'Real' Dog Bite Statistics Plus Media, Myths and Colleen Lynn Exposed
DOGSBITE.ORG website is not run by an “expert” in the field of canine behavior. It is run by a woman with a grudge. Her name is Colleen Lynn and she was the victim of a dog bite in 2007. Because of this incident that involved one individual dog she has decided to enact revenge on ALL pit bull type dogs.
Colleen Lynn blatantly lies on her website when she claims that pit bulls lead dog bite fatalities. She gathers all of her information from media reports, no questions asked. Clearly she doesn’t ask questions because most of what is reported in the media surrounding pit bulls and “attacks” is incorrect and has been repeatedly proven to be untrue.
Many question the truthfulness of Colleen’s account of what happened to her in June of 2007. Her story has changed multiple times. Pit Bulletin Legal News thoroughly investigated the incident and published these never before seen documents.
It is clear to myself and many others “that Ms. Lynn never published the Seattle Animal Control records regarding the investigation because the story she is now telling bears very little resemblance to what actually happened, and are in total conflict with the only other witness involved: the dogwalker.”
While Colleen’s blatant disregard for the truth on her website is not a surprise and not unexpected, it is important for all of us to have the correct information easily available. Thankfully there is the National Canine
Research Council whose dedicated staff comb through the details of every dog bite related fatality.
I encourage everyone to spend time carefully reading the invaluable information on NCR’s website including the 2010 Dog Bite Fatalities NCR and 2011 Preliminary Dog Bite Fatalities Report
The National Canine Research Council “re-interviews sources the media has reached, and located others they have not, among whom may be police investigators, animal control officers, coroners, veterinarians, health department officials, dog owners, and eye witnesses. They have obtained incident reports, bite reports, human and animal autopsy reports, summaries of judicial proceedings, and crime scene data and photographs when available.”
Access the National Canine Research Dog Bite Statistics HERE
NCRC’s informative section on ineffective laws including breed specific legislation HERE
FAQ’s regarding dog bites HERE and Breed Specific FAQ’s HERE
Dog bite-related fatalities are exceedingly rare. In 2010, 33 fatalities occurrd within a population of more than 308 million and a canine population estimated at over 78 million. NCRC is currently investigating 31 incidents in a dog population of over 78 million that occurred during 2011 thay may qualify as dog bite related fatalities. A final tally is subject to change as a result of NCRC’s thorough investigations. Their final report will be available the first week of 2013.
It is important to recognize that when attempting to research dog bites, researchers have frequently failed to acknowledge the relevance of stressful or inhumane situations that humans often force dogs to endure. At NCRC, they urge people to consider what the world looks like from their dog’s point of view.
“There are at least two parties involved in a dog bite; a dog and one or more humans. Dog behavior cannot be understood or analyzed apart from humans, or the situations in which humans have placed dogs.”
Sloane Quealy-Miner (www.bslnews.org)
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
Sign-Up Now for the Opposing Views Daily Newsletter
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
The NCRC does not have a staff of scientists. It is run by a former vet tech whose book "pit bull placebo" should discredit her on the subject. What you will find in the NCRC's fatality reports is that they will not assign breed unless the dog is registered as such. Any identification of breed by animal control officers or even the dogs owner is not enough. Also, breed can never be assigned based upon pictures once they give them to their "special" ncrc dog expert. So, their burden of proof is only met by a registered dog, and allows them to dismiss all other information. This is to the advantage of their message. If you look at only the dogs that meet the NCRC's burden of proof, pit bulls are still overreprested among that subset. It is clear that what appear to look like pit bulls to most people (including the animal control and others that responded to the attack scene) are killing more people each year than any other appearing dog. So, given only this information, only a damn fool owns or allows around their children a dog that looks like a pit bull.
There are studies that prove most people including animal control officers can't correctly identify dog breeds simply upon looks. Breeds from pugs to mastiff have been identified as pit bulls. Also dogs known to be pit bull have been mistakenly identified as another breed. My point is also proven by the number of court cases to prove a dog’s breed in areas where BSL is in effect. As for the NCRS, she researched, studied and compiled facts that she published in her book. She never claimed to be a scientist or to have a staff of them working with her on this publication. She has much more experience with canines than Colleen Lynn yet you are fine with what she writes? I must say that I have listened to Colleen’s account of her "attack" and read the statements, notes and the animal control report on her attack. I find Coleen to be less than creditable. Dogsbite.org also yearly posts what is called "The Clifton Report" this is a report written by a person with zero experience in animal science and is not a statistician. He is an editor of a bias newsletter. His report is where many get their fatality statics and never question his methods or the validity of his report. However, I have and I will point out just one of his many misleading statements. It is stated in every report since 2008, that "As many as 27 pit bull puppies in August 2008 used terminal cancer patient Michael Warner, 55, “as a food source,” according to Pierce County sheriff's spokesman Ed Troyer. Mr. Warner died from his injuries." The Seattle Times is where this information came from. In the Times report Ed Troyer's full statement included "They did not attack, he was down and the starving pups used him as a food source. They didn't know any better." On Aug 13th the Seattle Times update reports “Two pit bull puppies were said to be responsible for the bites" .NOT 27 but 2 puppies. Mr. Clifton choose to release the numbers from the first report and ignore the update printed a day later when he wrote up his report 5 months later. Every ‘Clifton Report’ since has the same misleading statement .My point, dubv, is people who live in glass houses should never throw stones.
I am breaking free from the bondage of inherently limited perceptions.
So Renda what is your point? You talk a lot but you don't make a point at all. Go to your pit bulls sites and spew forth all of this, they will believe, they believe anything. You condemn anything that proves how dangerous pits are yet you offer nothing in the way of solutions other than education. And education to a pit nutter means drinking the koolaid of their propaganda. Go home Renda, you have no argument. Pits write the book on themselves, no one else does.
I read about the incident of Ms. Lynne and while I sincerely felt for what she endured I cannot understand this campaign against all dogs that look similar. I myself was attacked by a dog and still have the scars. I myself lost a whole summer as the wound I received did get infected after the bite. I remember the dog was black and had long hair. I couldn't tell you the actual breed as I believe it was mixed.
I have had what many of the dogsbites people would call "pit bull" types around my family, my children AND my grandchildren for 20 years and I can personally say that never had my family known a better dog. Not only with kids but other animals as well. My house, for the most part, was always filled with family, friends, kids and dogs.
Just because a car of a certain make hits someone does not mean that every car out there that looks like it is going to do the same. Far from it actually. The other thing I would do is look at the person driving the car. Sadly not all cars are driven by responsible drivers but, many many many are.
One of my girlfriends was robbed by a man of colour. However not every man of colour is going to rob people.
Until you people stop hating on a certain appearance or "look", then you indeed will do nothing to improve public safety. Until you actually focus on responsible dog ownership and spend your time, energy and resources on educating rather than hating, you are blowing in the wind.
Che Bean...you are forming your argument around anecdotal evidece. Given their suitability for real evidence, one anecdote is cancelled by another in the opposite direction. How about Ilisted a negative run in with a pit bull for everyone positive thing you report? Your anecdotes are then cancelled out. The real point is that narcissists tend to overvalue their own anecdotal experience. You had some nice pits, ok. How many of those are needed to balance the scalping of a child by the same breed?
I'm afraid I can't. I live in a place where when they were discussing BSL, I took my pittie type girl to the Vet and while there asked him what HE thought of the upcoming legislation. This kind wonderful white haired gentleman told me that in all his years of treating dogs he had never personally met a "vicious pit bull", although he had come across many vicious dogs.
I also read the testimonies from the public hearings. I noted that 43 of the 44 dog groups, allowed to testify, were AGAINST the ban.
You indicated that I am a narcissist and all you know about me is that I have a family, lots of good friends and raised a few good dogs? Your prejudice on this issue only seems to overcome your ability to assume and stereotype.
As a footnote I have reviewed the fatal dog attacks in Canada (where I live) and out of the 39 documented child deaths there is not a single documented case of a child being killed by any of the banned breeds nor substantually similar dogs. So IF these dogs are SO dangerous, strong and aggressive, why is there not a single case of a child killed by them in the whole of Canada? These real Canadian statistics go back to the sixties.
I have also looked at and reviewed many unbiased professional studies. Three studies, in three different countries by three different organizations all agreed these dogs are no more aggressive than other types and breeds of dogs. You can google one of them by putting in "Is there a difference? Comparisons of golden retrievers and dogs affected by breed-specific legislation regarding aggressive behavior".
It appears we are are going to disagree on the issue at hand, this is why we are discussing this in "opposing views". You have yours, I have mine.
We're talking American here. And in 2010, pits killed 22 of the 33 deaths. Now stick that in your Canadian cap and wear it. If you can't see what is in store for Canada, then you need to move on. Plus you are drunk on the koolaid and can't research for the truth, only for what backs up what you already think. That's not research, that's BS. And you are full of it.
There are at least 28 different breeds of dogs commonly mistaken as so called "pit bulls" and if one adds all the mixes in of the different breeds, then America could be very much full of MIXED MUTTS of the non banned breeds that could be labeled "pit bulls" when they are indeed not. The AMERICAN Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) have said 90% of the calls they receive about so called "pit bulls" are mistaken identities. They also have said "pit bull" bias in the media is not a theory but indeed a fact. If you look up "ASPCA-media-bias-pit bull" you will find it.
The AMERICAN Medical Veterinary Association (AMVA) put together a "task force" of highly educated professionals and did a paper called " A Community Approach to Dog Bite Prevention". You should read it. It seems that not only is the ASPCA against breedism but so is the AMVA. Both are American and respected organizations. I could list many more" American" organizations that are of the same beliefs of the two above but obviously it is not worth the time or effort to mention other studies.
My goodness how you quickly degress to personal attacks and insults when someone's opinion is different than your own or who mentions professional studies opposing your own personal beliefs. As there seems to be NO acceptance of "opposing views" after all, my time here is finished.
If you look at older AVMA and ASPCA documents, then you will find that they once recognized the obvious, that fighting/guarding breeds are more dangerous on average. Now, assuming that is still true, can you imagine why they might have changed their tune? I can. As far as differences among dogs, what would be shocking, given the incredible diversity of dog types, would be if dogs did not vary in dangerousness based upon behavioral traits (let alone physical traits which is even more obvious). The AVMA is a business lobby that also makes some scientific pronouncements. I don't look to them for the unbiased truth. CDC, with AVMA backed vets, has an opinion on this whole thing, and they are in line with the AVMA. I recently had to dissect a pronouncement by the CDC regarding guidelines for rabies prophylaxis for potentially exposed humans for a court case. The CDC recommendations were based upon some of the worst reasoning (with purposefully hidden assumptions) I had ever witnessed. These types of organizations are wrong all the time.
There are at least 28 different breeds of dogs commonly mistaken as so called "pit bulls" and if one adds all the mixes in of the different breeds, then America could be very much full of MIXED MUTTS of the non banned breeds that could be labeled "pit bulls" when they are indeed not. The AMERICAN Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) have said 90% of the calls they receive about so called "pit bulls" are mistaken identities. They also have said "pit bull" bias in the media is not a theory but indeed a fact. If you look up "ASPCA-media-bias-pit bull" you will find it.
The AMERICAN Medical Veterinary Association (AMVA) put together a "task force" of highly educated professionals and did a paper called " A Community Approach to Dog Bite Prevention". You should read it. It seems that not only is the ASPCA against breedism but so is the AMVA. Both are American and respected organizations. I could list many more" American" organizations that are of the same beliefs of the two above but obviously it is not worth the time or effort to mention other studies.
My goodness how you quickly degress to personal attacks and insults when someone's opinion is different than your own or who mentions professional studies opposing your own personal beliefs. As there seems to be NO acceptance of "opposing views" after all, my time here is finished.
And a little more information about the ASPCA. Ed Sayers, the head of it, is a die hard "No Kill'er". Talk about biased. And the AVMA, obviously you know about them or you definitely would not have them on your "list". Bought and paid for by the dogmen and pit bull breeders as well as puppy millers. If you check the bios of their Board members you will see them deeply entrenched in agribusiness, aka the cruelty of puppy mills. Of course they would be for the pits, look at all the business they get from them and those large litters keep them happy. Funny how just a few years ago they were sending out to their members about pits being so dangerous and how to handle them in the office, then the board members changed and so did their stance.
And the now head of the AVMA was severely criticized when he was head of the Ag Dept because he failed to allow puppy mill cruelty to be busted. That is a report a mile long on how biased and horrid this man is. So if you use this as a reference then you support the cruelty of puppy mills, the cruelty of agribusiness, and the continuation of pit attacks so the vets can line their pockets.
You are one foolish man if you fail to do your research. Just follow blindly, never investigate yourself, drink that koolaid. Stay drunk, the rest of us will stay sober and bring about BSL.
Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. President John Adams
dog bite data hasn't changed over the years, but their interpretation has. why? because victims and parents of victims are not the only ones who are vulnerable to attack when they dare to speak out against dangerous dogs, cite statistics and demand protection from elected officials. the "experts" are vulnerable to the pressure of nutters too.
take BONNIE BEAVER for example. in December 1991, UNDER OATH, BEAVER stated "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. Pit bulldogs have been responsible for about 70 percent of the deaths of humans killed by dogs since 1979."
contrast BEAVER'S sworn testimony to an interview in 2011 criticizing a study by a group of texas doctors who courageously challenged the pit bull apologia. “These are serious injuries to humans, and I do not mean to belittle the seriousness of the problem seen at the hospital,” Beaver said. “However, the dog-related data is seriously flawed, and are used at will to try to prove a specific point of view.”
you can read more expert comments about pits bulls and dangerous dogs here. and unlike karen delise, i make sure that even the dimmest nutter can fact check my work.
pit bull zealots have decided that if they can not alter the message, they will silence the messengers and they are pissed off that they can not silence Colleen. their only remaining strategy is defamation. but in the end, like the pit bulls in the dog bite studies they rail against, their attacks on victims only reaffirm that they are liars and bullies.
KAREN DELISE is one of the most sophisticated liars among the pit bull crowd. i recommend her book the pit bull placebo. but don't just blindly follow along, do a little fact checking and you will see that your prophet is either incompetent or dishonest or both. see Scapegoats: Part 1 - The Bloodhound, the shameful slandering of an innocent dog, the english bloodhound, for the sole purposes of polishing the turd like image of pit bulls.
it took fred 5 months to find a nutter dumb enough to present his grotesque reinterpretation of Colleen's attack. what does that tell you about sloane quealy-miner?
There is something feeble and a little contemptible about a man who cannot face the perils of life without the help of comfortable myths. Moreover, since he is aware, however dimly, that his opinions are not rational, he becomes furious when they are disputed. Bertrand Russell
witness the dimly lit fury of sloane quealy-miner.
I did exactly that, Craven, I read the book, then I checked what was in the book. Prior to that, I actually believed that Delise was on the side of spay/neuter but then I realized that she was actually a pit bull pimper. I was shocked when I followed up the info in her book at how distorted and biased it was. I called in an attack and she refused to use it because it went against what she preaches. That was when I started telling the world what a liar she is.
Plus attacking a victim is the lowest of the low and Colleen was a victim. How low can you go? The pit nutters are always setting new standards for that low and here is another one.
There are two things I know as far as pitbulls. No other dog breed attacks in the same way. Like a wild animal going for the kill, they single out their victim..locking onto their taarget, go for the throat and disembowel and/or tear off limbs. No other group tolerates and accepts the aggressive behavior like pitbull people do. No other group shows such a lack of emphathy for victims of these dogs attacks...only concerned about the pitbull. For all their "blame the owner" they do not support legislation that would give serious penalties for attacks/kills on people and other animals. I'm just finishing Chris Kyle's American Sniper. I think every neighborhood with pitbulls needs a Chris Kyle living there.