Pit bull kills 70-year-old owner in Bangkok home

Please send that pooch to live out its days on a farm in upstate New York.

4 hours ago, scorecard said:

Maybe she's had the dog for a very long time?

She had the dog for five years i believe.

Post with a video link, which does not work removed @jvs

According to the Thaiger and the Thai enquier this dog has killed its previous owner 5 years ago!

https://thethaiger.com/news/bangkok/pit-bull-attack-kills-woman-second-fatal-mauling

Mods edit - link added, as poster did not post one.

I saw the uncensored photo of the mauled body of the owner on thai social media

truly horrific ….they say it was a cross breed of

a pitbull …i think if that photo was in this article reactions would be way different.☹️

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Please send that pooch to live out its days on a farm in upstate New York.

No, send the dog to a place in the woods with someone with a 9MM and a shovel. In New York State it would end the same way. Americans aren't that thick headed to let a killer dog live, as it has no fear of man and will likely kill again. Keeping it in solitary is also cruel, so it should be euthanized immediately.

When a known dangerous animal is permitted to remain in a situation where it can harm again, the legal responsibility often shifts significantly onto the human decision-makers. In many jurisdictions, this can lead to severe consequences for the owners or authorities involved, including charges of negligent death or manslaughter.

6 hours ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

Experts note that no dog is inherently evil, and dangerous behavior usually stems from specific underlying factors rather than just genetics:

Why is it always this breed then?

Also why,especially in the West are PB owners all pretend hard-men wxnkers?

A pit bull isn't evil as an earlier poster stated just as wolves and grizzly bears aren't evil. When they decide you are a threat, it can get ugly real quick. A good knowledgeable owner helps but they are extremely dangerous and the potential is always there regardless.

Been around many pit bulls that never get aggressive but it seems foolish to acquire one hoping yours is docile. I live in rural Thailand and still wouldn't take the risk. If a lab bites a neighbor it is usually an easy fix but if a pit bull attacks them it won't be. I've been bitten three times in Thailand and it was frustrating but if was a pit bull it would have been frightening.

1 hour ago, Keeenok Powell said:

Why is it always this breed then?

Also why,especially in the West are PB owners all pretend hard-men wxnkers?

We have one I can think of on this forum, and he is exactly the type of person you imagine.

3 hours ago, jvs said:

According to the Thaiger and the Thai enquier this dog has killed its previous owner 5 years ago!

https://thethaiger.com/news/bangkok/pit-bull-attack-kills-woman-second-fatal-mauling

Mods edit - link added, as poster did not post one.

Jeez. The damn dog is a serial killer.

The dog looks sick too. Anyway, if it attacks people it needs to be put down. Fully agree.

Have they found a new home for him yet ?

Ive got room for 1 more.

Good Lord. It sounds as if this woman had some very strange ideas and an overly sympathetic attitude towards dangerous dogs combined with a clueless culturally-derived way to deal with them. This is often related to "tham boon" but of course has little to do with the Buddhist religion. Renting a house to keep killer dogs in cages. Nuts.

6 hours ago, JustinTyme said:

"SPS" - (Small Penis Syndrome)

I'm hung like a donkey and had a lovely staffordshire bull terrier

11 minutes ago, sungod said:

I'm hung like a donkey and had a lovely staffordshire bull terrier

I collect absurd sentences, and am confident this one will live forever in the Hall of Fame! 555! OMG, this is PRICELESS!!!

8 hours ago, Thingamabob said:

Pitbulls need to be controlled by experienced carers. They are generally fine, and fun, but react with aggression if feeling threatened.

No they don't they all need to be destroyed

8 hours ago, fredwiggy said:

Dogs that aren't properly trained, with abuse, neglect and without a chance from birth of a social climate with other humans and animals will become fearful and strike out when that fear arises. Some dogs can cause extreme damage very quickly and shouldn't be pets around the elderly or small children as there are breeds that are known to be more amiable than others. The ones that are a lot stronger need experienced training.

Bred for violence, It's in their DNA nothing to do with training or being neglected. Pitts are like having a leopard for a pet, far too dangerous which is why they are banned in many countries and states.

9 hours ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

Experts note that no dog is inherently evil, and dangerous behavior usually stems from specific underlying factors rather than just genetics:

Why don't you claim he was only playing or just trying to be friendly, it's never the dogs fault with dog worshipers. Pitts ARE evil along with a few other breeds.

12 minutes ago, visalady said:

Bred for violence, It's in their DNA nothing to do with training or being neglected. Pitts are like having a leopard for a pet, far too dangerous which is why they are banned in many countries and states.

They were bred to fight other animals and not humans. That they and other large breeds can cause a lot of damage if they are bred to attack is obvious. There are thousands of pits and others like them who are not vicious. Some of them have a higher chance of aggression than others as well as others who aren't aggressive, as many have noted who own them with never a problem.

That they need to know who's the boss in the beginning is a definite. They also should be raised around other people and animals so they can not have fear which can lead to aggression if scared.

They can be gentle as a lamb but vicious as a bear, depending on that raising. There are hundreds of thousands of cases of people being bit by all breeds, but we hear of the pits, rottweilers, shepherds and huskies because of the damage they can cause quickly. If they've never known abuse and only love, they usually don't have it in their nature to hurt anyone.

They do have aggression in their DNA but it can be kept at bay with that loving treatment. Dogs raised with positive reinforcement, clear boundaries, and proper socialization are much safer and more stable.

Pit bulls descend from dogs historically bred for bull baiting and later dog fighting. Even then, fighting dogs were bred to be handled by humans, so they were not naturally aggressive toward people.

Even the most loved dog can bite or snap if it feels extreme pain, severe fear, or is startled. Genetics can influence how quickly a dog reacts to these triggers.You cannot predict a dog's exact behavior based on its breed alone. Individual personality, early socialization, and daily handling matter just as much as DNA.

With all this, they should not be with small children, as all other large dogs, as they can be scared and bite out of fear, and that bite can cause more damage than a smaller dog.................https://www.thehumanesociety.org/debunking-pit-bull-myths/

Edited Thursday at 11:08 AM2 days by fredwiggy

9 hours ago, jvs said:

This guy is now 3 years old,very big and also has a big reputation as being vicious and dangerous.

Yes big he is ,

He's got some impressive testicles on him!😳

1 hour ago, JustinTyme said:

I collect absurd sentences, and am confident this one will live forever in the Hall of Fame! 555! OMG, this is PRICELESS!!!

Nothing absurd about owning a dog

3 hours ago, sungod said:

Nothing absurd about owning a dog

555! What happened to the guy who said "'Im hung like a donkey and had a lovely staffordshire bull terrier" THAT is a sentence so absurd, it goes in the Hall of Fame! Don't run from it! You said it, you own it, and know that whenever I need a laugh ... I will remember it! Straight up KrAzY bro!!!

13 hours ago, IvorBiggun2 said:

Experts note that no dog is inherently evil, and dangerous behavior usually stems from specific underlying factors rather than just genetics:

Never mind that this breed was specifically bred for aggression, bite strength, and fighting, that's not relevant, is it? But I agree that the word evil is not the right word. Evil is the domain of human beings. The applicable terms are that this beed is inherently dangerous and deadly by its very nature.

Over a 20 year period pit bulls killed 536 people in the US. The second most deadly dog, Rottweilers, killed 63 people in the same time period. The sad part of this is that no one is ever going to do anything that will effectively prevent these tragedies. What a terrible way to die for someone who should be enjoying their older years in peace

We know this, right?

Pit bulls are involved in a higher percentage of serious and fatal dog attacks than any other dog breed, according to long-term data primarily from the United States. [1, 2]

Fatalities Compared to Other Breeds

• U.S. Statistics: Data spanning multi-year periods (such as 2005–2019 compiled by tracking organizations and trauma studies) show that pit bulls account for roughly 65% to 67% of all fatal dog attacks in the United States. [1, 2]

• Other Breeds: The next most frequent breed in fatal statistics is the Rottweiler, which accounts for roughly 9% to 10% of deaths. Other breeds like German Shepherds, mixed-breed dogs, and mastiff-types trail significantly lower, each generally making up under 5% of recorded fatalities individually. [1, 2, 3]

• Global Context: Comprehensive worldwide databases are scarce because many countries do not track bite statistics uniformly by breed. However, regions tracking specific subsets (like the U.K. regarding XL Bullies) note similar high proportions of severe incidents tied to pit bull-type dogs prior to or during targeted regulations. [1]

The name for the dog comes from the fact they were used in pits for bear baiting and dog fighting. Many of the more ferocious were inbred, breeders wanted vicious killers.

In some of these dogs (not all) there still lies that ancient gene. On occasion, as in this case, the gene bubbled up, the collar seems to have spurred that. Sad deal, RIP.

14 hours ago, visalady said:

No they don't they all need to be destroyed

Your opinion, not mine.

8 hours ago, Priorexpat said:

The name for the dog comes from the fact they were used in pits for bear baiting and dog fighting. Many of the more ferocious were inbred, breeders wanted vicious killers.

In some of these dogs (not all) there still lies that ancient gene. On occasion, as in this case, the gene bubbled up, the collar seems to have spurred that. Sad deal, RIP.

Aggression to dogs was encouraged as they were used for dog fighting. Aggression to humans was absolutely NOT encouraged as they had to be separated by men during fights and often lived alongside the owner's family in small houses between fights.

They're not naturally aggressive to humans, quite the opposite, but obviously if mistreated or caged for long periods they can become aggressive - same as any dog - and they're very strong and determined so they can inflict a lot of damage.

I have a RedNose American Pitbull Terrier and he's a bit of a celebrity with my girlfriend's family. They all love him, always ask about him and come to see him regularly. He loves people and really helps with my girlfiend's young niece who suffers from depression, she plays with him for hours and it really cheers her up. Kind of like a therapy dog.

This is a terrible story, but this is not reflective of the breed in general any more than Jennifer Pan or Robert/Michael Bever killing their parents is a reflection on children in general.