Re: Vick, Dogs, O the inhumanity...!
  Home FAQ Contact Sign in
alt.prose only
 
Advanced search
POPULAR GROUPS

more...

 Up
Re: Vick, Dogs, O the inhumanity...!         

Group: alt.prose · Group Profile
Author: SDR
Date: Aug 31, 2007 23:23

On Aug 29, 11:42 pm, "jeannek...@aol.com"
aol.com> wrote:
> ... Sherrie who sent a link about a Cockfighting
> film. Thanks for link. I also saw they re-released
> it as Born to Kill with nude-dream scenes, etc.,
> to make it marketable. Imagine the cheers as
> cocks engage...

I think you might've gotten a hold of a porn film
there. Probably to be expected, given your sources
and your obsessions. As a kid I enjoyed watching
cockfights: I used to go walking all over the place
and eventually ended up in what looked like the
world's tiniest stadium (turned out to be a cock-
fighting stage). Fell in love with it right away: The
sounds, the people betting, the birds were weirder-
looking than any chicken I'd ever seen before. And
the bouts were incredible/spectacular: the bird-
owners would sic he two birds at each other a few
times (this was done more than anything to give
the audience time to place all their bets down) and
then they'd let go of the birds... which instantly
flew at each other and in a flurry of flying feathers
and screaming cackles kicked & slashed at each other
-- midair! -- like rippling Spanish Dancers (the
famous hexabranchus sanguineus). I don't know
how man can get blamed for cocks fighting (all
cocks fight). At best you can say that betting is
against the Puritan(ical) tendencies of many
Americans (cock-fighting is quite legal and a grand
tradition in most other parts of the world, and
illegal even here only recently). You could say
that organized (by man) cock-fights must have
been a matter of opportunity taken up by men (as
man is an opportunistic animal).

I can't remember anything bloody about what I saw,
the fight was over when the owner of the bird that
seemed to be losing picked his bird up. And the bird
itself signaled he was losing by being chased around.
I can't imagine that these people would let a valuable
(and really loved pet) like their pride and joy champs
fight to the death (since, in any case, it would be
pointless... given that it was obvious who the winner
and loser were as soon as one of the birds "gave up").

I've never seen a dog fight, but I don't think I would
want to, even though I've read that the dogs bred for
this sort of sport are bred for an even looser skin
which can be bitten without it doing a lot of damage
to its owner: Dogs are just too savage--even the
mere sound of growling is enough to conjure up
terrible emotions in us of when we were much frailer
and defenceless monkeys up in the highest branches.
But I don't really much care for boxing, for example:
I can't imagine anything more brutal (all my life I've
tried to keep other guys from punching me to prevent
brain-damage... and from the earliest developed a
powerful punch myself because, let's face it, "to give
is better than to receive" ...at least, brain-damage).

I suppose you can make anything out of anything. But
I've seen documentaries of hen slaughterhouses and,
baby, it's something out of the worst kind of Hell
imaginable. I've heard tales about what goes on in
cattle slaughterhouses which have inspired in me a
horror so great it's made me wonder what a visiting
being from another planet might think of this one,
and its carnivorous apes! But I'm still eating beef.
I'm still a carnivorous ape. I think those people who
like to pass themselves off as vegetarians are like
a sick mental patient who eats nothing but worms
... he won't starve, but I think he's missing a great
deal passing up the occasional pizza. Our marrow-
sucking era is over. And if you look at the world of
ruminants and the world of carnivores it's pretty
obvious to which world omnivores like man/chimps
(and pigs/et al) would prefer to belong.
> Football/boxing do not have obvious goals like
> death. Dog/cock/bull fighting do.

I can't speak about dogfighting. But bull-fighting
(as I have seen it on TV) is certainly nothing like
the infamous tales of cows being hammered again
and again in slaughterhouses I've heard. And if
you've never understood a typical American rodeo,
let me assure you that the horses and bulls don't
"buck" because they enjoy the applause... it's usually
the "tickler" cattle prod or their penises being hard-
pincered (or note that the animals keep bucking LONG
after the riders have jumped off). And yet we don't
see these sportsmen being certed off to prison along
with Mr. Vick. This is hypocricy at best, at worst it
is a terrific miscarriage of justice against Mr. Vick
by capricious/arbitrary post-Puritan)ical) bastards.
> Each fight seems a variation on a theme: "mine is
> bigger" and the winner lives.

This is a typical female obsession about why men do
the things they do. Men don't obsess HALF as much
as women about penis size (outside of the first few
times in the school shower). If you're really
interested in why men do the things they do (and
women do the things they do)... study the work of
Jane Goodall on Chimps. This will tell you why men
and women find it so difficult to talk with each
other.
> This outcome explains to me why female
> footballers/boxers seem odd

Yes, I myself wonder why there aren't more 400-
pound women linemen in the NFL ... and boxers?
My goodness, think of how much trouble a 90-pound
woman with a 70-pound set of tits would have given
Mohammed Ali!!!!!
> because theirs is never bigger nor do they need to
> prove that, nor do they need to seek slamming to
> the same extent.

Lady, take my advice, please: A Freudian is what you
need. He or she'll straighten you right out.
> Pit bulls and bulls have conspicuous genitalia.

HOW did you graduate junior high school with your
brains so creeped out with all your sexual images?!?
> Roosters are rightly named; female dogs are
> titled: bitch by many breeders.

And why, pray tell, did they ever come to name clouds
"clouds?"
> Animals serving as avatars for those guys less
> endowed make sense to them. I imagined Vick noticing
> he was such an avatar and acting to displace that
> view.

Did you also imagine him hot-wiring cars and purse-
snatching? And if you didn't, WHY NOT?!?!?!
> The kill-cheers at all such events are telling. It
> is not about the dogs.;>

You ARE talking about dog-fighting, I hope.
> Contrast such with golf, duels, etc., where silence
> reigns and skill plus brains matter. Jeanne

AND tight-rope walking, even though th Ring Master
always prods (ha!) the crowd to holler at him when
he's midway across the rope.

Lady, lady, leggo of my leg, lady!

S D Rodrian
http://poems.sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3s.sdrodrian.com

All religions are local.
Only science is universal.
> On Aug 29, 1:10?pm, Sherrie Lee
> yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> On Aug 28, 9:34?pm, kevirwin
> comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>On Aug 28, 11:36 pm, turtoni
>>fastmail.net> wrote:
>
>>> "From an animal welfare standpoint, dog
>>> fighting is one of the most
>>> serious forms of animal abuse, not only for
>>> the violence that the dogs
>>> endure during and after the fights, but
>>> because they often suffer
>>> their entire lives. At least one major study
>>> alleges that the
>>> prevailing mind set among dog fighters is
>>> that, the more the dog
>>> suffers, the tougher he will become,

Is this the same mind-set which sez the same
thing about people's life-experience? Because
every time they interview some guy who's just
survived some horrible experience first thing he
claims is that it's made him stronger--!

"Things are only unique up until
they show you the rest of'em." --SDR
>>> and the better fighter he will
>>> therefore be. This position and the
>>> resulting treatment afforded the
>>> dogs stand in stark contrast with prevailing
>>> public values regarding
>>> the treatment of dogs in many modern societies.

Are those the ones with millions of uninsured
children suffering unimaginable distress, agonies, and
misery because bleeding-heart dog lovers don't
really have a heart or a soul.... just an
incomprehensible love for their "fellow" dogs?

Gimme a barbarous primitive society every time,
then.
>>> In addition to the controversial treatment a
>>> dog receives when he has
>>> potential as a fighter, according to a filing
>>> in U.S. District Court
>>> in Richmond by federal investigators in
>>> Virginia, which was obtained
>>> under the Freedom of Information Act and
>>> published by the Baltimore
>>> Sun on July 6, 2007, a losing dog or one
>>> whose potential is considered
>>> unacceptable faces "being put to death by
>>> drowning, strangulation,
>>> hanging, gun shot, electrocution or some
>>> other method"

Wow! Just like a cow. I suppose now you will join
the armies of Americans protesting MacDonald's!!!
Hoorah for all you hypocrites!
>>> There is a public safety issue associated
>>> with training dogs to be
>>> aggressive fighters. In St. Helens, England,
>>> on January 1, 2007, 5-
>>> year-old Ellie Lawrenson was mauled to death
>>> at her grandmother's home
>>> by a "pit bull terrier-type dog" allegedly bred
>>> by her uncle for the
>>> dog fighting ring. According to the BBC,
>>> post-mortem tests revealed
>>> she died of severe head and neck injuries.
>>> When authorities arrived,
>>> they discovered that the grandmother had
>>> managed to lock the dog
>>> outside, but had herself suffered injuries to
>>> tendons in her arm, and
>>> wounds to her thumb and elbow.

The number of dog bites by dogs "trained or bred
for dog-fighting" is an insignificant droplet in the
ocean of annual dogs-biting-man. And still there is no
clamor for banning these dangerous animals from
human society!

American cities exist at the bottom of a sea of
dog crap in all its city streets--And this is soft
dog crap: When it dies and becomes incorporated
into the city dust, I doubt there is a human being
who is not breathing it in& out constantly. Every
year the incidence of asthma increases exponentially
... along with the dog & cat population. Can it all
really be just a weird coincidence?

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/US/10/09/pomeranian.kills.ap/
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/06/national/main647781.shtml
http://www.care2.com/news/member/298561429/467346
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=290362
http://www.city-data.com/forum/dogs/122294-news-infant-apparently-killed-pet-dogs...
http://www.kidspot.com.au/board/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=7489
>>> Public outrage at this attack and
>>> others has resulted in a police clampdown.
>>> Near the home of Ellie
>>> Lawrenson, over two hundred fighting dogs
>>> in the Merseyside area of
>>> England were subsequently seized. Her uncle,
>>> Kiel Simpson, 23, pleaded
>>> guilty owning a dog banned under the
>>> Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, and was jailed.[8]
>
>>> After a life of training as a fighting dog, if
>>> a dog does not suffer
>>> its death while in such service, a rehabilitation
>>> to become a pet is
>>> usually not practical or even feasible. In
>>> Richmond, Virginia, when a
>>> dog fighter was sentenced in June 2007,
>>> it was revealed in court that
>>> over a dozen of his dogs had to be euthanized,

O horror! Not that dogs are killed, but ... where,
O where are the tears for all the human victims of
dogs?
>>> either because of
>>> serious illness, injury or malnutrition, or
>>> because their training as
>>> fighting dogs made them too dangerous for
>>> adoption. Until 2006, the
>>> man had kept 16 pit bulls in the backyard
>>> of his house, confined with
>>> heavy chains used for automobile towing.
>>> Experts say chaining the
>>> animals is a dogfighting technique for
>>> building strength.

Betcha didn't know you were training your pooch
for dog fights every time you tied it up in the
backyard!
>>> When an
>>> animal control officer responded to a call
>>> from a neighbor that one of
>>> the dogs had died, he found the dead dog
>>> in a trash can. The others
>>> had no food, no clean water and no adequate
>>> shelter. Jody Jones,
>>> program manager of Richmond Animal Care
>>> and Control, said in court
>>> that the case produced more dogs euthanized
>>> than any other case she
>>> knows of from her 15-year career in animal
>>> control.[9][10][11]

What about "doggie Heaven?" This is a term I have
heard more than once from grown-up (yes) dog-owners
telling me about the death of their pooches!!!! (AND,
NO, THERE WERE NEVER ANY KIDS AROUND!)

Fluffy Arrives in Doggie-Heaven:

And Saint Peter The Dog pounces on him!

Fluffy and Saint Peter Dog: Grrrrrrr! Bite, growl,
sniff butts, roll around on the ground (of clouds),
fangs threaten dripping saliva, then:

Saint Peter Dog to Fluffy: "Ok, you can go in."
>>> Following the seizure of a large number of
>>> dogs in an April 2007 dog
>>> fighting case in Mississippi, Tara High,
>>> executive director of the
>>> Humane Society of South Mississippi said
>>> "The reality is that they've
>>> been used for entertainment. It's quite tragic
>>> for those of us that
>>> are kind of left to deal with it and the
>>> reality that these animals
>>> aren't going to be able to be rehabilitated,"

The only difference between an ex-dog-fighting dog
and a regular pooch is that when the regular pooch
bites everybody exclaims (c'mon, everybody now):

"Oh, my Gosh! He never did THAT before!"
>>> she said. Ms. High
>>> compared the animals to "a loaded weapon.
>>> And not something we feel
>>> very comfortable letting out into the community."
>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_fighting
>>You make excellent points from your source about
>> why dog-fighting
>>should be totally discouraged. However, the
>>reality of dogs, in
>>general, even if only rarely, is that there are
>>breeds that can turn
>>on their masters regardless of whether they
>>underwent "vigorous
>>fighting regimes" or not. Call it "the nature of
>>the beast".

ALL DOGS BITE. ALL DOGS KILL. That's why
we got them as pets (instead of lions, as lions
kept killing too many of their owners... hint:
not as many as killed by dogs, ergo).
>>I can't
>>say what the originator's intent was;

To posit that dog fighting is not on the level
as the Holocaust. Simple enough, I'd say. But
I've been mauled by a lot of dog-lovers.
>>I signed on to this level:
>>putting a human in jail for this offense
>>for a period of time that
>>approximates the time given to rapists,
>>thieves, & muggers is
>>unconscionable. Fine the hell out of him,
>>because it is against the
>>law and then everyone move on...

Ha! Wishful thinking. You live in a country
where a couple of mosquitos give somebody
West Nile Fever and the government institutes
a program against it across the nation. But when
a dog after dog kill our children the debate
usually devolves into whether or not the killing
dog should be "euthanatized."
>>Btw, I don't hear the clamor for the other
>>three people involved. I'm
>>not seeing: Vick and his minions anywhere....
>>Why do you suppose that is??

START QUOTE from

http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html

Dog Bite Law Statistics

There is a dog bite epidemic in the United States.
There are almost 5 million victims annually -- about
2%% of the entire population. 800,000 need medical
attention. 1,000 per day need treatment in hospital
emergency rooms. Approximately 26 die per year. Most
of the victims who receive medical attention are
children, half of whom are bitten in the face. Dog
bite losses exceed $1 billion per year, with over $300
million paid by insurance.

The dog bite epidemic: a primer

The number of dogs

There currently are 74.8 million dogs in the USA.
(American Pet Products Manufacturers Association
(APPMA) 2007-2008 National Pet Owners Survey.)

The number of victims

A survey by the national Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention in Atlanta ("CDC") concluded that dogs
bite nearly 2%% of the U.S. population -- more than 4.7
million people annually. (Sacks JJ, Kresnow M, Houston
B. Dog bites: how big a problem? Injury Prev
1996;2:52-4.)

Almost 800,000 bites per year -- one out of every 6 --
are serious enough to require medical attention.
(Weiss HB, Friedman D, Coben JH. Incidence of dog bite
injuries treated in emergency departments. JAMA
1998;279:51-53.)

Dog bites send nearly 368,000 victims to hospital
emergency departments per year (1,008 per day).
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Nonfatal
Dog Bite-Related Injuries Treated in Hospital
Emergency Departments - United States, 2001, MMWR
2003;52:605-610. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report
is published by the CDC.

16,476 dog bites to persons aged 16 years or greater
were work related in 2001. (Ibid., Nonfatal Dog
Bite-Related Injuries Treated in Hospital Emergency
Departments - United States, 2001, MMWR 2003;52:608.

Every year 2,851 letter carriers are bitten. (US
Postal Service.)

Getting bitten by a dog is the second most frequent
cause of visits to emergency rooms caused by 9
activities common among children, namely playing
baseball or softball, being around a dog, playing at
the playground, riding in ATVs and mopeds, playing
volleyball, inline skating, horseback riding, being in
a baby walker, and riding skateboards. (Weiss HB,
Friedman DI, Coben JH. "Incidence of dog bite injuries
treated in emergency departments," JAMA 1998;279:53,
citing US Consumer Product Safety Commission,
"Injuries associated with selected sports and
recreational equipment treated in hospital emergency
departments, calendar year 1994." Consumer Product
Safety Review, Summer 1996;1:5. Also citing US
Consumer Product Safety Commission, "Stair Steps and
Baby Walkers Don't Mix." Washington D.C.:US Consumer
Product Safety Commission;1992. Consumer Product
Safety Alert No. 009207.)

An American has a one in 50 chance of being bitten by
a dog each year. (CDC.)

The number of fatalities.

The yearly number of fatal dog attacks in the USA is
reported as 12, 17 and 26. It is most accurate to say
that the average number was 17 in the 1980s and 1990s,
and that it has risen to 26 in this decade.

The study mentioning 12 deaths per year was published
by CDC and called Dog-Bite-Related Fatalities --
United States, 1995-1996, MMWR 46(21):463-467, 1997.
It related that there were 25 deaths in those two
years (i.e., 12.5 per year), but a footnote said that
the figure 25 probably represented only 75%% of the
actual number of dog bite related fatalities. This
study nevertheless is the source of the oft-cited
statistic that there are only 12 deaths per year; the
footnote is routinely ignored.

The study itself referred to two prior studies for the
purpose of providing a bigger and more accurate
picture. The prior studies were published by JAMA and
Pediatrics. (Sacks JJ, Sattin RW, Bonzo SE. Dog
bite-related fatalities from 1979 through 1988. JAMA
1989;262:1489-92. Sacks JJ, Lockwood R, Hornreich J,
Sattin RW. Fatal dog attacks, 1989-1994. Pediatrics
1996;97:891-5.) JAMA is the official journal of the
American Medical Association, and Pediatrics is the
official journal of the American Academy of
Pediatrics; both are considered to be authoritative
publications, which is one reason why the CDC relies
upon them. These three studies, taken together, showed
that from 1979 to 1996, 304 people in the US died from
dog attacks. The average number of deaths per year was
therefore 17. This conforms with the footnote in the
1997 study, too. Therefore, it is more accurate to
summarize the publications as showing that the average
number of deaths during the 18-year period of 1979 to
1996 was 17, despite the fact that the CDC itself
routinely says the figure is 12.

Current information about fatal dog attacks is found
in publications by individuals, not governmental
agencies:

* Merritt Clifton, Dog Attack Deaths and Maimings,
US and Canada, September 1982 to November 13,
2006, click here to download.
* Karen Delise, Fatal Dog Attacks: The Stories
Behind the Statistics, 2002, self published,
available by clicking here.
* Kenneth Phillips, Canine Homicides, a section of
Dangerous and Vicious Dogs, at this website.
* Richard Polsky, Fatal Dog Attacks in the United
States.

It should be noted that fatalities are highly unusual.
For every fatal dog bite in the United States, there
are 230,000 bites that are not treated by a physician.

The dogs that are most responsible

Merritt Clifton, editor of Animal People, has
conducted an unusually detailed study of dog bites
from 1982 to the present. (Clifton, Dog attack deaths
and maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 to
November 13, 2006; click here to read it.) The Clifton
study show the number of serious canine-inflicted
injuries by breed. The author's observations about the
breeds and generally how to deal with the dangerous
dog problem are enlightening.

According to the Clifton study, pit bulls,
Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes are
responsible for 74%% of attacks that were included in
the study, 68%% of the attacks upon children, 82%% of
the attacks upon adults, 65%% of the deaths, and 68%% of
the maimings. In more than two-thirds of the cases
included in the study, the life-threatening or fatal
attack was apparently the first known dangerous
behavior by the animal in question. Clifton states:

If almost any other dog has a bad moment, someone
may get bitten, but will not be maimed for life or
killed, and the actuarial risk is accordingly
reasonable. If a pit bull terrier or a Rottweiler
has a bad moment, often someone is maimed or
killed--and that has now created off-the-chart
actuarial risk, for which the dogs as well as
their victims are paying the price.

Clifton's opinions are as interesting as his
statistics. For example, he says, "Pit bulls and
Rottweilers are accordingly dogs who not only must be
handled with special precautions, but also must be
regulated with special requirements appropriate to the
risk they may pose to the public and other animals, if
they are to be kept at all."

The financial impact of dog bites

Dog attack victims in the US suffer over $1 billion in
monetary losses every year. ("Take the bite out of
man's best friend." State Farm Times, 1998;3(5):2.)

That $1 billion estimate might be low -- an article in
the Journal of the American Medical Association
reported that, in 1995, State Farm paid $70 million on
11,000 claims and estimated that the total annual
insurance cost for dog bites was about $2 billion.
(Voelker R. "Dog bites recognized as public health
problem." JAMA 1997;277:278,280.)

According to the Insurance Information Institute, dog
bites cost insurers $345.5 million in 2002, $321.6
million in 2003, $317.2 million in 2005, and $351.4 in
2006. The number of claims paid by insurers was 20,800
in 2002, but fell to 15,000 in 2005. The insurance
payment for the average dog bite claim was $16,600 in
2002, but rose to $21,200 in 2005. Liability claims
accounted for approximately 4 percent of homeowners
claims. Dog bite claims in 2005 accounted for about 15
percent of liability claims dollars paid under
homeowners insurance policies.

Researchers from the CDC estimated that the direct
medical costs of dog bites per year equal $164.9
million in the USA. Quinlan KP, Sacks JJ.
Hospitalizations for Dog Bite Injuries [letter] JAMA
1999; 281:232-233. Also available by clicking here.

Dog bites are on the rise

The number of dogs in the United States increased by
only 2%% between 1991 and 1998. (Wise JK & Yang JJ,
"Dog and Cat Ownership, 1991-1998," JAMA
1994;204:1166-67.)

The number of bites, and the cost to insurance
companies, however, rose significantly. In 1986,
nonfatal dog bites resulted in an estimated 585,000
injuries that required medical attention or restricted
activity. (Sosin DM, Sachs JJ, Sattin RW. Causes of
nonfatal injuries in the United States, 1986. Accid.
Anal. Prev. 1992;24:685-687.) By 1994 an estimated
800,000 sought medical care for bites. (Weiss HB,
Friedman D, Coben JH. Incidence of dog bite injuries
treated in emergency departments. JAMA
1998;279:51-53.)

This is a 36%% increase in medically attended bites
from 1986 to 1994.

The cost to insurance companies, measured only by
homeowner claims (as opposed to health insurance
claims and claims on other lines) grew significantly
over the past decade, although it went down by about
4%% between 2002 and 2003.

The scene of the attack

Over 50 percent of the bites occur on the dog owner's
property. (See Insurance Information Institute, Dog
Bite Liability, accessed 8/30/07.)

Dogs bite family and friends

The vast majority of biting dogs (77%%) belong to the
victim's family or a friend.

Worldwide problem

The USA is not the only country with the dog bite
problem. Canadian statistics are contained in Injuries
Associated With Dog Bites and Dog Attacks, from CHIRPP
(Canada). Australian statistics are summarized in The
public health impact of dog attacks in a major
Australian city, from The Medical Journal of
Australia.

Canine homicides and the dog bite epidemic: do not confuse them

There have been many news reports about deaths caused
by dogs in the USA. The attention given to the
homicides has put the spotlight on pit bulls and
Rottweilers. There is a very good reason for focusing
on these two breeds: in recent years, they have
usually been the number one and number two canine
killers of humans. (See below, The breeds most likely
to kill.) It therefore is correct to single out those
two breeds when talking about canine homicides,
because those two breeds lately have caused half or
more of the deaths -- a disgraceful statistic whether
it is regarded as the fault of the dogs, their
breeders, their owners, or all three.

However, the focus on death cases may leave the public
with the false impression that pit bulls and
Rottweilers are responsible for the dog bite epidemic.
It is a much broader problem than that, involving all
dogs and all dog owners. While pit bulls and
Rottweilers inflict a disproportionate number of
serious and even fatal injuries, the dog bite epidemic
involves many different breeds, and results from many
different causes. A clear distinction needs to be made
between canine homicides (i.e., incidents in which
dogs kill people) and the dog bite epidemic.

Canine inflicted homicides have remained at the same
general level (15 to 20 annually), which cannot be
said for the number of dog bites, which is too high (5
million annually) and appears to be growing higher
(see statistics, above). Considering the fact that
there are 65 million dogs in the United States (see
above), the homicide problem is minuscule. This is not
to denigrate it, but to point out that eliminating it
entirely would save only 15 to 20 people, out of the 5
million who are bitten by dogs.

The confusion caused by discussing the homicides and
the dog bites in the same breath has its most
important ramification in the area of prevention. Some
are advocating the banning of pit bulls, Rottweilers
and possibly other breeds, for reasons that range from
their alleged dangerousness to the fact that they are
very often treated inhumanely. Those who hear about
the homicides often support breed bans. (See Breed
Specific Laws, Regulations and Bans.)

However, while banning the pit bull might lower the
number of human deaths, such a ban would probably not
reduce the number dog bites in any significant manner.
After the United Kingdom banned pit bulls in the
1990s, a study showed that the number of dog bites
remained the same even though the number of pit bulls
had steeply declined. (Study cited in B. Heady and P.
Krause, "Health Benefits and Potential Public Savings
Due to Pets: Australian and German Survey Results,"
Australian Social Monitor, Vol.2, No.2, May 1999.)

As a practical matter, the current tide of public
outrage should be focused on the enactment of measures
that would deal effectively with the entire epidemic,
not merely the breeds that kill. It would be unwise to
enact all kinds of controls on one or two breeds, not
necessarily because it would be unfair, but because it
would produce narrow and therefore unsatisfactory
results. The war against crime isn't a war against
just the bank robbers, but against all criminals; the
war against drugs isn't a war against just the
Colombian drug lords, but all drug lords. For the same
reason, the dog bite epidemic must not focus on just
one or two breeds and stop there. The war on this
epidemic must be comprehensive.

The most horrifying example of the lack of breed
predictability is the October 2000 death of a
6-week-old baby, which was killed by her family's
Pomeranian dog. The average weight of a Pomeranian is
about 4 pounds, and they are not thought of as a
dangerous breed. Note, however, that they were bred to
be watchdogs! The baby's uncle left the infant and the
dog on a bed while the uncle prepared her bottle in
the kitchen. Upon his return, the dog was mauling the
baby, who died shortly afterwards. ("Baby Girl Killed
by Family Dog," Los Angeles Times, Monday, October 9,
2000, Home Edition, Metro Section, Page B-5.)

In Canine homicides and the dog bite epidemic: do not
confuse them, it has been pointed out that the dog
bite epidemic as a whole involves all dogs and all dog
owners, not just the breeds most likely to kill.

Children are the most frequent targets

Studies of dog bite injuries have reported that:

* The median age of patients bitten was 15 years,
with children, especially boys aged 5 to 9 years,
having the highest incidence rate

* The odds that a bite victim will be a child are
3.2 to 1. (CDC.)

* Children seen in emergency departments were more
likely than older persons to be bitten on the
face, neck, and head. 77%% of injuries to children
under 10 years old are facial.

* Severe injuries occur almost exclusively in
children less than 10 years of age.

* The majority of dog attacks (61%%) happen at home
or in a familiar place.

* The vast majority of biting dogs (77%%) belong to
the victim's family or a friend.

* When a child less than 4 years old is the
victim, the family dog was the attacker half the
time (47%%), and the attack almost always happened
in the family home (90%%).

The face is the most frequent target
Studies also have shown that:

* Dog bites result in approximately 44,000 facial
injuries in US hospitals each year. This
represents between 0.5%% and 1.5%% of all emergency
room visits

* The face is the most frequent target (77%% of all
injures). Mail carriers are an exception where 97%%
involve the lower extremities.

* The central target area for the face includes
the lips, nose, and cheeks.

END QUOTE
no comments
diggit! del.icio.us! reddit!