First Application of Lillian's Law for dog attacks

[Don in Austin]

Originally Posted by waitressinthesky

As a proud owner of a small (probable) pit mix (FROM Town Lake Animal Center... picked up the poor creature with a 110-degree fever and complete loss of leg movement from being neglected), I will agree that 99% of pit bull owners are unfit to be dog owners, period.

I can't stand people with pits (or ANY breed with a powerful body) who think it's OK not to get them spayed/neutered (hello, this makes them more aggressive) or think they should breed them to make money (that's reason number two why our shelters are maxed out all the time). I could go on all day about HOW STUPID these people are. They think "taking care" of a dog means tethering them out in the back yard and giving them food once a day. Forget about training them or socializing them, I guess. These people know NOTHING about being pet owners.

I treat my dog the way I would any other dog. She sleeps in my bed, she goes to the dog park and plays nicely with others (really, she's the gentlest one there), she gets healthy food twice a day and she knows all of her commands. MUCH more well behaved than my old dachshunds! I stick my hands between her jaws all the time and never get bitten. She knows the strength of her jaws.

THE OWNER IS ALWAYS RESPONSIBLE -- ONE HUNDRED PERCENT -- WHEN AN ANIMAL ATTACKS. You chose to get a pet. In this case, the owner chose to get MULTIPLE pets without doing research, understanding how bigger, stronger dogs act and without having a property that could handle the dogs. I have no sympathy for the owner.

Fair enough!

Don in Austin

[stan4]

Originally Posted by CptnRn

Actually the article says he did try to repair the fence. Unfortunately the dogs still got out during his absence. That could happen to anyone in spite of reasonable efforts to contain them, but he is still the party responsible. The City bears some responsibility for this by making it illegal to tether a dog.

If your dogs are escape artists, KEEP THEM IN THE HOUSE.

How hard is that to wrap your head around?
People shouldn't be leaving any dog, let alone potentially dangerous ones, out alone in the yard unsupervised.

[CptnRn]

Originally Posted by CptnRn

Actually the article says he did try to repair the fence. Unfortunately the dogs still got out during his absence. That could happen to anyone in spite of reasonable efforts to contain them, but he is still the party responsible. The City bears some responsibility for this by making it illegal to tether a dog.

Originally Posted by JanND

It isn't illegal to keep your dog in the house is it??? You can't afford a fence, then it better not be outside w/out you.
Ludicrous.....you own an animal, you and only you are responsible for it's actions.

I don't know of any dog owner who hasn't had their dog escape from then a time or two. That doesn't make them evil. At most all you can say is this guy was negligent.

[OpenD]

Originally Posted by CptnRn

At most all you can say is this guy was negligent.

AND responsible.

[verybadgnome]

Originally Posted by OpenD

AND responsible.

Agreed. Since the mauling can't be labeled an "act of God" it is the fault of a person(s) and that certainly does not include the victim.

[owlman]

Did anyone find out what his sentence is? He was due for sentencing early this month. Inquiring minds want to know