GOOCHLAND, Va. --

(AP) One of the pit bulls that authorities say mauled a Virginia woman to death had a history of aggression.

The Richmond Times-Dispatch reports that Goochland County Sheriff James Agnew says the pit bull, named Pacman, had previously been adopted and returned because of concerning behavior.

Authorities believe Bethany Lynn Stephens, 22, was mauled by her two pit bulls while out on a walk last week. Investigators said the petite woman of about 100 pounds was killed by the dogs, which had a combined weight of about twice hers.

But it's not the dog, it's the owner. Right???

So sad. I'm sure she loved those dogs.

How many separate posts are there going to be about this one news story (which isn't remotely related to landlording, not that OT posts are unheard of, but this seems quite the obsession)?

It IS related to landlording in that all of us have to deal with animals. I know you get offended, Emily, when pit bulls are discussed, but it's a fact of life these days.

And when pet dogs turn on and kill their owner, and start to eat her, it IS a news story.

As I said before, there is/was clearly more to this story. Several of the original stories said that she had raised them since they were puppies. The same article would then say that the Sheriff thought that they had been "bred for fighting."

Now, we're seeing that they were with a different owner and then "returned" at some point due to aggression. It just seems like we're still never getting the whole story here. Did she raise them from pups? Or get them after from someone else? Were they bred for fighting? Or she raised them and then gave one to someone else who returned it? That also seems odd since the stories say that they were her own dogs that she loved since they were pups. That wouldn't fit with the idea of giving one away...

And, of course, we still have the problem with the weights not making any sense when it comes to pits. The Sheriff's estimates weights were basically DOUBLE what a normal pit weighs. The information we are being given simply doesn't fit reality.

- John...

The dog named Pacman that growled at its previous owner should have been euthanized when the adoption organization got the pet.

The reality is that a woman weighing 100 lbs had two pits/pit mixes that mauled their owner. I bet both the dogs weighed more than the owner did.

It's sad to think about the ladies last minute of her life what horror she was going through that's very sad. Now her family grieves...

I'm absolutely not "offended" when this topic is discussed - but as someone highly knowledgeable of animals and their behavior, I will always challenge assumptions, prejudices, and reliance on bad information. This isn't limited to animals. I've frequently done the same relating to taxes and financial matters, for example - another topic I know a lot about (which I should, since my employer is paying me to know!).

There is no such thing as a dangerous breed. There are dangerous animals, without a doubt. But dogs need to be evaluated as individuals. Many factors go into a dog's behavior - environment, age, past experiences/possible abuse, individual temperament, training, etc.

One reason I feel strongly about educating people on this topic, is that the assumption that certain breeds (which are nearly impossible to identify anyway) are dangerous, means that people are ignoring the actual reasons these incidents happen. That's when people get hurt.

Tried to reply. System is eating it even though it isn't really political (but mentions some political examples).

Hopefully it will get posted. In the meantime, the short version is that I agree with Emily and have no problem putting my hand in my pit's food bowl or even stealing treats out of her mouth when playing.

- John...

To note it, I have a pit that I inherited. We play fight over its food/treats all the time. So, yes, I definitely can put my hand into her dish while she is eating.

In any case, I'm with Emily. It is interesting to me that so many people will easily believe that the media has a "narrative" that they are pushing when it comes to healthcare or welfare or gun control or so many other things -- lots of you will immediately go "let's just fake news or the media trying to feed us what they want us to believe."

John, that's true!

It would be nice to know the real facts. I'm not convinced either side has them when it comes to dog bit statistics.

LisaFL: Actually, even in the recorded cases of pit attacks, it is actually MORE often the owner than not.

So, that argument really doesn't work. They DON'T more often attack someone else.

- John...

Oh -- and I agree that too many people don't pay attention and put others at risk (especially babies and such). People just don't think. Agreed.

- John...

LisaFL: I did a quick search. So far, in 2017, there have been 11 fatalities involving pits. Of those:

5 were the owners or regular caregivers for the dog.

1 was a baby left alone with several pits.

2 were other family members visiting.

1 was a person walking their own dog.

2 were neighbors out walking.

So, it kinda depends on how you look at it. If you just look at two groups (owners and non-owners), then slightly more non-owners were killed. But if you really look at the categories, it is much more likely to be an owner than some other specific incident.

I think what usually gets REPORTED in the news are the cases where it was someone else. That's why people think "according to the statistics that they have read" that it is not usually the owner.

- John...

Bill: To answer your question: because just because something was bred for something for years does not mean that is all it will ever be.

Would you argue that we shouldn't have any Saint Bernards either? They are very aggressive if not properly trained when young, but are great dogs when the are trained.

What about the Akita? These were originally bred for protection only and are fiercely protective of their owners of they feel threatened. Do we eliminate these too because they were once bred only for protection/attacking? Today, they are one of the most loved family dogs in Japan.

I just think the idea of "Well, they were bred for this originally, so there is no point in any future for them" is a weird train of thought.

- John...

I think that still misses the point. I've said it before. We have hundreds of thousands (or even millions?) of pits and pit mixes in the USA alone. We see a dozen or so fatalities a year related to them.

So the "stretch" is this idea that out of that many dogs in the USA, that they must be an "aggressive" or "dangerous" breed. THAT is what I think is a "weird thought."

Also, I don't think anyone in this thread was suggesting that LLs that aren't taking pits start taking them. I've literally seen zero people suggest that in all my years here. So, weird that you went there too. No one suggested it.

- John...

One thing that makes this breed so dangerous is that the pit owners always think that theyre harmless. Most don't have the resources or knowledge to prevent the dogs from endangering everybody that is forced to live around them.

New neighbors that share our property line in the back have two pits. I'm scared to let my kids play outside in their own backyard. Now I've got to spend $7000 of my money to put up a better fence.

I presume y'all have seen the next headline to hit the news cycle, about the Kentucky woman who died, and her husband, who would have died, except his brother was able to distract the dogs enough to save him.

"...After further investigation, the Bell County Sheriff's Department said they discovered the dogs belonged to Johnny Dale Lankford, 42, who was already being held in the Bell County Detention Center on charges from Friday, December 22nd for assault 2nd degree, domestic violence, unlawful imprisonment 2nd degree and a bench warrant.

CDM: Are there really that many poorly informed LLs here that don't think pits are a risk?

Seems like people just keep making up straw-man arguments to support their cause.

I don't know of ANY landlords that don't recognize that pits are a high risk animal.

Classic straw-man.

- John...

Let’s play holiday trivia.. Can anyone name the dog breed that according to a 2014 Time Magazine article accounts for just 6% of the total dog population yet accounts for 68% of all dog attacks?

Hint: It rhymes with bit.

Kentucky woman killed by neighbor's pitbull on Christmas Eve. The year isn't over John.

Again, no one is arguing that there aren't dangerous pits. The issue is simply that LOTS of dogs can be bad at times -- but some (such as pits) have the strength to be deadly.

There are 3-5 MILLION pits in the USA. There were about a dozen fatalities from pits in 2017.

All some of us are saying is that when you have a HUGE number of pits -- then just because you've had a handful of deaths from them does NOT mean that we should euthanize several million of them or that people shouldn't have them.

For comparison, remember that about FIVE TIMES as many people die in the USA each year from being hit by lightning. People always like to go "you're more likely to be hit by lightning" when something is super rare. Well, you're more likely to be hit by lightning than be killed by a pit.

- John...

Plenty: See -- that's the thing. That's the narrative that the media presented with this one. But then as more facts come out, it appears that that ISN'T what happened. They weren't dogs that were nice until they suddenly weren't one day. They were dogs that apparently the Sheriff believes were bred for fighting. They were dogs that apparently were placed with someone else but showed aggressive behavior and had to be returned.

Again, people want to believe that pits are nice dogs that just go nuts one day and are therefore unsafe. But, once we (finally) get some facts in cases like these, we find out that it often really wasn't that way.

These simple were not dogs that were "nice" and then "suddenly, one day" were not. They were dogs that may have been bred for fighting and certainly showed aggressive behavior in the past.

- John...

To put in our terms... It sounds like the "tenant" that was nice and then just "suddenly" "one day" became a PITA.

THAT is what happens to inexperienced LLs that don't do their background checks and research.

We've learned that the reality is that good LLs usually do their checks and find out that they actually WEREN'T "nice" before. They've always had issues -- we just had to find them.

- John...

Emily, you are in la la land. Pits have been selectively bred over many generations for aggression. It is in the DNA stream of the breed more than in breeds that were bred for other traits. Beyond that, they physically are capable of doing more damage to a human than other breeds.

@John MI, yes, I believe there are LLs who aren't well informed about pit bulls. And there are many people adopting pits or pit mixes from shelters without knowing the history of the dog they're adopting and the risks involved. Look at the story of these dogs.

I guess I haven't seen a LL here that goes "Oh yeah, I take pits no problem." Even the ones that are pro-pits are still going "but my insurance won't allow them."

Also, I'm open to changing my mind. I'm not "hardened" to the point where I couldn't be convinced with the proper "information." The problem is that so much "information" that we receive about pits is clearly biased. As we saw in this very great example that started this thread: the original information that was very widely reported turned out to be a bit different from reality in the end. I think we see that a lot when it comes to pits that were "friendly family dogs that just went nuts one day." That's what the stories keep saying -- but then the facts/"information" often doesn't back that up.

Again, we're talking about a dozen pit attacks out of 3-5 MILLION in the USA alone. That "information" is important and often seems to be overlooked.

- John...

My ins.does not allow 17 breeds. I understand it is based on nationwide on bite statistics.The problem with pits is they don't "bite" they are out for the "kill".You can't argue with stupid folks.Happy New Year!

My ins.does not allow 17 breeds. I understand it is based on nationwide on bite statistics.The problem with pits is they don't "bite" they are out for the "kill".You can't argue with stupid folks.Happy New Year!