sfgate.com


(06-18) 07:35 PDT UNION CITY -- A 6-year-old Union City boy died after he was mauled by his family's dog, authorities said Tuesday.

The dog, described as a pit bull or pit bull mix, attacked the boy at the family's home on Elizabeth Way about 11 a.m. Monday.

The boy died at Lucile Packard Children's Hospital in Palo Alto. His name has not been released.

The family was in seclusion Tuesday. A man who answered the phone at the home declined to comment.

Union City police are expected to provide more details about the case Tuesday.

The boy's death is not the first case in the Bay Area in which pit bulls have killed members of the families that owned them.

In 2011, a pit bull in Pacifica fatally mauled its owner, 32-year-old Darla Napora, who was pregnant. The year before, three pit bulls killed 2-year-old Jacob Bisbee at a relative's home in Concord.

In 2005, two pit bulls fatally mauled 12-year-old Nicholas Faibish at his home in San Francisco.

Henry K. Lee is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: hlee@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @henryklee

What is this?

Pitbull propaganda?

What homeowner's insurance company do you work for?

What pitt bull owners assoc./ fight club do you work for?

The issue was discussed on AR recently and this is just another topic. No, I don't have anything to do with any insurance co, and no I don't believe this breed is well suited for a family pet. Call me crazy, but I also don't favor brahma bulls, captive bred tigers or pythons as pets. If you do thats fine, as you can see from the examples listed in the article, several others do too!

A liberal in Dillangham,Alaska?

quote:

Originally posted by Norseman:
A liberal in Dillangham,Alaska?

A political discussion on the Dog Forum?

Actually no, I'm a registered republican although I have broken ranks to vote libertarian a time or two.

Since it appears you can't tolerate a difference of opinion, nor are you comfortable with your own self esteeme and therefore you prefer a vicious breed of dog to make up for your own inadequacy, I conclude you're a liberal.

Why own a pitt bull as a family pet? Neighborhood so violent and your so incapable at home defense you need a dog to do it for you? Tried a lab as a retriever, a spaniel as a flusher and a shorthair as a pointer and all worked well but,.........ah,.....what the heck,....... "I think I can get a pitt to retrieve pheasants!"? Your cousin from Alabama uses pitts as a pig catch dog and you figgered one from his litter would make a great "find your lost child in the mall" pet?

Super, I'm wrong. Demonstrate for us all my wrong thinking by posting the article that details a larger number of people attacked and killed by say,.........brittany spaniels than the 5 people mentioned as being killed above.

Scott, right on. Thanks for posting and trying to educate the uneducatable.

I would really need to see and get some background on the family before I discounted them as having some or all the fault in this. I mean family put him with their dog. So maybe ignoring that is not the most logical analysis, unless your a defense lawyer trying to defend the indefensible family members.

I consider the family 100% responsible and the pitt not at all. Like the denier on this discussion, they knew better and simply chose otherwise.

Teach a horse not to step on our foot? No, thats what horses do. Expect a snake to not eat our pet hamster? No, thats what snakes do. Train an eagle to go vegitarian? Youbetcha.

Our friends and AR members in the South have mentioned more than a few times the pitts have a place or a purpose in their world as pig hunting dogs and that makes perfect sense.

I've read more than one discussion here about the deficiencies of beagles as pets. All sounded fairly sensible to me and nobody came out of the woodwork to argue how beagles could be taught to stay close to home, lay around on the sofa all day.

Arguing that pittbulls aren't agressive is like suggesting bloodhounds don't track.

They have a purpose in pig hunting, but that only accounts for a tiny fraction. I would estimate that for every one used in pig control, there are 10 or more used in dog fighting, maybe 20 more used to guard drugs nowadays mostly Meth. So if we ban these dogs nothing changes, they just use a different breed. Lots of dogs can take out a child. I think your anger is justified but your aiming at the wrong target.

quote:

Originally posted by Navaluk:
They have a purpose in pig hunting, but that only accounts for a tiny fraction. I would estimate that for every one used in pig control, there are 10 or more used in dog fighting, maybe 20 more used to guard drugs nowadays mostly Meth. So if we ban these dogs nothing changes, they just use a different breed. Lots of dogs can take out a child. I think your anger is justified but your aiming at the wrong target.

Perhaps I've not made my thoughts clear and no suprise there, I'm not always very easy to follow.

I don't favor banning anything. Like many other species or breeds of animals it appears obvious to me that pitts have defined characteristics that in this case include aggressive behavior. Labs are known to fetch, draft horses to pull, pythons to squeeze. Because this is true, I find in bizzare that people would possess pitts as pets. Yes, lots of dogs can take out a child, but pitts certainly seem to be known for doing so more than say a shorthair.

The generalization that any dog can do anything is so broadly true it almost isn't. Yes it is possible that a spaniel could be trained as a pig catch dog,....... but,.........

If you or they wanna own a pitt for a pet, I think thats your business. If you want to live next door to me and own a pitt for any reason, as a pet or otherwise thats your business. The hitch comes where you seek my blessing. Your pitt makes it onto my property I shoot it. My family is under strict instructions to shoot it. I've no doubt that there are many pitts out there with no attack imstinct, but how to tell? Theres shorthairs out there that won't point but fortunately a non pointing- pointer doesn't usually hazard my families health.

It seems obvious to me that a prized pitt should be handled similarly to a prized thorobred horse. Carefully corralled, carefully supervised, and not allowed to graze and wander freely about the open range.

When have you seen a pekinese in charge of security at a meth lab?

I just had a run in with a loose, big intact Pit while out walking my dogs. My dogs were off leash working on "heeling" when this big pit comes at us from across the street and down the road from us. Barking and growling he came on a dead run. I actually thought about this thread. When he got about 20 feet out and was still coming full tilt, my male Kuvasz stepped out in front of me with his tail high and curved over his back. My Great Pyr puppy (9 months) stayed at heel perfectly. Good boy! My Kuvasz never barked or growled, but that Pit hit the brakes and came to a sudden skidding stop at 6-7 feet in front of my Kuv. It was really funny watching the Pits reaction, from head up growling running aggression to stopped, head down looking at his front toenails. My Kuv walked up, towered over the Pit and gave the top of the Pits head a quick sniff then turned and walked back to heel as I walked on by. I dint see the Pit raise his head until we were 2 houses away. He just kept looking at his nails.

So at least this one Pit wasnt an all out killing machine. This one Pit showed good sense I think.

If you own a pitt bull or variation thereof, and it attacks and kills anyone, then you are responsible for the death of that person. The breed is not suitable for use as a pet without reservation. And I don't care what anyone else says on this topic; the proof is in the data.