Fla. Woman Killed by Her Two Pit Bulls

uscitizen

uscitizen

Villified User
Oct 2, 9:41 PM EDT

Fla. Woman Killed by Her Two Pit Bulls


MIDDLEBURG, Fla. (AP) -- Two pit bull terriers fatally attacked their owner who had raised them since birth, authorities said Tuesday. Tina Marie Canterbury, 42, was walking to her back yard when the 2-year-old redbone pit bull terriers attacked her, according to the Clay County Sheriff's Office.

One of Canterbury's sons tried to help her, but the dogs attacked him. He was not seriously injured, authorities said.

A family friend shot at the dogs to scare them away. A deputy shot one of the dogs. The other dog ran away but was found two hours later and killed, authorities said.

Clay County Sheriff Rick Beseler said he couldn't remember such a severe dog attack since becoming sheriff three years ago.

There were no signs of dog fighting or other abuse at the Canterbury home, authorities said.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/D/DOG_ATTACK?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=US
 
I know lots of pits who are complete sweet hearts.

Its like killing people for having German heritage in my mind.
 
Many, not all pits (pits covers a lot of breed terroritory) tend to go int a killing rage, esp if more than one of them.
I agree Desh some are sweethearts, but some I have seen still have this tendancy. Even if raised by good people.
 
Desh said:
I know lots of pits who are complete sweet hearts.

Its like killing people for having German heritage in my mind.
Click to expand...

Pits were breed/created to chase and kill small things.

It is not happenstance that pits attack and kill people far more than anyother dog. It is the responsibility of the owner to socialize and train these dogs not to be a problem, and apparently, the woman who was killed failed in this responsibility.

Pits are not meant for everyone who wants a dog.

What time will the PETA protest begin?
 
Breed specific legislation is on the rise and has been enacted in several states and/or communities. I disagree with this approach, partly because it's patently unfair and unrealistic. Very often, maybe even most often, these proposals are drawn up by people who are reacting with and/or to hysteria about a single occurrence or an imagined future occurrence, not to something that typifies the behavior of any breed.

As of September 1, 2007, in Texas new laws took effect that are pretty much "dangerous dog" legislation, and make a lot more sense than a blanket BSL approach. All dogs are to be under the owner's control and confined on their own property, on leash if not on the property. If a dog injures someone the owner may be charged with a felony, and the penalties are potentially quite severe. The initially proposed legislation was pretty much knee-jerk hysteria, but several dog groups, local AKC clubs and reputable breeders, made a concerted effort to bring some sanity to the legislation and for the most part they succeeded.

Sadly, "dangerous dog" legislation wouldn't have helped this poor woman because apparently her dogs had not been in any trouble prior to this attack.

I'd like to see a compromise. Each breed has certain characteristics, and many of those have been specifically chosen for enhancement by some breeders. If someone owns such dogs, it might be a good idea to require that the people and dogs take basic behavioral/obedience training by qualified instructors (NOT those people at Petsmart!) and pass a standard test. This helps people to understand their dogs better and to learn to communicate with them. Better for the people and better for the dogs. That way the owners of dogs like pits and rotties, for instance, could learn to recognize signs of agitation, unfriendliness, predatory instinct, etc., and deal with those before they can be acted upon.
 
Thorn said:
Breed specific legislation is on the rise and has been enacted in several states and/or communities. I disagree with this approach, partly because it's patently unfair and unrealistic. Very often, maybe even most often, these proposals are drawn up by people who are reacting with and/or to hysteria about a single occurrence or an imagined future occurrence, not to something that typifies the behavior of any breed.

As of September 1, 2007, in Texas new laws took effect that are pretty much "dangerous dog" legislation, and make a lot more sense than a blanket BSL approach. All dogs are to be under the owner's control and confined on their own property, on leash if not on the property. If a dog injures someone the owner may be charged with a felony, and the penalties are potentially quite severe. The initially proposed legislation was pretty much knee-jerk hysteria, but several dog groups, local AKC clubs and reputable breeders, made a concerted effort to bring some sanity to the legislation and for the most part they succeeded.

Sadly, "dangerous dog" legislation wouldn't have helped this poor woman because apparently her dogs had not been in any trouble prior to this attack.

I'd like to see a compromise. Each breed has certain characteristics, and many of those have been specifically chosen for enhancement by some breeders. If someone owns such dogs, it might be a good idea to require that the people and dogs take basic behavioral/obedience training by qualified instructors (NOT those people at Petsmart!) and pass a standard test. This helps people to understand their dogs better and to learn to communicate with them. Better for the people and better for the dogs. That way the owners of dogs like pits and rotties, for instance, could learn to recognize signs of agitation, unfriendliness, predatory instinct, etc., and deal with those before they can be acted upon.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with much of what you've said here. As a dog owner who has spent many years training personal protection dogs, I know that all large dogs should be trained and properly socialized.

Unfortunately, many who buy Pits and Rotts buy them FOR their worst characterstics.
 
blackascoal said:
I don't disagree with much of what you've said here. As a dog owner who has spent many years training personal protection dogs, I know that all large dogs should be trained and properly socialized.

Unfortunately, many who buy Pits and Rotts buy them FOR their worst characterstics.
Click to expand...

Sadly that's true. That's also why I'd advocate required training, for both dog and owner. Well, we know who's really being trained during these classes, don't we!:o

My Aussie will start round two of Canine Good Citizen classes next week. Mr. Friendly approached the evaluator -- twice -- during his exam last time, and that was a no-no. At least he didn't try to jump up as he'd have done a few months ago, but even excessive friendliness isn't a good thing. Normally he'll sit to be petted when he meets a stranger. I'm taking him through again instead of just going for the re-testing because he needs the exposure and loves the outings. :)
 
Thorn said:
Sadly that's true. That's also why I'd advocate required training, for both dog and owner. Well, we know who's really being trained during these classes, don't we!:o

My Aussie will start round two of Canine Good Citizen classes next week. Mr. Friendly approached the evaluator -- twice -- during his exam last time, and that was a no-no. At least he didn't try to jump up as he'd have done a few months ago, but even excessive friendliness isn't a good thing. Normally he'll sit to be petted when he meets a stranger. I'm taking him through again instead of just going for the re-testing because he needs the exposure and loves the outings. :)
Click to expand...


Walking through parks with lots of people is not only great excersis, it also teaches dogs to make good decisions. I always recommend that people take their dogs to 4th of July events where there's sure to be lots of noise and people. Good temperment training.

This is equally true for those who rely on their dogs for protection and especially important for personal protection dogs. It makes them safe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top