It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Woman suing owner of dog that her dogs killed

page: 3
16
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 01:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Raxoxane


To each his own, but perhaps the neighbor who owned the beagle actually REALLY cares about dogs, and as a result he DIDNT WANT the pitbulls put down because he cares about dogs so much. Would I have been the owner of that beagle, sure, in the heat of the anger I might want the dogs who killed him put down, but another part of me would feel for the exact same reasons as this guy. Putting those dogs down wouldn't bring mine back, and I would feel as if I killed them personally. But maybe I'm just to much of a pacifist.




posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 01:23 AM
link   


COMPLETELY frivilous lawsuits such as the woman who bought coffee then spilled it on her lap then sued the store that sold her the coffee because it was too hot.


If you are referring to the Mcdonalds lawsuit,(blog.3nips.com...) the coffee WAS way too hot... a business is responsible for it's product...when a business serves coffee that is expected to be hot that is justified, but when a business sells coffee that is BOILING/SCALDING... THAT IS IRRESPONSIBLE AND LIABLE...

just sayin...



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: chuck258
a reply to: TheSpanishArcher

I don't know where it was, and I have heard this story in several different versions, from it being coffee from McDonalds to being from 7 eleven. The jist of the story was the woman sued them because she had the coffee in her lap in the car (between her legs) and one way or another, the lid popped off and scalding hot coffee burned her inner thighs and genitals, she may have gotten into a car accident.

Either way, you would think the average person would know that coffee is made with extremely hot water, and would have the common sense not to put it in her lap in a cardboard/paper cup with a thin plastic lid. Today, after changing the brakes on my car I heard what sounded like the rotors dragging on the pads after taking it for a test drive, my dumb ass touched the rotor because I saw some brake pad debris and burned my finger. If I were this woman, I would have sued Ford for not telling me the rotor was going to be hot after rolling down a hill testing the brakes.



I know one of the people who sued McDonalds-- a man. A cup of scalding hot coffee was dropped in his lap by an employee at the drive-up. He received serious burns and went directly to the emergency room. It's probably a good idea to know all the facts before deciding who was right and who was wrong.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
Insane lawsuit. I hope it gets thrown out. Any lawyer who took this case should be shamed out of the business, IMO.

On pitbulls... it's NOT the breed. It's the owner and how the dog is raised. They are actually precious and sweet dogs. But the owner has to know what they're doing and take responsibility for how their dogs are, regardless of the breed. This owner clearly has a problem meeting the needs of her dogs. If they were raised as fighting dogs, they absolutely can be rehabilitated, but it takes work.

I can't believe people still think that pitbulls are inherently dangerous dogs... It's just ignorance.

On the pitbulls biting the owners... when a dog (ANY dog) is in the heightened state of a fight with another dog, any distraction will be perceived as a threat and the dog will likely redirect its bite to the human. It's not like they DECIDE to bite the owner. It's an instinct.

People who don't understand dogs shouldn't have them.


We don't know what it says in the actual lawsuit. I would guess that it contains things not dealt with in the news story. As for pit bulls, I agree with you. Raised with love and kindness, they're wonderful dogs. People believe that pit bulls are inherently aggressive because of the media.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: queenofswords
Every pit bull owner says the same thing...."it's not the dog, it's the way they are raised". Baloney!

All dogs can bite, but when a pit bites, it won't let go till there is death. I have researched this topic in the past because I know of several incidents personally regarding this breed where a person or other animal was attacked without provocation by a pit bull. You always hear the owner say something like "oh, he's the sweetest dog I have ever owned...he wouldn't hurt a flea....he has never done anything like this before!"

They are unpredictable and when they do decide to attack, they latch on and don't let go. It turns my stomach to hear people defend them at the expense of the safety of a child or other pet. They don't get a bad rap for no reason as many of their owners will claim.


I'll bet you believe their jaws lock. Rubbish.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:16 AM
link   
a reply to: chuck258

a problem with dogs is once they have been blooded they change and cannot really be trusted.....sadly for these animals being put down might just be necessary



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: chuck258

originally posted by: queenofswords


Wrong, just because you did searches that were probably slanted against pitbulls does not make it truth. I have already said multiple times I have seen and have broken up several dog fights where pitbulls are involved. Pitbulls don't "lock" their jaw, they just have a very strong bite. However, pitbulls actually have a weaker bite than Rottweilers, Dobermans, Mastiffs and GERMAN SHEPHERDS.




I'd like to know how the bite power was scientifically measured.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
Insane lawsuit. I hope it gets thrown out. Any lawyer who took this case should be shamed out of the business, IMO.

On pitbulls... it's NOT the breed. It's the owner and how the dog is raised. They are actually precious and sweet dogs. But the owner has to know what they're doing and take responsibility for how their dogs are, regardless of the breed. This owner clearly has a problem meeting the needs of her dogs. If they were raised as fighting dogs, they absolutely can be rehabilitated, but it takes work.

I can't believe people still think that pitbulls are inherently dangerous dogs... It's just ignorance.

On the pitbulls biting the owners... when a dog (ANY dog) is in the heightened state of a fight with another dog, any distraction will be perceived as a threat and the dog will likely redirect its bite to the human. It's not like they DECIDE to bite the owner. It's an instinct.

People who don't understand dogs shouldn't have them.


We don't know what it says in the actual lawsuit. I would guess that it contains things not dealt with in the news story. As for pit bulls, I agree with you. Raised with love and kindness, they're wonderful dogs. People believe that pit bulls are inherently because of the media.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: chuck258

a problem with dogs is once they have been blooded they change and cannot really be trusted.....sadly for these animals being put down might just be necessary


More rubbish.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:48 AM
link   
i could very well be wrong ...it is what i have been led to believe...and i have never had one of my dogs in that situation
edit on 17-11-2014 by hopenotfeariswhatweneed because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 08:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a problem with dogs is once they have been blooded they change and cannot really be trusted..


What does it mean when a dog is "blooded"? I've never heard that phrase before and can't find anything about it...



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 08:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

i would guess he is trying to say once they have tasted blood they will not be the same...they will want more blood.
i have heard that before but i think people that say that are somehow confusing dogs with great white sharks



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 09:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grovit
i would guess he is trying to say once they have tasted blood they will not be the same...they will want more blood.


Thank you, Grovit. Imagine... a carnivore liking the taste of blood! LOL! Well, that's hilarious! My dogs hunt and eat rabbits and birds. They have been on raw diets, complete with plenty of blood many times. They have never been aggressive or tried to bite anyone. But they do love blood...

The "Bloodthirsty" Myth



People fail to understand that dogs are carnivorous predators. They are supposed to "have a taste for meat."
...
The dog is, by nature, a predator, and will chase other animals because it is hard-wired to do so, not because it is bloodthirsty or has a taste for meat in the human definition of the words.
...
Humans were the ones that deemed the killing behavior as inappropriate and unwanted. Humans tend to expect dogs to exhibit only the delightful behaviors that benefit us, and to act as little humans in fur coats. But when the dog acts in accordance to its canine behavior, some people get upset and think the animal is "messed up" or is a "bad dog." They do not work through the behavior and do not teach the dog the desirable behavior or get it treated homeopathically for vaccinosis issues (such as excessive fear and aggression), and then chain it in the backyard or dump it at a shelter.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 09:43 AM
link   
I respect your viewpoint and feelings on this matter,I just feel differently.Each to their own.I am also a great doglover,I just feel that dogs as vicious as this woman's are most likely a liability+may well attack again,whether another dog or even a person.She obviously is not responsible enough to keep dangerous animals securely confined for the common good-the death of the dogs would have been on Her,not him,if he had demanded they be put down.No need for him to feel guilty for wanting dangerous animals removed after what happened.I just see things differently,does'nt mean I don't feel badly for the dogs in a situation where they had to be put down-though I feel far sorrier for the Beagle,to be honest.


If her dogs were put down,it would have been done in a quick+humane manner-not brutally and in hellish pain and terror torn apart.

However if I was him,at crunchtime my family's safety and their lives -and eliminating possible future threats to their lives and safety-takes precedence over the lives of other people's vicious dogs.May not make me as nice a person as you,# shame and sorry,but there you have it.
a reply to: chuck258



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 10:06 AM
link   
Indeed.Any problem/bad situation can only be dealt with and possibly rectified,and hopefully future occurences averted, if the root cause of said problem is addressed.The root cause Cannot be dealt with as long as people are for whatever reason,reluctant to place blame on the person/modus operandi/system responsible for said problem.

Cop-outs and avoidance of identifying root cause+responsible party in any unfortunate matter helps no-one and nothing-and imo is one of the reasons why the world is the way it is.PC attitudes and a fear(which I find incomprehensible) of coming across as a "cruel/harsh/coldhearted" person,may very well also be a significant factor,imo.

Which in turn causes me to wonder -why people who are unafraid to cut to the heart of a matter and jolly well assign blame+deal with a situation-should be made out as the "bad guy".The matter of this contemptible woman and her pussy-neighbour just emphasizes certain things to me again. How topsy-turvy the world has become,how Feeble people have become,how common-sense and the ability to discern right+wrong-and cutting through bs to the heart of a problem, seems to be slipping away.a reply to: LadyGreenEyes



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 12:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: ItCameFromOuterSpace
a reply to: chuck258

All pit bull owners should have to register their dogs as dangerous and be ridiculed by society. Pit bulls shouldn't even be allowed within city limits. There's no need to have these kinds of animals.



Bull#. It has to do with the owners. Pitbulls used to be called the "Nanny Dog." What does that tell you? That these dogs used to be held really highly. But people have changed. These dogs are the most looked out for when people want to dog fight, over breed, and have bait dogs. Tell me what kind of person does that? Surely dogs do not ask for that.

Don't pull that 'Dangerous and ridiculed by society' crap. moderndogmagazine.com... The majority of Michael Vicks pitbulls were turned into therapy dogs, or were adopted by families with children. And they were fighting dogs, and used as bait.

It isn't fair that this happened, but don't you dare blame the animal.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 12:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: coastlinekid
If you are referring to the Mcdonalds lawsuit,(blog.3nips.com...) the coffee WAS way too hot... a business is responsible for it's product...when a business serves coffee that is expected to be hot that is justified, but when a business sells coffee that is BOILING/SCALDING... THAT IS IRRESPONSIBLE AND LIABLE...

just sayin...


If you are STUPID enough to put a Styrofoam cup of HOT coffee between your legs, while driving a car, you pretty much deserve what you get. When was the last time you saw a car without a cup holder? I know boiling is 212 degrees F., how hot is scalding?
edit on 17-11-2014 by JIMC5499 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Raxoxane

It's a mess, for certain! These days, when we hear someone committed a crime, we tend to also hear relatives and reporters blaming anything and anyone EXCEPT the criminal themselves. Blaming institutions is considered acceptable, but blaming the individual who chose to do wrong is considered bad form. It's nuts. The PC stuff is even worse.

Those that do dare to state the truth are treated as "evil" by many, and when they are proven correct, virtually no one wants to acknowledge it. I have seen that personally myself, but in the past and recently. The problem with common sense these days is that it isn't.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:26 PM
link   
First, I own a two year old Irish Rednose Pitbull. He was a rescue dog, so we took care when we first brought him home to feel out his demeanor. I also have a small white cat, also a rescue as I found her as a kitten in my back yard. I also have a tiny maltese dog, older, blind, but happy. All of this BS from people about Pitbulls and how dangerous they are is crap. My dog plays nicely with my Maltese, and my children. He goes to public parks and plays with other dogs. Any dog can be bread to have a bad demeanor, even little dogs can be biters. It's all in how they are raised and how they are socialized.

Now that I am off my rant, this law suite is ridiculous and wont get anywhere. She's probably an idiot dog owner who shouldn't even have the ability to raise children let alone pets. I have heard this new story for weeks now. Unfortunately, she obviously didn't take care of her dogs and train them properly and she doesn't deserve them. If I was the beagle owner, I wouldn't have let her off so easy. My Two Cents. Cheers Gents.



posted on Nov, 17 2014 @ 02:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: queenofswords
Every pit bull owner says the same thing...."it's not the dog, it's the way they are raised". Baloney!

All dogs can bite, but when a pit bites, it won't let go till there is death. I have researched this topic in the past because I know of several incidents personally regarding this breed where a person or other animal was attacked without provocation by a pit bull. You always hear the owner say something like "oh, he's the sweetest dog I have ever owned...he wouldn't hurt a flea....he has never done anything like this before!"

They are unpredictable and when they do decide to attack, they latch on and don't let go. It turns my stomach to hear people defend them at the expense of the safety of a child or other pet. They don't get a bad rap for no reason as many of their owners will claim.


I'll bet you believe their jaws lock. Rubbish.


I know their jaws do not "lock" as commonly believed. But, I also know that a pit bull latches on, grips full force, then holds and shakes until its victim is dead or someone intervenes by strong physical force against the pit. They are not nippers, but rather violent attackers with death as the goal.

I know personally of a toddler that was attacked by a pit that broke away from his leash and owner and went for the child. She was walking with her mother and daddy on a path at a park when it happened, and her daddy also sustained severe injuries protecting his little girl. Nobody knows why the dog suddenly bolted toward the baby, but it did. Maybe the child squealed or smelled like Gerber's pureed chicken. Who knows. Crazy-a**ed breed of dog.




top topics



 
16
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join