Pit bull attacks Glenview teen, and Chicago dog owner is ticketed

There are 228 comments on the Chicago Tribune story from Aug 20, 2008, titled Pit bull attacks Glenview teen, and Chicago dog owner is ticketed. In it, Chicago Tribune reports that:

A Chicago man's pit bull terrier attacked a 14-year-old boy riding a bicycle in Glenview last week, authorities said.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chicago Tribune.

Pingu

Lisle, IL

#247 Sep 10, 2008
Mowog wrote:
<quoted text>
I have never said we can live a risk-free life. However, we can reduce risks to ourselves, our families and our neighbors, right? Why do you need to have a Pit Bull as a household pet? I don't get it, sorry.
Mowog, just out of curiosity, what is your position on guns and gun-ownership? For or against, and why?
Mowog

Wheeling, IL

#248 Sep 10, 2008
Pingu wrote:
<quoted text>
Mowog, just out of curiosity, what is your position on guns and gun-ownership? For or against, and why?
We have a consitutional right to bear arms but I wouldn't have one in my home.
Mowog

Wheeling, IL

#249 Sep 10, 2008
Brookfield wrote:
<quoted text>
Mowog - ELC said it best - sometimes ya gotta get in the car and go out and live.
In the case of pits - you choose not to have pits - that's fine. But just because you choose not to have pits doesn't mean the rest of the world should not have pits or other large dogs.
You are right that I don't choose to have a Pit but why do I have to deal with the people who think they need one? Why do people have to be put at risk because of someone's ego trip?
Mowog

Wheeling, IL

#250 Sep 10, 2008
ELC wrote:
<quoted text>
Over the 37-year period from 1965-2001, pit bulls have been blamed for an average of 2.48 human fatalities per year.
- You are than 200 times more likely to die from taking aspirin than from a pit bull attack.
- 25 times more children a killed by faulty cribs the total number of children and adults killed by pit bulls.
- You are more than 60 times more likely to be killed by a palm tree than a pit bull.
- You are 151 times more likely to be killed by your bathtub than you are by a pit bull.
- A child is more than 800 times more likely to be killed by their adult caretaker than by a pit bull.
- Medication errors cause 7000 Deaths per year.. so you’re 3000 times more likely to be killed by your medication than an APBT
- An average of 195,000 people in the USA died due to potentially preventable, in-hospital medical errors... 87000 times higher than fatalities by APBTs
- National Weather Service reports that over the last 30 years the U.S. has averaged 62 reported lightning fatalities per year.. 30 times more than those by APBTs
- Slip and falls account for over 20,000 fatalities per year in North America
- Alcohol abuse kills some 75,000 Americans each year
Since, it is estimated that perhaps as many as 1.25 million pit bulls are killed per year, it is at least a 500,000 more likely that a pit bull will be killed by a human than the other way around. For every pit bull who kills, there are hundreds of thousands that DON'T.
So let's ban aspirin, in fact all medications, hospitals doctors, coconut trees, parents, bathtubs, the weather, rolling pins, mountains, stairs, skates, tigers (wild tigers kill on average 40-60 people per year), zoos, domestic cats (care to guess how many babies are still-born because their mother changed the cat litter?), snow, hills, sinkholes pocket knives, cocktails, loud music, Home Depot (2200 people are injured in Home Depot stores per year), fish....
Mowog, no one is telling you to get a Pit. I wouldn't tell someone who was critically injured riding a horse to get back on either, not unless they wanted to. But some people do find that the reward outweighs the risks, this can be applied to something as simple as taking an aspirin! Live with the pain, or take a pill. Stay home and miss out on life, or get in the car to go out and have some fun...
The list of risks is a pretty tired retort. Been there, done that.

If this is the best you can do, then this Pit Bull debate has reached its typical end. There will be more articles and I'm sure I'll see you guys on that one, I hate to say.
ELC

Girard, OH

#251 Sep 10, 2008
Mowog wrote:
<quoted text>
You are right that I don't choose to have a Pit but why do I have to deal with the people who think they need one? Why do people have to be put at risk because of someone's ego trip?
Couldn't the same be said about guns, fast cars, recreational airplane use, alcohol and a plethora of other things?

Why be so he||-bent on dictating what kind of dog a person can own?

As far as all these other incidents you claim will happen, well, we've already proven media bias is behind most of them, so that's a moot point.
Brookfield

Lisle, IL

#252 Sep 10, 2008
ELC wrote:
<quoted text>
Couldn't the same be said about guns, fast cars, recreational airplane use, alcohol and a plethora of other things?
Why be so he||-bent on dictating what kind of dog a person can own?
As far as all these other incidents you claim will happen, well, we've already proven media bias is behind most of them, so that's a moot point.
Thanks ELC - I was thinking the same thing.
Long as we're on the subject of dictating what things other people can / can't do - that opens up the whole can of worms of things people do that has a cost for society at large, like smoking, drinking, eating too much, driving gas-guzzling cars etc.- these things are far more prevalent & far more expensive to society than pitbull ownership - should we start regulating how many cigarettes? max number of big macs you're allowed per visit to McD's? max number of beers you're allowed in one sitting?
Baseball Mom

Bolingbrook, IL

#253 Sep 10, 2008
i'd like to jump in here if i may.
as a dog lover and someone who was nearly attacked by a pit bull, i have thought about this subject a lot and followed this discussion with interest.
in my opinion, while any dog can bite or attack, there seems to be a lot of pit bull attacks in recent years. while some may indeed be dogs that are misidentified, i think a big part of the problem is that pit bulls have become the dog of choice for certain people who want a 'tough' dog. this is not every pit bull owner. i have met many responsible pit bull owners with wonderfully behaved dogs and, in spite of what happened to me, i am the first one to ask to pet the dog. but there are certain people who want a pit bull for the wrong reasons and do not realize the harm that they can do if they do not train the dog and encourage it to be rough and tough. i'm not talking about just gang bangers and dog fighters. in my case it was young adults who thought it was 'cool' to have a pit bull.
the problem is that, even if you ban pit bulls, people who want a big tough dog will just move on to another breed. then there will be a surge in stories involving that breed, whatever it is and, as people have shown here already, any large breed dog can be dangerous.
i'm not sure what the solution is beyond tougher laws for people who do not properly restrain their dogs but i don't think banning any breed is the answer.
Brookfield

Lisle, IL

#254 Sep 10, 2008
Baseball Mom wrote:
i'd like to jump in here if i may.
as a dog lover and someone who was nearly attacked by a pit bull, i have thought about this subject a lot and followed this discussion with interest.
in my opinion, while any dog can bite or attack, there seems to be a lot of pit bull attacks in recent years. while some may indeed be dogs that are misidentified, i think a big part of the problem is that pit bulls have become the dog of choice for certain people who want a 'tough' dog. this is not every pit bull owner. i have met many responsible pit bull owners with wonderfully behaved dogs and, in spite of what happened to me, i am the first one to ask to pet the dog. but there are certain people who want a pit bull for the wrong reasons and do not realize the harm that they can do if they do not train the dog and encourage it to be rough and tough. i'm not talking about just gang bangers and dog fighters. in my case it was young adults who thought it was 'cool' to have a pit bull.
the problem is that, even if you ban pit bulls, people who want a big tough dog will just move on to another breed. then there will be a surge in stories involving that breed, whatever it is and, as people have shown here already, any large breed dog can be dangerous.
i'm not sure what the solution is beyond tougher laws for people who do not properly restrain their dogs but i don't think banning any breed is the answer.
Well said Baseball Mom - and welcome to the fray.
Pingu

United States

#255 Sep 10, 2008
Mowog wrote:
<quoted text>
You are right that I don't choose to have a Pit but why do I have to deal with the people who think they need one? Why do people have to be put at risk because of someone's ego trip?
Let's exchange the words, then. You don't choose to have a pit bull. Which is of course your right and your choice.
And why do you have to deal with people who do have pit bulls? Because it's their constitutional right and choice.
And unfortunately, some of those people will put others at risk because of their choice. Just like with guns.

Like you, I, too, am against guns. But I have friends who love guns, who use them responsibly, who shoot at targets instead of animals. As a result of talking with these friends, I've come to respect that there IS a place for guns that are used responsibly.
Pingu

United States

#256 Sep 10, 2008
(Finishing my previous post...)

Ditto for pit bulls.
There IS a place for dogs that are raised and kept responsibly.

If you disagree with that, then we should be arguing about the Second Amendment here instead of dogs.
Karen

United States

#257 Sep 10, 2008
What I don't understand is how the dog is always punished for the owners' neglect or mistreat. Properly trained, attended to and leashed dogs rarely, if ever, are the ones involved these attacks.
Also, I am enjoying how everyone keeps bringing up that these breeds are prime for dog fighting rings and other trained viciousness...it's not like they train themselves! You're pointing out the human involvement!
J-Dog

New York, NY

#258 Sep 11, 2008
ELC - do you really need to write a novel to get a point across? Facts are Facts and they speak for themselves - sorry you disagree but welcome to America.

How about a test - you (and Brookfield) bring your Pits to my local dog park - we let them free to run with my dog and other dogs - if there are no altercations or anything for 15 minutes of frolicking and playing (because Pits are so jovial and playful) I will detract all my comments. So if there as much as a growl or movement to attack another dog or person we then all decide to ban Pit Bulls - we can do this on the lake front if that is easier and that way there are much more people around to test the Pit Bull character. Will you guys do it? I say we get John Kass to organize the event and mediate? Thoughts?
ELC wrote:
Here are some quotes from the CDC and Doctors involved in the studies concerning Breed Specific Legislation:
- When a specific breed of dog has been selected for stringent control, 2 constitutional questions concerning dog owners’ fourteenth amendment rights have been raised: first, because all types of dogs may inflict injury to people and property, ordinances addressing only 1 breed of dog are argued to be under inclusive and, therefore, violate owners’ equal protection rights; and second, because identification of a dog’s breed with the certainty necessary to impose sanctions on the dog’s owner is prohibitively difficult, such ordinances have been argued as unconstitutionally vague, and, therefore, violate due process.
-Another concern is that a ban on a specific breed might cause people who want a dangerous dog to simply turn to another breed for the same qualities they sought in the original dog (eg, large size, aggression easily fostered). Breed-specific legislation does not address the fact that a dog of any breed can become dangerous when bred or trained to be aggressive.
-Other risk factors included dogs who roamed the neighborhood or dogs who were tethered. In other words, it appeared that the negligence of human guardians was a higher risk factor than the breed of the dog. learned breed-specific legislation is not the way to tackle the issue of dog bites,” said Dr. Julie Gilchrist of the CDC Injury Center in Atlanta, Georgia.“Instead, we should look at the people with those dogs responsible for the bites.”(Pit Bulls in the City, Indy Tails July 2005)
Now, if even the CDC admits the data is BS, why do you keep bringing it up??
ELC

Girard, OH

#260 Sep 11, 2008
J-Dog wrote:
How about a test - you (and Brookfield) bring your Pits to my local dog park - we let them free to run with my dog and other dogs - if there are no altercations or anything for 15 minutes of frolicking and playing (because Pits are so jovial and playful) I will detract all my comments. So if there as much as a growl or movement to attack another dog or person we then all decide to ban Pit Bulls - we can do this on the lake front if that is easier and that way there are much more people around to test the Pit Bull character. Will you guys do it? I say we get John Kass to organize the event and mediate? Thoughts?
<quoted text>
OK, but now you're asking that a Pit Bull not be allowed to act like a dog, and that's not fair.

I will agree if first you go to the lakefront dog park with us and observe the normal interactions between dogs. You will see that dogs growl, sometimes in fun, and sometimes to correct another's behavior. Sometimes they nip for the same reasons.

Once that is done, I will happy parade a pit bull through that park and prove to you there is nothing to fear...

Deal?
Brookfield

Roselle, IL

#261 Sep 11, 2008
J-Dog wrote:
ELC - do you really need to write a novel to get a point across? Facts are Facts and they speak for themselves - sorry you disagree but welcome to America.

<quoted text>
Yah well - we weren't all that sure you were reading the shorter posts.

As for facts speaking for themselves - very true. Now go back and read what ELC has to say.
Brookfield

Roselle, IL

#264 Sep 11, 2008
Pol Pot wrote:
<quoted text>
How long have you been this full of crap?
LOL
Judging by the long string of posts here and in other pit forums - I'd say he's been very full / for a very long time. but careful, he's a little sensitive about criticism.
Brookfield

Roselle, IL

#265 Sep 12, 2008
Pol Pot wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey Pol Pot - come on over -
http://www.topix.com/forum/source/chicago-tri...

Mowog's there - we anticipate it's only a matter of time before the other one shows up to share his insightful comments.
American Pit Bull Terrier

Mount Prospect, IL

#266 Sep 12, 2008
As a proud owner of 4, I am proud to say I am thankful we are NOT governed by the masses. Unfortunately we claim to be the bearers of all that is knowledge. It is this reality that makes us unaware of what is so. We rely on what is said and take it as the truth. What is said, by mass media,“Pit-bull viciously attacks…” We know the truth; Pit-bulls are vicious. An unseen reality is not all attacks are reported. This is so. Why would an individual report being attacked by a Maltese or a Tea Cup Poodle? After all can a Pomeranian be vicious? Not likely, or at least it’s what we say. For me, what is so is I will never have the fear of being attacked by my pack of “Pit-bulls” they have no need to turn on me. Only the vicious turn on one another. My peace; “shame on us for allowing this to be what’s so.”
LP Trixie wrote:
HOOOORAAAAY!!!! I get to cut and paste this again:
WOW this is like the millionth report of a pitbull mauling a person in the news. like omg WAKE UP people! Obviously this is a dangerous breed and needs to be banned and outlawed to breed. Pitt Bull owners BE CAREFULL! they will turn on you and kill you, if not you then one of your family members! Let us highlight the fact that attacks by pitbulls are steadily occurring. In fact, it reinforces the topic that people are still talking about how DANGEROUS this breed is. On personal experience, Ive seen pit bulls attack other dogs. basically, the pit bull owners think they can control their dog and the dog "snaps" and we call the cops. They are banned in various part of Canada and Australia, fully banned in the UK, Denmark, Norway, and in some states in the USA. Please if you are a pit bull owner BE CAREFUL and don't become part of the statistic of an owner being mauled or killed by this breed. I will post more attacks as they come.
BAN PIT BULLS NOW!!
Lauri

Waukesha, WI

#267 Sep 16, 2008
Did anyone really READ that CDC website link? Right on the first page, at the top is their conclusion:

[quote]Conclusions—Although fatal attacks on humans appear to be a breed-specific problem (pit bull-type
dogs and Rottweilers),[b]other breeds may bite and cause fatalities at higher rates.[/b] Because of difficulties inherent in determining a dog’s breed with certainty, enforcement of breed-specific ordinances raises constitutional and practical issues. Fatal attacks represent a small proportion of dog bite injuries to humans and, therefore, should not be the primary factor driving public policy concerning dangerous dogs. Many practical alternatives to breed-specific ordinances exist and hold promise for prevention of dog bites.[/quote]

The CDC themselves say that breed-specific laws will NOT work.

You get rid of 'Pit Bulls' and the people that used to have them will just start with a different breed. Maybe Rottweilers or Dobermans. And then we ban those breeds and they move to German Shepherds and Great Danes. Ban those and pretty soon they will be taking breeds like Goldens and Labs and creating fighting dogs with them.

As long as dog fighting exists SOME breed of dog will be used.
Lauri

Waukesha, WI

#268 Sep 16, 2008
Sorry - my tags didn't work right.
Brookfield

Roselle, IL

#269 Sep 16, 2008
Lauri wrote:
Did anyone really READ that CDC website link? Right on the first page, at the top is their conclusion:
[quote]Conclusions—Although fatal attacks on humans appear to be a breed-specific problem (pit bull-type
dogs and Rottweilers),[b]other breeds may bite and cause fatalities at higher rates.[/b] Because of difficulties inherent in determining a dog’s breed with certainty, enforcement of breed-specific ordinances raises constitutional and practical issues. Fatal attacks represent a small proportion of dog bite injuries to humans and, therefore, should not be the primary factor driving public policy concerning dangerous dogs. Many practical alternatives to breed-specific ordinances exist and hold promise for prevention of dog bites.[/quote]
The CDC themselves say that breed-specific laws will NOT work.
You get rid of 'Pit Bulls' and the people that used to have them will just start with a different breed. Maybe Rottweilers or Dobermans. And then we ban those breeds and they move to German Shepherds and Great Danes. Ban those and pretty soon they will be taking breeds like Goldens and Labs and creating fighting dogs with them.
As long as dog fighting exists SOME breed of dog will be used.
AMEN! Another person who actually READS!
Thanks Lauri for your post.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 5 min red and right 189,886
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 40 min shinningelectr0n 1,232,917
legit pain P.I.L.L.S n m/ar.iju/an.a 1 hr Local Chicago 1
Affidavit: White House birth certificate is a F... 1 hr JustTheFACTS 1
Fun Song Combos (Sep '12) 2 hr Lexus1985 425
Music Artists A to Z (Feb '14) 2 hr Lexus1985 407
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 4 hr IBdaMann 53,520
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]