said:
Right. :(

Strength and capability to do fatal damage have a bit to do with it as well. You don't hear much about people being mauled to death by enraged Chihuauas.
i would actually have a chuckle at that kind of headline. "today at noon a 36 year old man was killed when a pack of chihuauas attacked him"
 

wordmunger

macrumors 603
Sep 3, 2003
5,125
2
North Carolina
I have just one question: wouldn't it have been easier to lock up the DOGS than to lock up a 12-year-old boy?

It makes me very suspicious as to whether the mother actually did try to lock the boy in the basement.