Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > Austin
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 03-22-2012, 10:21 PM
 
Location: Pflugerville
2,211 posts, read 4,838,605 times
Reputation: 2242

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by OpenD View Post
Seriously, this law applies equally to all breeds of dogs. It's about owner responsibility. That's what the thread is about.
Too you. Too me it's about a law called "Lillians Law" that was named after a 70 something woman who was mauled to death by 6 pit bulls. And low and behold, every application of Lillians law so far deals with....pit bulls.

It is about owner responsibility. But if an owner was irresponsible with his 6 chihuahuas...Lillian would still be alive. You can't seperate out owner responsiblity and the breed of dog people choose.

I don't think irrepsonsible people should have ANY dog, but they especially shouldn't have huge monsters capable of ripping a bumper off a car. And whenever I hear from pit bull owners, either in real life or on this forum, they are the MOST clueless people about animals, because they don't accept that THEIR pet is dangerous. You can still love a pet and recognize it's dangerous, and treat it accordingly. But I see this quality lacking in many pit bull owners. They insist their dog would never hurt a fly.

If I owned a pet rattlesnake, I would need to accept the fact that my pet could kill someone, and I have to treat it accordingly. This guy let an animal just as dangerous as a rattlesnake alone in a back yard with a fence the dog had already escaped from. This owner was irresponsible and stupid.

But we dont' make owners take IQ tests before they get animals. Anyone can pick up a dangerous pit bull if they want. So I would like one of two things to happen...

1) make people prove they are responsible before they get any pet
2) Don't allow ANYONE to get dangerous pets

It's a shame we need to choose from one or the other...but then again...ALL LAWS banning something stem from a whole bunch of people demonstrating zero common sense. They ruin it for the rest of us.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-22-2012, 10:27 PM
 
Location: Austin, TX
499 posts, read 1,303,164 times
Reputation: 361
Any guesses on sentencing? I'll say, if he doesn't have any prior criminal record, he'll get probation only.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-22-2012, 10:31 PM
 
Location: Pflugerville
2,211 posts, read 4,838,605 times
Reputation: 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by owlman View Post
Any guesses on sentencing? I'll say, if he doesn't have any prior criminal record, he'll get probation only.
Probably. I am not sure what probation will entail for him though? If you get probation on a DUI you get community service have to go to AA and if you get another DUI they throw the book at you. I would really hope this guy doesn't get another dog that then gets out and attacks someone again. I don't really see how probation would work for him. I would be very surprised if he hasn't already bought a replacement dog, but hopefully he has learned his lesson.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2012, 05:37 AM
 
2,133 posts, read 3,568,642 times
Reputation: 3404
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayBrown80 View Post
Too you. Too me it's about a law called "Lillians Law" that was named after a 70 something woman who was mauled to death by 6 pit bulls. And low and behold, every application of Lillians law so far deals with....pit bulls.

It is about owner responsibility. But if an owner was irresponsible with his 6 chihuahuas...Lillian would still be alive. You can't seperate out owner responsiblity and the breed of dog people choose.

I don't think irrepsonsible people should have ANY dog, but they especially shouldn't have huge monsters capable of ripping a bumper off a car. And whenever I hear from pit bull owners, either in real life or on this forum, they are the MOST clueless people about animals, because they don't accept that THEIR pet is dangerous. You can still love a pet and recognize it's dangerous, and treat it accordingly. But I see this quality lacking in many pit bull owners. They insist their dog would never hurt a fly.

If I owned a pet rattlesnake, I would need to accept the fact that my pet could kill someone, and I have to treat it accordingly. This guy let an animal just as dangerous as a rattlesnake alone in a back yard with a fence the dog had already escaped from. This owner was irresponsible and stupid.

But we dont' make owners take IQ tests before they get animals. Anyone can pick up a dangerous pit bull if they want. So I would like one of two things to happen...

1) make people prove they are responsible before they get any pet
2) Don't allow ANYONE to get dangerous pets

It's a shame we need to choose from one or the other...but then again...ALL LAWS banning something stem from a whole bunch of people demonstrating zero common sense. They ruin it for the rest of us.
Here we go again: Military foster dog attacked | KXAN.com

What do you know? The aggressor dog was a pit bull! I'm sure its just a coincidence.....

Don
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2012, 12:56 PM
 
Location: Pflugerville
2,211 posts, read 4,838,605 times
Reputation: 2242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don in Austin View Post
Here we go again: Military foster dog attacked | KXAN.com

What do you know? The aggressor dog was a pit bull! I'm sure its just a coincidence.....

Don
Wow.....and this is the third attack for this pit bull.......
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2012, 02:08 PM
 
Location: Holly Neighborhood, Austin, Texas
3,982 posts, read 6,714,293 times
Reputation: 2882
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayBrown80 View Post
Wow.....and this is the third attack for this pit bull.......
And this:

"He now has to get a series of 40 rabies shots because of the attacks; officials are unsure if the dog that attacked him is current on its vaccinations."

Last I heard most of these are still administered to the stomach. Seems like grounds for a pain and suffering suit to me.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2012, 04:32 PM
 
Location: Austin, TX
1,825 posts, read 2,819,392 times
Reputation: 1627
The shots also cost north of ten grand last I looked.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2012, 11:51 PM
 
Location: Avery Ranch, Austin, TX
8,977 posts, read 17,494,433 times
Reputation: 4000
Quote:
Originally Posted by verybadgnome View Post
And this:

"He now has to get a series of 40 rabies shots because of the attacks; officials are unsure if the dog that attacked him is current on its vaccinations."

Last I heard most of these are still administered to the stomach. Seems like grounds for a pain and suffering suit to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquitaine View Post
The shots also cost north of ten grand last I looked.
Dang! That's the same treatment that was used 50 years ago! Can't they drop it on a sugar cube like the polio vaccine?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2012, 06:13 AM
 
Location: Austin, TX
1,825 posts, read 2,819,392 times
Reputation: 1627
Nah, rabies is tough stuff. I think wiki has a really cool case where they didn't make it to some girl in time so they put her in a coma and somehow managed to starve the virus over the course of a month, but other than that, it's really awful to treat. That's why some places force you to give all your pets rabies shots, even for indoor animals for whom the most exotic creature they'll run into is a microwave.

Does Austin require all pets to have rabies shots?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-25-2012, 07:36 AM
 
Location: Central Texas
20,958 posts, read 45,279,124 times
Reputation: 24739
Originally Posted by verybadgnome
And this:

"He now has to get a series of 40 rabies shots because of the attacks; officials are unsure if the dog that attacked him is current on its vaccinations."

Last I heard most of these are still administered to the stomach. Seems like grounds for a pain and suffering suit to me.



Last I heard, the rabies shots are now 4 shots over a period of two weeks and nowhere near as painful as the 40-shot series that used to be necessary. (I'm paranoid about rabies.) A quick google confirms that.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > Austin
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top