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.
Status:
"Smartened up and walked away!"
(set 28 days ago)
11,792 posts, read 5,798,330 times
Reputation: 14221
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by marino760
If that was a service dog and I very much doubt it was, it failed miserably. Service dogs don't bite people. They are not guard dogs. The police aren't going to do a background check on the dog. They simply take the owner's word for it.
Did you bother to actually look and see if a service dog has actually bit anyone - no - I found multiple stories of service dogs attacking people - most were provoked - but these were trained service dogs. I love the know it all on these forums.
Read one tale of a woman with a seeing eye dog that regularly flies to Florida.
On a recent flight, someone sat next to her and placed a little yappy "emotional support" dog on the tray table. Then suggested the dogs play together during the flight.
The blind woman was aghast. Service animals don't play while they are working.
The flight attendant moved the woman and her "emotional support animal" to another row where the dog continued to bark throughout the flight. Another sign that it wasn't a trained service animal.
By the way that dog acted, that was not a legitimate "service dog". By what the dog had on him, he was not a service dog. By the way the owner had the dog on the seat, he was not a service dog. A service dog does NOT sit on the seat of a bus or subway train. They never have. They sit at the feet of the person.
The reporting may say that he was a "service animal", but most reporters don't have a clue what an actual certified service animal is, nor do the police, just as most of both of them don't typically have a clue what an actual pitbull looks like.
Because people have emotional support animals and call them service animals, people continue to confuse the two.
An "emotional support animal" is NOT a service dog. They do not have credentials, no one has checked them, no one has trained them, they are not certified. They are simply someone's pet and they got the title "emotional support animal" for their pet after telling their psychologist why they need their pet.
Emotional support animals do not offer a thing to the human except that the human doesn't have to pay the pet fees at an apartment complex, and they can have their dog in apartments that state "no pets". That's it. That is what the advantage of an emotional support animal.
They do not have the right to go into the stores with people, they do not have the right to ride on public transportation, planes, or cruise ships because they are NOT ADA certified animals.
People should have to have the dog licensed by the ADA, and carry a license for their ADA certified animal. If someone has an authentic service animal, we can all see the service animal. Having the person present a license is not infringing on anything. Most people can plainly see why an animal is a service animal, but those idiots who have emotional support animals and think that entitles them to everything that a certified animal gets, need to be called out. If a business was allowed to do that by asking for a license that would not provide any medical information, would only have an official stamp from the ADA that the animal is indeed a certified service animal, we wouldn't see so many stupid stories like this.
Having said all of that, if you push a dog off of a seat, over and over again, and you attack their human, you cannot then act surprised that you got bit.
Imagine yourself being shoved off of a seat repeatedly and then seeing your mate get attacked...you all would just sit there and do nothing?
Both of these people are morons.
The good news is, because of idiots who claim emotional support animals are service animals, the law is starting to crack down:
Agree with the bolded type, along with just about everything else.
He should not have had the dog on the seat, but for her to start shoving and kicking at it was a very bad response (I probably would have asked to pet it!) Things escalated from there - he hit her, she hit him, and eventually the dog reacted like a dog: it bit the person it perceived as a threat to its master. Most dogs will do that, if pushed too far.
Of everyone involved in this incident, I think the dog is the least responsible for a bad outcome, but it will probably end up bearing most of the blame, just because it's a pit bull.
Considering how much pain, misery and human suffering pitbulls cause it says many bad things about humans that we aren't all united against pit bulls. Due to moral decay, today's generation gets a tinge of excitement when they hear of a pitbull mauling or killing an innocent person...they will always take the dogs side and never the innocent human victim.
Considering how much pain, misery and human suffering pitbulls cause it says many bad things about humans that we aren't all united against pit bulls. Due to moral decay, today's generation gets a tinge of excitement when they hear of a pitbull mauling or killing an innocent person...they will always take the dogs side and never the innocent human victim.
Are you serious? I don't get a "tinge of excitement" out of anyone's pain. I do, however, have issues with blaming the dogs instead of the owners. This was not an unprovoked attack.
That man should not have taken his dog on the subway, or put it on the seat. The woman should not have responded by shoving it and kicking it. He should not have hit her. Only when she hit him back did the dog bite, and I have to say that I, too, have had dogs who would have bitten someone who hit me, and none of them were pit bulls. That the dog tolerated being pushed, prodded, and kicked speaks volumes, IMO. It was put in a crap situation to which no animal should be subjected.
Are you serious? I don't get a "tinge of excitement" out of anyone's pain. I do, however, have issues with blaming the dogs instead of the owners. This was not an unprovoked attack.
That man should not have taken his dog on the subway, or put it on the seat. The woman should not have responded by shoving it and kicking it. He should not have hit her. Only when she hit him back did the dog bite, and I have to say that I, too, have had dogs who would have bitten someone who hit me, and none of them were pit bulls. That the dog tolerated being pushed, prodded, and kicked speaks volumes, IMO. It was put in a crap situation to which no animal should be subjected.
Once again I agree completely. Pitbulls may have some genetic traits, but nothing that an owner who understands their dog can't over come. This is evidenced by the fact that the vast majority of pits are loving loyal pets who never display aggressive behavior.
Bad owners make for bad pets. Bad breeders create bad or flawed blood lines. It starts with the breeder then the owner. A dog depends upon its owner to teach it how to behave, to socialize and what is an acceptable response to strangers.
Not unlike children, dogs reflect the time and effort put into them by their owners.
Considering how much pain, misery and human suffering pitbulls cause it says many bad things about humans that we aren't all united against pit bulls. Due to moral decay, today's generation gets a tinge of excitement when they hear of a pitbull mauling or killing an innocent person...they will always take the dogs side and never the innocent human victim.
Because it is always the idiotic human that causes this whether through poor training, claiming their emotional support animal is a "service dog" and putting the dog on a seat of a bus/train/subway, by people who raise them specifically for fighting, by people who get dogs and know nothing about dogs at all....you cannot have a pitbull if you're a pushover. You cannot have a pitbull if you don't know how to lead a dog, train a dog, be firm with the dog. It has a high potential of ending in disaster.
Pitbulls have been used for fighting, and some of them are rescued. Despite the absolute horrors that some of these animals have gone through, they still show like for humans. Pitbulls, before being used as a status symbol by twits in this country, were considered the "babysitter" dog because their demeanor is actually very good. But when you put a human who is an idiot into that picture, as the owner of the pitbull, you're going to see stories like this and others.
Further, a large chunk of the stories about pitbulls attacking people have not actually been pitbulls. The media doesn't know what a pitbull is, a lot of police do not know what a pitbulls is, and even people working in shelters do not know what a pitbull is.
As long as there are people out there who continue to push the bs about "dangerous pitbulls", more pitbulls are going to suffer.
Plenty of pitbull owners in this world know a) about dogs b) how to be firm with dogs c) train their dogs and each and every one of them who has a calm, gentile pitbull is an ambassador for the breed as they are showing the true nature of a pitbull, not this gang glorified fighting dog that has been abused, neglected, and later tortured and killed when the pieces of garbage who use them for money and status are done with them. (Remember that useless trash football player who was slamming dogs on the ground, repeatedly? Yeah, he's part of the problem. And you're damn right I care more about the dogs than that scum jackass.)
Every time I hear someone blather on about how evil pitbulls are, I realize that the person doesn't know a thing about dogs.
Are you serious? I don't get a "tinge of excitement" out of anyone's pain. I do, however, have issues with blaming the dogs instead of the owners. This was not an unprovoked attack.
That man should not have taken his dog on the subway, or put it on the seat. The woman should not have responded by shoving it and kicking it. He should not have hit her. Only when she hit him back did the dog bite, and I have to say that I, too, have had dogs who would have bitten someone who hit me, and none of them were pit bulls. That the dog tolerated being pushed, prodded, and kicked speaks volumes, IMO. It was put in a crap situation to which no animal should be subjected.
*ding ding ding!* This exactly. Nobody's happy that the woman got bit. What's being pointed out was that the dog in question, *through no fault of its own*, was put in a no-win situation once the woman and his master came to blows. Up until then, the dog had been non-reactive--he only became aggressive when he saw his master get attacked. The dog has no way of understanding that his master *started* the whole situation, and was the one who escalated it.
The woman who got bit should have never been put in this situation, but she should have realized that the dog equally didn't ask for it, and wasn't going to be capable of reasoning out who was at fault for the entire mess.
My 2nd job is at a mall. There is NO WAY all of these "service dogs" are legit. People buy a vest so they can take their dog everywhere.
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 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.
