10/7/12 pit shot dead after attack on...

10/7/12 pit shot dead after attack on cop

Posted in the Massena Forum

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
cant deny

Auburn, NY

#1 Oct 10, 2012
Off-duty officer shoots, kills pit bull

Posted: 10/08/2012
PASADENA, Md.(WMAR)- Anne Arundel County Police are investigating the shooting of a pit bull by an off-duty Maryland Transportation Authority Officer.

Officers were called to the area of Vena Lane and Notley Road in Pasadena on Sunday at about 11:00 a.m. for reports of an aggressive animal.

When police arrived, they found an off-duty MdTA officer had shot and killed a pit bull that was attacking him.

The preliminary information shows that the dog had escaped from a home on Vena Lane. The dog appeared aggressive, growling and approaching residents in the neighborhood.

A resident asked the off-duty officer for help. The officer was attempting to guide the dog back to its home when it charged and attacked the officer's leg.

The officer drew his departmental weapon and fired, striking the dog.

The dog then ran and collapsed a few yards away.

The officer received minor injuries to his leg. MdTA police say that officer used his weapon in an approved manner and will not be suspended from the force

Read more: http://www.abc2news.com/dpp/news/region/anne_...
cant deny

Auburn, NY

#3 Oct 10, 2012
me again wrote:
If you are sick of this hit report abuse on all of her posts.
can't stand the TRUTH can you
Get rid of pitbulls

Rochester, NY

#4 Oct 10, 2012
Give that officer a Commendation.
Diffused a potential dangerous situation quickly.
He should train other cops on taking down loose PitBulls.
cant deny

Auburn, NY

#5 Oct 10, 2012
Get rid of pitbulls wrote:
Give that officer a Commendation.
Diffused a potential dangerous situation quickly.
He should train other cops on taking down loose PitBulls.
i see on the other pro pitbull thread they are directing people to the national canine research council website apparently they didn't do their research on this website it was founded by one of the biggest lying pitnutters on the planet - karen delisle - and sold to one of the other biggest lying pitnutters on the planet - jane berkley - both pit owners an OF COURSE NOT BIASED AT ALL but the pitnutters on here always bash people for using biased sites but it's perfectly ok for them to use biased sites i will post more on these two pitiots
cant deny

Auburn, NY

#6 Oct 10, 2012
Baldeosingh also refers to the National Canine Research Council (NCRC) as "US Canine Research Council," as though it is a government institution. The NCRC is a pro-pit bull entity inspired by Karen Delise that became a limited liability corporation (not a nonprofit) on August 14, 2007. The following day, and under the signature of Jane Berkey, who also owns Pit Nutter Animal Farm Foundation, the NCRC became authorized to do business in New York.
cant deny

Auburn, NY

#7 Oct 10, 2012
sorry spelled their names wrong it's delise and berkey
cant deny

Auburn, NY

#8 Oct 10, 2012

KAREN DELISE (a former vet tech), the great neo cortex's official condemnation of the study begins with the fact that SURGEONS have dared to express an opinion about dangerous dogs. Those opinions are reserved for herself and handful of highly trained gifted supreme beings endowed with mystical powers. DELISE thinks surgeons should stick with surgery. I can certainly relate to that sentiment, I always find myself thinking along those lines whenever the nutter lawyers like LEDY VANKAVAGE, DEBRA BRESCH, LAURA ALLEN, NATHAN WINOGRAD, KEVIN THOMASON open their mouths about animals. They should stay out of the animal AND medical business.

The vet tech writes "Those, whose professional lives are spent with pets and their owners, have been consistent in their recommendations: education of adults and children concerning dogs and dog behavior; and humane care custody and control of all dogs." This cited quote from DELISE is attributed to Texas vet BONNIE BEAVER who under oath testified in 1991, "By its origin, a pit bull is a fighting dog that takes very little stimulous to initiate aggression, and it will continue to fight regardless of what happens" and "Pit bulldogs have been responsible for about 70 percent of the deaths of humans killed by dogs since 1979."

No critique of this study would be complete without the classic pit bull sleight of hand trick, Find The Pit Bull. "There is robust evidence that guesses even by animal professionals of the breed or breeds that make up dogs whose ancestry is not known to them correlate extremely poorly with DNA analyses of the same dogs." Rule number #2 in the pit bull advocacy handbook, ALWAYS cast doubt on breed identification!

The vet tech continues "The authors seem to have begun their research with a belief regarding “pit bull” dogs, and then exploited the tools of epidemiology to legitimize that belief." ALL science starts with a belief. The belief that scientists go into research without any preconceived notions is absurdly naive. The former vet tech/"research director" fails to recognize that ALL SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY BEGINS WITH A HYPOTHESIS which states a belief or expectation. Without a belief, expectation or hypothesis, it is impossible to conduct scientific inquiry!!! Karen, objectivity in science is an illusion and only unethical researchers lie to their audiences and themselves with fantastic claims of absolute detachment and neutrality.

"The illusion of objectivity is most powerful when its victims believe themselves to be free of it." Rupert Sheldrake

The evil genius makes a big deal about the percentage of children in emergency rooms. She claims only 2% of all child visits to the E.R are for dog bites, not 20% as the San Antonio University Hospital surgeons suggest. But the vet tech's only accomplishment is exposing herself as JANE BERKEY'S hired gun and the vet tech only succeeds at fooling her gullible drones with the attack on the authors' one in five visits. A 1998 AMA study,(which you can find at dogsbite.org along with lots of other studies and great information), found that 23% of the children who visit the emergency room, are there for dog bites, in other words - roughly one in five.

*I was extremely disappointed that KAREN DELISE didn't take this opportunity to expand on her theory of the meteorologic effects on dog aggression. Oh well, maybe next time.
cant deny

Auburn, NY

#9 Oct 10, 2012

In what might be the pit bull apologia’s most sinister machination of all, Jane Berkey et al are attempting to besmirch the image of the Bloodhound in an effort to elevate the image of their beloved pit fighter. On August 25, the Minnesota City Pages ran a four page discussion of dangerous dogs. And there at the bottom of page one:“Pit bulls weren’t always considered dangerous dogs—that honor has shifted from breed to breed throughout history. In the 1880s, bloodhounds tormented the populace.” This reeks of the Animal Farm Foundation, Karen Delise and Andrew Yori. Yori is on the Berkey payroll, a recipient of one of the Vick dogs and a Minnesota resident.

The best lies always possess a kernel of truth to create the illusion of credibility. Yes, before the pit bull, before the rottweiler, before the doberman or the german shepherd, the bugaboo breed was the bloodhound, the CUBAN Bloodhound and the SIBERIAN Bloodhound.

When I say the word Bloodhound, the image of a large brown & black dog with loose skin, long, pendulous ears and a plaintive howl will come to mind. A very distinctive looking dog.

When I say Cuban Bloodhound, do you see a large muscular mastiff/bulldog cross with short cropped ears and a muzzle more suitable to the function of violence and savagery? Or do you still see McGruff the crime dog? The Cuban Bloodhound is presumed to be extinct by most and information about the dog is not impossible but not easy to find.

The Cuban Bloodhound aka Spanish Bloodhound aka Southern Bloodhound aka American Bloodhound
Hilary Harmar briefly addresses the Cuban Bloodhounds in her Bloodhound History. Harmar describes the Cubans as "extremely ferocious and savage creatures" with smaller ears, pointed muzzles and very little connection to the true Bloodhounds.

The White English Bulldog Preservation Society describes Cuban Bloodhounds as similar to the Presa Canario or the Dogo Argentino, dogs that most people classify as pit bull type dogs. The WEBPS describes the dog used by the United States Army during the Seminole Indian War,“This dog depicted could easily be mistaken for an APBT, yet history records this to be a Cuban Bloodhound, known in the south today as the Brindle Bulldog.” The WEBPS claims that only the name is extinct, not the dog and that it still exists in the south as the Brindle Bulldog. The Cuban Bloodhound was not a scent hound, it bore absolutely no physical or temperamental resemblence to the true British Bloodhound. The Cuban Bloodhound was in fact a big game hunting and guarding dog, much like the Presa or the Dogo. A dog with a violent function. It was bred to be a fearless dog that used brute force to capture runaway slaves, exterminate the Seminole Indians and terrorize union soldiers.

The White English Bulldog Preservation Society contends that the Cuban Bloodhound is the “direct ancestor of the Brindle Bulldog and Old Red Bulldog,(a large, highly aggressive guard dog being red in color, and quite rare), of Louisiana and Mississippi. It is said that this Old Red Bulldog is a cross of the Cuban Bulldog and Dogue de Bordeaux, and was developed in Louisiana in the 18th and 19th centuries as a ferocious and malevolent guard dog. The Cuban Bloodhound was a key ingredient in the makeup of many guard and hunting type dogs of the south in early American history, thus the highly aggressive behavior; the notorious “mean streak;” that has followed bulldogs in American history.” NOTE: Training and environment does not follow the bulldog through history, genetics does.
cant deny

Auburn, NY

#10 Oct 10, 2012
The Siberian Bloodhound aka Russian Bloodhound
The descriptions of Siberian Bloodhounds that I have found vary. Some sources say it is similar to a Great Dane while another source claims it is synonymous with the Great Dane and yet another describes a St Bernard type dog. However, none of them come close to describing a TRUE Bloodhound. That’s because they were not, even though that is what the evil genius Karen Delise wants you to believe.

The Genuine English Bloodhound aka British Bloodhound
Bloodhounds made their way to the United States around 1880. The first importer of Bloodhounds was Jenks L Winchell of Fair Haven, Vermont. In 1881, Winchell retired from his New York magazine and established a Bloodhound kennel in Vermont. He was also the first president of the English Bloodhound Club in America. Bloodhounds were rare and valuable dogs at that time. Yet, as I will demomstrate later, Delise will have you believe that the rare and high priced Bloodhound, in America for less than a decade, was already terrorizing Americans. A quick check of the AKC Stud Books in 1889 reveals that only 14 Bloodhounds were registered. Taking advantage of Google yet again, reveals the value of the Bloodhound. In 1889, John Winchell of Fair Haven, Vermont purchased 2 dogs from a London police chief. The English Bloodhounds were valued at $1000 each. It seems extremely unlikely that dogs valued at $1000 in the 1880’s would not be registered with the AKC, nor would they be chained, be allowed to roam or be used as a guard dog.

Breed Confusion
There does seem to be some confusion between the different Bloodhounds back in the day but nothing like the pit bull apologia is deliberately attempting to drum up now. Part of the confusion can be attributed to the 1852 classic ‘Uncle Tom’s Cabin’. Although nowhere in the book does Harriet Beecher Stowe mention Bloodhounds of any kind, Siberian Bloodhounds were used in the stage reproduction of the book and the vicious hounds took on a life of their own. Ironically, a quick search of the book which is available at www.gutenberg.org , yields one reference to a “hound” and two “bull-dog” references.“Legree had trained them in savageness and brutality as systematically as he had his bull-dogs; and, by long practice in hardness and cruelty, brought their whole nature to about the same range of capacities.” Notice the use of the word trained. In reality, fox hounds were initally used to track runaway slaves but they would not bite. Because the fox hound had never been bred to hunt and bite people, these hounds could not be trained, encouraged, or coerced to attack the slaves. This forced slave owners to import Cuban bloodhounds, a dog that had been bred by the Spanish to hunt and kill and that had been successfully used to terrorize natives and slaves in the Caribbean, Central and South America. It is also important to point out that Uncle Tom’s Cabin was published approximately 25 years BEFORE the first Bloodhound was imported to America. In addition to the use of Siberian bloodhounds in the stage production of Uncle Tom's Cabin, breed confusion can also be ascribed to the slave owners overemphasizing the ‘blood’ in Bloodhound to promote fear among the slaves.

Some authors describe the Cuban as a Mastiff and others describe it as a Bulldog. In all likelihood, they are all correct. The Cuban Bloodhound was bred for function not form and therefore a great deal of variation existed. All of the Cuban Bloodhound sources that I could locate agree on it’s temperament and they do not paint a pretty picture.
cant deny

Auburn, NY

#11 Oct 10, 2012
Walter Dyer attempted to repair the damage done to the British Bloodhound in 1917 when he wrote “The Maligned Hound” for The New Country Life.“The so-called Cuban Bloodhound which was used in Jamaica and the Southern States was not a bloodhound in the true sense of the word. He probably possessed less hound than mastiff blood, with perhaps an infusion of bulldog.” Dyer then points out that while the Cuban bloodhound was ready to “tear his victim limb from limb”, the true bloodhound would never attack. Yvette Uroshevich, a contemporary breeder of Fila Brasileros, dogs whose original function was similar to the Cuban Bloodhound writes “If a slave did escape, the Filas were used to track them down. Unlike their ancestor, the Bloodhound, the Fila Brasileiro will grab and hold at the end of the trail.”

Cuban and Siberian Bloodhound Ban
Even before the Civil War people who attempted to keep Cuban Bloodhounds for any other purpose than controlling, terrorizing and hunting slaves found these dogs to be dangerous to keep, and after the end of slavery, these dogs became useless as well as dangerous.

Jesse Edward, an English natural historian had this to say about the Cuban Bloodhound in 1858,“I had one of these Cuban bloodhounds given to me a few years ago, and finding him somewhat more ferocious than I liked, I made a present of him to a keeper in the neighbourhood. He was put into a kennel with other dogs, and soon killed some of them.”

In an article from 1870, Oliver Optic’s magazine, the Cuban Bloodhound or Southern Bloodhound is described as “The bloodhound of the south, and perhaps known best as the Cuban bloodhound, is not of the genuine breed, but is descended from the Biscayne Mastiff, and is trained to fight as well as to hunt. He is inferior to the hound in his powers of following a trail, but is bloodthirsty and cruel. Slavery found a use for these terrible dogs, and the negroes feared them more than the lash or musket of the master; and during the rebellion these hounds served only too well their masters’ inhuman commands. This article was written approximately 10 years before the British Bloodhound was imported to America and 5 years after Henry Wirz was hanged for committing civil war crimes in a Georgia Prison. Wirz used Cuban Bloodhounds against the union soldiers at the Andersonville Prison. See photo of "Spot" above.

By the 1880s people recognized that the Cuban and the Siberian Bloodhounds were too dangerous to be kept like other dogs. In 1886, the state of Massachusetts banned the Cuban and Siberian Bloodhounds:

(sections 2 and 3 are the fines and penalties for violating the law)

Six years later the law was amended to exclude English bloodhounds.

Recognition of the Genuine English Bloodhound
Scottish naturalist and canine historian Henry Downing Richardson felt the Cuban Bloodhounds was not entitled to the bloodhound designation.“It is only fair that that gentle and affectionate animal – the genuine bloodhound – a dog far from being cruel or ferocious, should be distinctly separated from these, his disreputable namesakes.”

Wade Hampton, former governor, former senator and Commissioner of Railroads, noted the distinction between the Cuban Bloodhound and the true Bloodhound in 1894,“The Cuban bloodhound is a fierce, intractable dog.”“The English bloodhound, on the contrary, is a noble dog, gentle, sagacious and affectionate.” Hampton goes on to state that he has hunted with both bloodhounds and described the Cuban as “generally worthless for this purpose.”
cant deny

Auburn, NY

#12 Oct 10, 2012
Author of "British Dogs: Their Points, Selection and Show Preparation, William D. Drury describes the temperament of the bloodhound as “extremely affectionate, neither quarrelsome with companions nor with other dogs. His nature is somewhat shy, and equally sensitive to kindness or correction by his master”. In contrast Drury states the Cuban Bloodhounds were “savage brutes”.“In the Southern States of America it was customary to hunt escaped slaves with hounds and to call those hounds Bloodhounds. It is not wise to make sweeping assertions, and no doubt each district had its special strain of man-hunters, but whatever else these might be, they were not Bloodhounds.”

And finally, Judge John Camillus McWhorter was disturbed by the courts willingness to accept the Bloodhounds’ scenting abilities as a evidence. In 1920, Judge McWhorter diligently researched the subject of Bloodhounds. Judge McWhorter consulted with the leading authority on the British Bloodhounds, Count Le Couteulx De Cautelue and found that the Bloodhound is “docile and affectionate” and so “slow and plodding”, it was rendered useless for hunting animals so it was crossed with the fox terrier to produce fox hounds. The Judge found that the Bloodhound’s savage image was a myth and noted that the kind and affectionate Bloodhound could not be “induced to hurt anyone”. He also realized that any discussion of the true Bloodhound must by necessity include the vicious Cuban Bloodhound because the two dogs were often confused. Judge McWhorter notes that the Cuban bloodhounds were “vicious”. In contrast, the true Bloodhounds were often found at the end of their trail being pet by the person they were pursuing. The Judge’s research found there were no true Bloodhounds in America during slavery and they were not imported until just before 1880. The dogs of choice were fox hounds for scenting (who also could not be induced to inflict harm) and Cuban bloodhounds for capturing their property. The Judge traced the myth of the Bloodhound’s infallible nose to the slave owners who used the fox hounds and called them Bloodhounds and exaggerated their scenting abilities to keep their slaves intimidated. Of course, the reputation of the vicious Cuban Bloodhound helped keep them intimidated too. The Judge believed the Cubans were the result of a cross between the Great Dane which at that time was doing the work that the Dogo and the American Bulldog now excels at - hunting hogs and the Cuban Mastiff - a guarding/fighting dog.

Now that we have become familiar with the historical TRUTHS about "Bloodhounds", let’s see what the pit bull apologia tries to pass off as the truth.

When the average person hears that bloodhounds were the monsters of the 1800’s, they automatically visualize McGruff the Crime Dog. The damage is done. Karen Delise succeeds in further muddying the dangerous dog waters and advancing the pit bull agenda, while slandering an ancient breed dog with absolutely NO documented history of attacks. Merritt Clifton’s dog bite data, lists NO Bloodhounds in serious or fatal attacks from 1982-2009. Likewise for Delise’s own dog bite statistics in her first book Fatal Dog Attacks, NO Bloodhounds were involved in a dog bite related fatality. As a matter of fact, while researching the Bloodhound, the opinions seems unanimous, this dog is probably THE most docile of hounds.

Since: Sep 12

Lincoln, RI

#13 Oct 10, 2012
I know, CD, its hard to except that you may not know all there is to know about the problem, but truly intelligent and open minded people realize that they dont know everything. That the things that they beleive are true right now, may turn out to be completely wrong in the future. Being open minded does not entail disregarding everything you dont agree with and assuming its wrong because it contradicts what you think you know now. Willingness to learn new things is the first step to true intelligence.
cant deny

Auburn, NY

#14 Oct 10, 2012
The Bloodhound aficionados on dogbreedinfo.com advise owners to supervise child/dog interactions NOT for the sake of the children but for the sake of the dog!“The Bloodhound is a kind, patient, noble, mild-mannered and lovable dog. Gentle, affectionate and excellent with children. This is truly a good natured companion. These dogs are so good-natured that they will lie there and meekly let children clamber all over them. This breed loves all the attention they receive from them. To be fair to your Bloodhound, make sure your children do not pester or hurt the dog, because Bloodhounds will sit there and take it.” Hmmm, sounds almost like a nanny dog. Compare that to what the pit bull apologists scream in unison after a serious or fatal pit bull attack,“never leave children alone with dogs!” as if all dogs possess the same liability.

Karen Delise addresses the Cuban Bloodhound and the Siberian Bloodhound in Chapter Two of her book The Pit Bull Placebo and deliberately blurs the three different breeds of dogs together to strengthen her argument that the human component is the ultimate determining factor of aggressiveness in dogs.

First on the agenda is the statement that started this journey,“Pit bulls weren’t always considered dangerous dogs—that honor has shifted from breed to breed throughout history. In the 1880s, bloodhounds tormented the populace.” Dissecting Delise’s Appendix A, starting on page 176, for the years 1880-1889, Delise recorded 16 serious and fatal dog attacks by “Bloodhounds”. Breaking it down by specific type, Delise lists 11 Bloodhounds, 3 Siberians and 2 Cubans. Recall that Bloodhounds had just come to America around 1880 and in 1889, two bloodhounds were imported from England for $1000 a piece and the AKC had 14 Bloodhounds in their registry. The probabiltity that the dogs identified as Bloodhounds, were in fact true British Bloodhounds given their population and their value seems stasticially impossible.

Cuban Bloodhound
Excerpts from The Pit Bull Placebo
"The case previously discussed of the Bloodhounds killing a burglary suspect they were tracking may be a case of “true Bloodhounds” since these dogs were owned by professionals, worked exclusively as tracking dogs, and were identified by the authorities as Bloodhounds." p 25

Authorities? The same kinds of authorities that Delise now claims can not identify a pit bull?

"It is known that Bloodhound-type dogs were used by both the Union and Confederate armies to hunt down enemy soldiers, as well as in prison camps. And there is little dispute about the fact that Bloodhounds were used to hunt down fleeing suspects. The real dispute at the time was the level of aggression attributed to these dogs. For every media account of a scent dog attacking and inflicting harm on its human quarry, there were long editorials submitted to the newspapers by Bloodhound aficionados explaining the noble and gentle characteristics to be found in this breed. The obvious point that seemed to escape notice was the fact that dogs did indeed perform in both of these fashions, i.e., savagely attacking their quarry at times and at times showing tremendous restraint and gentleness upon reaching their quarry. As the debate swirled about the true nature and behavior of the Bloodhound, the evidence that owners/handlers determined behavior was seldom discussed." p 10

There is no dispute about the level of aggression in the Cuban and Siberian Bloodhounds. These were savage brutes. The dogs performed in both fashions because they were two different breeds. The only swirling debate is in the minds of desperate pit nutters attempting to create disinformation about the British Bloodhound in the same way that they create disinformation in the pit bull, ie, the nanny dog.

"Many people owned Bloodhounds in the late 1800s," p 20

Many? How about fourteen people.
cant deny

Auburn, NY

#15 Oct 10, 2012
"So while there can be debate over which breeds of dog contributed to the genetic makeup of the Cuban Bloodhound, it is really of little significance. The behaviors of these animals had little to do with breed genetics and everything to do with the depravity of their masters." p 23

There are two problems with this statement. First, the genetic makeup of these dogs has been determined, they were pit bull type dogs. And second, as demonstrated previously, the "depraved masters" failed to create vicious attack dogs out of the Fox Hounds.

"And so we find, despite the numerous reports of Bloodhound related attacks and fatalities, there is no documented case where a St. Hubert’s/British or “true” Bloodhound was ever positively identified." p 26

And there it is. The one sentence out of 200 pages that speaks the truth and it is lost in the obstreperous roar of the evil genius' adoring fans.

"Here again, we have dogs that, although prized for aggression towards humans, still functioned as tracking or scent dogs, which makes the designation “Bloodhound” technically correct." p 27

I think if the tables were turned, this would be the point in the discussion where all of the pit nutters start to scream "THAT'S NOT A PIT BULL!"

"The following lose-lose situation for a Siberian Bloodhound took place in 1882 in New York City. The son of a policeman was walking a huge Siberian Bloodhound on a “cord” when approached by the owner of a varnishing company. The merchant wished to purchase the dog to guard his factory. The dog was sold for $5 and promptly put to use. Shortly thereafter, an employee showed up one Sunday night to set up the ovens for the next day. The Bloodhound attacked the man and the dog was shot the next morning for his troubles." p 27

This is a perfect example of how the pit bull apologia deliberately distorts reality. I found this New York Times article and the dog is identified as a SIBERIAN Bloodhound, yet in the appendix on page 176, Delise records it as a "Bloodhound". Despicable.

"The behavior of these Bloodhound-type dogs was either the direct result of human encouragement for aggressiveness or the direct result of humans failing to control or use reasonable care with these animals." p 34

The behavior of these Bloodhound-type dogs was the direct result of genetic engineering on the part of depraved masters.

"Cuban Bloodhound, Siberian Bloodhound, British Bloodhound—it matters little, for when these breeds left the hands of those looking for a vicious tracking, attack, or guard dog, severe and fatal attacks by these breeds virtually disappeared from newspaper reports." p 35

The classic deflection of breed matters little or "a dog is a dog is a dog". But the fact remains that even when the gentle British Bloodhound was crossed with a scrappy Fox Terrier to create the Fox Hound, they would not attack the slaves. And I suspect that these breeds "virtually" disappeared from the newspaper reports because people became fed up with this level of savagery and voluntarily gave them up as in the case of Jesse Edward or law makers banned them as they did in Massachusetts in 1886.

In Delise’s zeal to condemn all dogs in order to further her pit bull agenda, she makes a few critical errors.

First, she classifies ALL Bloodhounds as scent hounds, when in fact the CUBAN and SIBERIAN Bloodhounds are guarding/hunting dogs. These dogs didn’t track people, they hunted them. And when they located their human prey, they often savaged them and sometimes even killed them. In contrast, the British Bloodhound is the ultimate tracker and finding the end of the trail is his reward.

Second, Delise describes an 1882 incident in New York where a factory guard dog, a Siberian Bloodhound, attacks an employee (p 27). Delise then records the attack in appendix A on p 176 as simply "Bloodhound", further deliberately blurring the lines between the “bloodhounds” and creating fear around a docile dog.
cant deny

Auburn, NY

#16 Oct 10, 2012
Third, Delise is highly critical of those who rely on the media reporting of pit bull attacks, yet she herself commits this crime with reckless abandon on attacks that occurred over 100 years ago.

Fourth, Delise tries to reinforce the cruel owner aspect by emphasizing the use of a CORD to control the dog. I found other references during the 1880’s of a leash loosely described as a CORD and ROPE. There were no PetSmarts or Petcos back in the day. People used what they had to make do. They were not necessarily being cruel or abusive.

Fifth, Delise lists the first recorded Bloodhound attack in 1864, approximately FIFTEEN years before the Bloodhound arrived in America!

And sixth, Delise’s biggest mistake was in assuming that no one would check her research. Welcome to google Karen!

The myth of the savage Bloodhound in the 1880's must be stopped before it gains the momentum of the Nanny Dog. Wayne Pacelle, you are in a unique position to ensure that this lie is extinguished.

Beecher Stowe, Harriet Uncle Tom's Cabin or Life among the Lowly, 1852

Uroshevich, Yvette Fila Brasileiro: A Comprehensive Owner's Guide, 2003

Richardson, H.D. Dogs: Their Origin and Varieties, Directions As to Their General Management, 1857

AKC Stud Book, Volume six, 1889

New York Times Attacked By Bloodhounds, November 22, 1885

New York Times A Siberian Bloodhound Killed, March 24, 1882

New York Times A Siberian Bloodhound; After Biting Several Persons He Digests Three Grains of Strychnia, March 10, 1882

Gross, Warren Lee, The Soldier's Story of His Captivity at Andersonville, Belle Isle, and Other Rebel Prisons, 1869

The Winchell Genealogy

Laws and Resolves Passed by the Legislature of Massachusetts, 1884

Acts and resolves passed by the General Court of Massachusetts, 1892

Brooklyn Daily Eagle, New York, June 1889

Dyer, Walter The New Country Life, The Maligned Bloodhound, 1917

Oliver Optic's magazine: Our boys and girls, Volumes 7-8, 1870

Drury, W. D. British Dogs, Their Points, Selection, And Show Preparation, 1903

Harmar, Hilary The Bloodhound Origin And History

White English Bulldog Preservation Society, 2006

Citypages.com Dangerous Dogs of North Minneapolis, August 25, 2010

McWhorter, J.C American Law Review, Volume 54, The Bloodhound as a Witness, 1920

Wrightington, Sydney R. The Green Bag, Volume 17, 1905

Jesse, Edward Anecdotes of Dogs, 1858

Clifton, Merritt Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada, September 1982 - December 2009

Delise, Karen Fatal Dog Attacks: The Stories Behind the Statistics, 2002

Delise, Karen The Pit Bull Placebo The Media, Myths and Politics of Canine Aggression, 2007

free download of The Pit Bull Placebo book is available HERE.

special thanks to cking, researcher, editor, collaborator
cant deny

Auburn, NY

#17 Oct 10, 2012
Proud Pitnutter wrote:
I know, CD, its hard to except that you may not know all there is to know about the problem, but truly intelligent and open minded people realize that they dont know everything. That the things that they beleive are true right now, may turn out to be completely wrong in the future. Being open minded does not entail disregarding everything you dont agree with and assuming its wrong because it contradicts what you think you know now. Willingness to learn new things is the first step to true intelligence.

Since: Sep 12

Lincoln, RI

#18 Oct 10, 2012
CD, I think your confused. There is a difference between actually proving the other person wrong and just thinking you did. I dont know who wrote what you just posted, nor did you make an effort to make sure others who read it can clearly see that what you posted is actually true and from a reliable source and not simply libelous slander. The bottem line is, if it lines up with your small minded opinion, it's true in your eyes, no matter where it came from.
cant deny

Auburn, NY

#19 Oct 10, 2012
Proud Pitnutter wrote:
CD, I think your confused. There is a difference between actually proving the other person wrong and just thinking you did. I dont know who wrote what you just posted, nor did you make an effort to make sure others who read it can clearly see that what you posted is actually true and from a reliable source and not simply libelous slander. The bottem line is, if it lines up with your small minded opinion, it's true in your eyes, no matter where it came from.
everything i posted PROVES both of them to be liars and any rational person can see that you can say they are not all you want but until you can PROVE with documented verifiable facts that they aren't then what you say is just BS you will have to prove every single point made in my posts to be WRONG and every single source cited to be WRONG and you will never do it or you would have done it right now you had every oppurtunity to prove it wrong with this post of yours and you haven't proven anything wrong SO ALL YOU ARE DOING IS RUNNING YOUR MOUTH - PROVE ANY OF IT TO BE WRONG birds of a feather flock together you have been proven to be a liar and now you are citing liars lies thetruthaboutpitbulls.com is where it came from and they have a long list of references at the bottom something delise and berkey and you never do all the references are clearly posted and anyone can research any of them you also KNOW you can copy and paste a small section into the search box and it will pull up exactly where it came from so stop trying to mislead people if you wanted to know where it came from you know exactly how to find out you are just playing games and people who are RIGHT don't have to stoop to playing lame games like all you pitnutters do all the references are right at the bottom which PROVE it's not libelous slander and by the way ignorant one it can't be both libelous and slanderous libel is in writing and slander is spoken nothing i post is opinion everything i post is documented verifiable facts EVERYTHING YOU POST IS OPINION don't be mad at me for proving you delise and berkey to be LIARS you are the ones that shouldn't have lied in the first place and that is exactly what is going on with you pitnutters you are all hopping mad because EVERYTHING you post i can prove wrong with documentation that it is absolutely wrong and you pitnutters can't prove ANYTHING i say is wrong with documentation you just say it's wrong and never back it up with PROOF that it is wrong I BACK UP EVERYTHING I SAY UP WITH DOCUMENTED VERIFIABLE PROOF
cant deny

Auburn, NY

#20 Oct 10, 2012
Proud Pitnutter wrote:
CD, I think your confused. There is a difference between actually proving the other person wrong and just thinking you did. I dont know who wrote what you just posted, nor did you make an effort to make sure others who read it can clearly see that what you posted is actually true and from a reliable source and not simply libelous slander. The bottem line is, if it lines up with your small minded opinion, it's true in your eyes, no matter where it came from.
and by the way national canine research council IS NOT A RELIABLE SOURCE IT HAS BEEN PROVEN TO POST LIES AND MYTHS AND MISCONCEPTIONS - HYPOCRITE you are always talking about reliable sources and you don't even use a reliable source yourself - pretty ignorant if you ask me
cant deny

Auburn, NY

#21 Oct 10, 2012
Proud Pitnutter wrote:
I know, CD, its hard to except that you may not know all there is to know about the problem, but truly intelligent and open minded people realize that they dont know everything. That the things that they beleive are true right now, may turn out to be completely wrong in the future. Being open minded does not entail disregarding everything you dont agree with and assuming its wrong because it contradicts what you think you know now. Willingness to learn new things is the first step to true intelligence.
my sources have NEVER been proven to be liars like yours have

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

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.

Massena Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
people stealing from massena metal 1 hr Frank 12
hitting 1 hr Mezzzzzzz 19
why do adult children treat their parents like ... (Jan '12) Thu Did you do the same 139
currier going after blythe properties in massena Wed blythe is not a word 16
We need to begin taking the butt hash epidemic ... Wed Forrest 4
Rapidz (Sep '15) Jun 22 resident13655 26
Reluctant to choose Trump or Clinton? Look into... Jun 20 Deep Pockets 23
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Massena Mortgages