Michigan Police Shoot Third Pit Bull In Two Weeks

Jackson County, Michigan sheriff deputies have killed three pit bulls in the past two weeks.

Most recently, on Friday, Jackson County sheriff deputies shot and killed a pit bull that bit a woman outside of her friend’s house. When the deputies responded to the call, they said that the dog charged at them twice. In response, they shot the dog.

Three days earlier, sheriff deputies killed a pit bull that bit a woman. The week before, another officer killed a roaming pit bull.

The police say that they receive numerous phone calls about pit bulls, and shooting them is essential to keeping communities safe. Deputies say that they are threat and something serious needs to be done to stop them from doing anything dangerous.

Many local dog owners say that it is extreme to shoot the dogs. They say that dogs should be given a second chance to correct their behavior before being killed.

Tina Reed, who owned the pit bull who attacked the woman on Friday, said she feels horrible about the injuries her dog inflicted, but she added that the 8-year-old pit bull had never escaped or bitten anyone before. She said that because some pit bulls are trained to be vicious, all are considered vicious. She called it discrimination against dogs.

Other residents say that there are enough incidents to prove that pit bulls are mean and the deputies are justified in killing them. They say if they are aggressive, they need to be “taken care of.”

Source: The Jackson Citizen Patriot

8 Responses to “Michigan Police Shoot Third Pit Bull In Two Weeks”

  1. catmom5 says:

    Wonder if there were any other dog bites in the same three week period . . . and how the “officers” handled those. Sounds typical ~ shoot first, ask questions later.

  2. Furrli says:

    So i guess since gangsters, bikers, and sexual predators are known to be violent, vicious, and dangerous.. it’s ok to just go out and shoot them?

    just cuz they’re roaming the streets?

    i think its time for ppl to wake up ..

  3. Cathy says:

    Furrli says:

    August 7th, 2007 at 5:26 pm
    So i guess since gangsters, bikers, and sexual predators are known to be violent, vicious, and dangerous.. it’s ok to just go out and shoot them?

    just cuz they’re roaming the streets?

    Well, that might just be a good idea that you brought up.

  4. Sandy says:

    I know Jackson Michigan and they have a lot of scum who do fight these dogs…a lot of crime..The fact the dogs bit people sez something to me..In this issue and knowing what I know I DO support the police in this case and would if it were any othet breed of dog.

  5. Baaboo says:

    I think 90% of people “should be taken care of” !!!

  6. Mary says:

    My husband is a biker and is one of the gentlest men I’ve ever met. It’s the SUV drivers I worry about.

    But back to the issue at hand: “They say that dogs should be given a second chance to correct their behavior before being killed.”

    The dog should correct its behavior? It’s the irresponsible owners who need to correct their own behavior. Anyone who owns a dog — especially a high profile breed like a PBT — should know the risks they take if they allow the dog to run free or condone aggressive behavior in any way.

    Two of the three dogs cited in the article bit someone. One charged the police officers. What would you have them do? Risk being bitten themselves?

    In rescue, we called these dogs “known biters” and could not accept them into rescue because of insurance and liability reasons. Yet a police officer, who is sworn to protect the community, should sheath his guns and what, offer the dog a treat and wait and see if the dogs bites again, *then* take action? A second chance could lead to a child getting their face shredded or worse.

    PBT or labrador retriever — the dog bit and then charged the cop. Think about this.

  7. Seth says:

    If I lived in Jackson county, MI I’d call up the police and ask if I could buy the dog corpes and take ‘em to the butcher shop.

  8. SAVE CONGO says:

    Arrival Story:
    If you have not heard about this troubling story, now’s the time you did. Whether you are a dog lover or not this story is distrubing because it is another failure of the judicial system to follow the law. The law requires that the State prove by ’clear and convincing evidence’ that a dog is vicious in order to end the dog’s life. That means that the State must show that it is ’highly probable’ that the dog is vicious. A dog who is provoked and bites in defense of himself or a member of his family (dog or human) is not a vicious dog. We, the people, do not need an expert to tell us this. However, for those who need this comfort I am attaching a copy of the ’expert report’ which opines that the dog, known as Congo, was ’clearly provoked’. If you know me personally, you know about my escapades in searching for the truth and my dedictation to helping ’underdogs’. I have helped many of you and rarely, if ever, ask for anything in return. If I have one ’help’ to use in exchange for the help that I have given then I am willing to use it on Congo’s behalf. For those of you who do not know me, I am an attorney and not well liked in my profession by some (or maybe many) because I am willing to talk about ’the pink elephant’ that stands in the middle of the room. I have little tolerance for those who tell me to look the other way while legal professionals violate the rights of hardworking, taxpaying people. One of the most common pink elephants is when a judge deviates from the law because of political pressure or personal gain (in the form of future policial favors) which we all know too well. Either this judge is working on making his way to the Superior Court (heaven help us) or he was sleeping during the trial (some of you have had this experience, I know I did when I sat on a jury in Burlington County in 2004). The Trenton Times article on this story is below and following that are statements from the expert, animal caregivers, friends, and family. Goes to show you anyone can be a judge these days…you just have to know the right people and nothing really about the law or the process involved in analyzing it. What can you do to help? Send letters to support the James Family (whom I have met and wholeheartedly endorse as well as their dogs) to the following: Use the Subject ’SAVE CONGO’ · letters@njtimes.com · caseyandrossi@nj1015.com · ahuston@pacpub.com · letters@trentonian.com If you want to do more on November 13, 2007 beginning at 10:00 a.m. at the Adminstrative Building on Witherspoon Street in Princeton there will be a protest of the judge’s decision labeling Congo as ’vicious’ and ordering Congo to be put to death. If you want more details please contact me. Trenton Times Article Judge rules dog should be put down Defense to appeal ruling in landscaper attack Thursday, November 01, 2007 BY LINDA STEIN PRINCETON TOWNSHIP — A German shepherd that attacked a landscaper was ruled vicious by a Municipal Court judge and four other dogs were found to be potentially dangerous. The ruling may be a death sentence for the German shepherd named Congo because a dog found to be vicious is required to be euthanized under state law. But the defense has vowed to appeal the judge’s ruling. In his opinion handed down Tuesday, Judge Russell Annich Jr. said that workers came to the Stuart Road house of Guy and Elizabeth James on June 5. Giovanni Rivera, of Trenton, was one of five day laborers hired to perform landscaping work at the 10-acre, fenced property. The crew had arrived at about 7 a.m., which was earlier than the couple expected them, the judge wrote. According to the ruling, Guy James saw the workers drive up and told them to wait in their car until he returned and told them the dogs were inside. The men waited about 13 minutes, then two got out and started work, the judge wrote. After a minute, Elizabeth James told them to get back in the car. Several of the dogs ran over, barking. One of the workers was frightened and repelled the dogs with a rake, the judge wrote. Elizabeth James shouted for the worker to stop hitting the dogs with the rake, and Rivera, who was frightened and seeking protection, grabbed her from behind, according to the ruling. She began screaming. Rivera then fell to the ground. At that point, Congo began to bite him and the other dogs joined in, the judge said. After about three minutes, Guy James came out of the house and stopped the dogs from attacking, according to the opinion. Rivera was taken to The Medical Center at Princeton where he was treated for multiple bite wounds. In his opinion, Annich said Rivera ’suffered substantial injuries.’ Attorney Robert Lytle, who represents the homeowners, said he will appeal the ruling to Superior Court. ’Although we respect the judge’s decision we disagree with it,’ Lytle said. ’There was overwhelming evidence the incident in this case was provoked unintentionally by the workers on the property, swinging a rake at the dogs, hitting the dogs in the head, injuring them.’ Kim A. Otis, the municipal prosecutor, said, ’I thought it was a very fair

E-mail It