-
Hanna 09/17/2010 7:43:00 AM
now i do feel for the mail man, but i would like to say, that its not the BREED of dog, its the BREED of the owners. i have a 110lb blue pitbull myself, im 21, have raised him since he was a puppy. he is a sweet heart and LOVES everyone and everything. its because of how he was raised is how he turned out. Its just like people. if you were raised to kill, your guna be a murder. so blame the people for these dogs.
-
Werner Heisenberg 09/08/2010 3:11:00 AM
My wife and I routinely walk our dog at several of the Minneapolis dog parks, and I find it amazing how many pit bulls are named Diablo and Diesel. The other day I heard an owner call out to his pit bull named Glock. We've yet to encounter a socialized pit bull, or for that matter one that isn't overly aggressive. We're about ready to stop frequenting these parks out of fear for our dog's safety and our own safety. You win, pit bull owners. The parks are all yours.
-
Penalize Owners 09/04/2010 7:37:00 AM
A pit bull mix knocked down my 100-lb. mother-in-law who was walking to her friend's house by a church. Bit her in the hip, chewed her arm, and likely would have injured her far worse if neighbors hadn't fought off the beast. Thankfully for other innocent little old ladies and children and 300-lb. mail carriers, the dog is now dead. I'm sick of people's lame excuses. Talk is cheap. Words don't mean crap when a beloved family member is terrorized and bitten to pieces by a out-of-control animal. Bring on more legal penalties against the lowlife idiot "pet" owners.
-
Stephen 08/31/2010 8:49:00 PM
As a resident of North Minneapolis, and a dog owner, I felt the piece was fine. I live near many dog owners, most responsible, and a few who aren't. I've watched loose dogs roam and feared for the safety of myself and my dog. I moved from a suburb to rehab a house and have been surprised at how connected and welcoming my neighbors have been.
Here's what I would like to see:
1. Residents who complain about a neighbor's dog will have animal control out to check to see if it is licensed. I'm guessing 95% of the problem dogs are not. Simple- inexpensive and not time sensitive. Send the officer when they are not busy to check.
2. If the dog is licensed, the officer should check the owner's ability to have a dog. This means actually owning a leash, and a means to clean up their waste. Again- 95% of the problem dogs are in rental units, which means poorly constructed fences, cheap DIY kennels and often no leashes, or means to clean up their waste.
3. Land-lords need to know that if tenants will be keeping dogs, then the property must be cleaned regularly of litter and waste and fences maintained. Fine the ones who don't enforce this on their tenants.
4. Allow the post office to note problem dogs and move the mail box out to the fence or other safe place.
It seems like these simple steps target behavior, not breeds, are reasonable for citizens and neighbors to expect of each other and of the city. I'll bet with a little coordination between the police, animal control, and building inspectors you would quickly find correlations of complaints and begin removing the worst offenders.
-
PartyScooper 08/31/2010 1:33:00 AM
I wonder if Brian Dumoulin knows that 'Neko' is Japanese for 'Cat'...
lol he names his dog 'cat'
-
Another NoMi Neighbor 08/31/2010 12:33:00 AM
I am extremely disappointed in this piece. Yes there are pit bulls that bite in NoMi, we have criminals too. But they are just small fraction of our diverse neighborhood. This article falsely perpetuates two stereotypes: 1)all pits are dangerous and 2)NoMi is a ghetto wasteland. Believe it or not there are actual normal people who have chosen to make NoMi their home. For every dumpy slummy home there are dozens of beautiful homes. We have good restaurants and even art galleries! Just once would it be possible for a positive story to be done on North. Offhand I know of 3 people within 4 blocks of my home who actively participate in some type of dog rescue program. Why not tell a story of all the people in NoMi working hard to save dogs and help find them loving, resposiblle homes!
-
Donna Watkins 08/30/2010 12:04:00 AM
It's kind of a happy coincidence that City Pages also ran the story about the Target event featuring Bull Terrier "Bullseye." There are several photos of the dog not ripping the faces off of various celebs. Bull Terriers have been included in some Breed Specific Legislation.
-
Ellen 08/28/2010 10:49:00 PM
Blip, it's true that "pitbull" type dogs can cause a fair amount of damage if they try. However, it's also true that there are a couple of dozen breeds of dogs that can cause similar damage quite easily. And then sometimes breeds that no one expects to cause damage do so, like the husky who killed a child in MN last year or the boxer who killed a child in WI last week. So the point is: the common denominator for danger is bad people who abuse or neglect their animals (or stupidly leave small children alone with them). And, since the Twin Cities has leash laws to prevent dogs from roaming and dangerous dog laws to prevent people from harboring vicious dogs, the question I asked is WHAT CAN WE DO TO GET BETTER ENFORCEMENT OF EXISTING LAWS?
-
Blip 08/28/2010 2:34:00 PM
What many of the bully lovers here seem to ignore is the fact (mentioned in the article) that these dogs were BRED to be powerful aggressors. (Think about it: an eighty-pound dog that can take down a full-size cow. Hmmm.) It's not that individual pits can't be sweet, friendly pets (my niece has a bully of the "lick you to death" variety); it's the fact that they are extraordinarily strong, they have amazingly powerful jaws, and they tend to clamp down and hang on. This is not a cocker spaniel biting out of frustration, or a chihuahua nipping out of nervous fear: this is an animal that is DANGEROUS BY DESIGN. I sympathize with pitbulls and with the people who legitimately love and care for them, but the problem here is not bias on the part of the article writer. It's the people who encourage, promote, and provoke the dangerous potential of these dogs.
-
Ellen 08/28/2010 3:59:00 AM
Arthur: Note that the article refers to someone who was accidentally shot by a ricochet when the police were killing a dangerous dog. Do you think it's a good idea for there to be lots of guns discharging in the city? I don't. Therefore, the question is: Is there anything else that can be done to avoid having the police shoot dogs? I'm neither pro- nor anti-police, but I am against gunshots in the city unless ABSOLUTELY necessary.
Cindy: Have you ever heard the phrase, "Correlation does not equal causation?" You're assuming that "pitbulls" being involved in more of these incidents means that "pitbulls" are more dangerous. But there are many other variables here, such as the fact that some really crappy people have chosen to own, neglect, and abuse this type of dog. And if THAT is the cause of the problem, then the only effective way to deal with it is to step up enforcement of existing laws against horrible people who mistreat and misuse dogs. That's why I want to know: How can we get more resources for Animal Control?
-
Cindy 08/28/2010 12:07:00 AM
I agree with Arthur. This is a very weird slant for this article to take. It seems to be blaming police officers instead of pit bull or owners. Very unfortunate take on this.
And if it is true that pit bulls are filling the police logs to a much greater extent than other dogs, I think that's a sign that the pit bulls should be regulated, NOT police officers!
-
Arthur 08/27/2010 8:19:00 PM
Ellen says: "What's the point of this article?"
The point is sinister for the police. The point is that cops are wrong to shoot a pit bull that is menacing or charging them. This is ridiculous. This is suggesting that an officer is wrong to regard a pit bull as a greater threat than other dogs. This is suggesting that police are wrong to use their best judgment.
It is only common sense to regard a pit bull, that has been bred to have huge jaw muscles and for a propensity to attack, as a greater threat. This is trying to shift blame away from BOTH pit bulls and OWNERS - including the irresponsible ones!
The obvious and SANE response to viewing the disproportionate numbers of pit being shot is - They represent a greater threat to police officers than other dogs, so they should be banned for the safety of all public servants and the public in general. Instead, this article is setting up a discussion about how police officers don't have good judgment and therefore should be HAMSTRUNG in doing their duty by regulating the police and not the dogs. INSANE!
All law enforcement should proactively defend their officers' rights to carry out their duty using their best judgment!
-
Bert 08/27/2010 7:24:00 PM
Brenda, I agree that people need to be held more accountable for their dogs. But why should there be a difference in consequences when a Pit Bull bites someone as compared to a Jack Russel? If a non-Pit Bull Dog bites a kid in the face, should it just be let go, or given a warning just because there is less damage, even though it's likely the dog will bite again? Any dog can just as easily lash out when they are in an abusive situation or have been purposely trained to be aggressive.
A breed ban is not the answer. More funding to get stronger and better enforced laws and consequences for dog bites MAY be the answer.
-
Occam's Chainsaw 08/27/2010 6:20:00 PM
There is no common law "one free bite" rule in Minnesota. The courts here apply strict liability. The problem with many of these cases is that some local authorities choose not to aggressively pursue charges and/or the evidence is sketchy ("my dog never left the porch, officer!).
Breed-specific bans are not the answer. The existing laws need to be be applied more aggressively. The first time a dog - any breed - inflicts harm on another person or pet, that dog should be seized and euthanized and its owners held liable. Period.
-
David Foureyes 08/27/2010 6:08:00 PM
Ellen - Thank you for your comments. You are completely right questioning the purpose of the article. Nothing in it is really news, just more stories about the problem we already know exists. Where are the proposed solutions? Where are the people with the ideas? Identifying he problem is easy...identifying those with a solution takes investigation.
-
Ellen 08/27/2010 11:47:00 AM
What's the point of this article? That there are thugs who mistreat animals, and the animals as a result are dangerous? That some of these thugs live in N. Mpls & that pitbulls are their current victims? That Animal Control in Minneapolis is underfunded? Is any of this news?
Things I'd like to know: What can we do to get more resources for Animal Control to deal with dogs running loose before tragedies happen? Do police officers need more training to deal with dogs without shooting them (as, for instance, in the case of the dogs who were protecting their owner's body)? How can we get people to call in dogs running loose?
To put this in perspective: Minneapolis & St. Paul have enacted excellent non-breed-based vicious dog laws in the last few years, and both have had SIGNIFICANT drops in the number of dog bites since then. I know that's cold comfort to Mr. Bloomquist, but it would make the story more accurate & less sensational.
Unless, of course, the point of your story is that North Minneapolis is a terrible place to live? In that case, it's perfect the way it is.
-
Brenda 08/27/2010 3:10:00 AM
First, the old English common law "one bite rule" must go. ANY BITE by a pit bull should be treated as attempted homicide by the dog's owner PLUS pit bulls (carefully defined as to who they are) should be banned. And those who are training dogs to harm others should be treated as having attempted homicide because in fact that is what they have done.
-
Goog 08/27/2010 2:51:00 AM
Cindy- I was more commenting on the fact that every City Pages article dealing with North Mpls makes it look like the worst place on earth. And now they've made it look like every house has a vicious Pit Bull lurking in the shadows ready to rip your kids face off.
And I do believe that the Mpls Dangerous Dogs list includes the owners name and address...
-
Mungo 08/27/2010 2:39:00 AM
I can't believe how many people come out to defend dogs that maim kids. There are bad dogs. They bite kids in the face and attack postmen. They have bad owners. They are dogs, not people, and they need to be put down. Lolo - it would be one thing if you were only putting yourself in danger. But you're not - you're also endangering everyone around you by keeping that dog around. The fact that you were attacked once doesn't mean you're actions are justified.
-
Christina 08/27/2010 2:16:00 AM
There are good and bad dogs in every breed and I agree with everyone that there really is no bad dog, just bad dog owners. The challenge with the bully breeds is the damage they do if they attack, those jaws and teeth are built for tearing things apart and their single minded focus when they get into that zone is frightening. The bigger issue is how do you prevent people who have no business from getting these dogs and how do you make the penalties severe enough to maybe deter some of these people from getting these dogs.
-
Cindy 08/27/2010 1:33:00 AM
Really Goog? Blow up North Minneapolis? I live there. Why does ALL of N. Mpls get a bad rap? There are a couple of bad areas within North, but that's it. I own 2 Shiba Inus and walk them through my neighborhood twice a day. Everyone I see is friendly and looks out for their neighbors. I only see 1 pit bull that is in a kennel within a fenced yard. Otherwise it's the same kind of dogs you see in every other suburb. It's too bad they don't have a Dangerous Owner of Dog list made public. There are no bad dogs, just bad owners.
-
Lolo 08/27/2010 12:52:00 AM
This piece of trash is about as fair and balanced as Fox News. You’ve said just enough in defense of the breed to allow you to claim you’ve addressed both sides of the issue. Similarly, anyone who thinks this article is good and honest and true has already made up their mind on the subject. You’re story hurts those of us who love the breed and see every article written like this as a set-back for those who don’t know anything about the breed. You list case after case of attack with language that has me thinking the City is plagued by lion-like feral pit bulls that are “muscles with teeth” and are looking for their next child to bite. Bite? My pit bull would sooner lick you to death. We call her our “pocket pit” because she was a runt; she was intended to be sold as a fighting dog, kept in a basement, about to be killed because of her size, her dewclaws ripped out and tail banded until it fell off (our vet was horrified). It amazes me that these dogs still trust us.
While I understand the topic is narrow, it could have been examined in an equally eye opening way, and still have been objective. There is a serious problem, but it’s written as if the dogs have a choice. I agree with all the comments posted here by those the article saddened. I would like to add that I was a kid who, as Mungo so eloquently put it, had my “face ripped off” (not by a pit bull). I had 160 stitches and have scars that have become part of my identity. I don’t mean to minimize Mr. Bloomquist’s experience by any means, but what good came of depicting the graphic nature of the attack and not addressing why people in the neighborhood were just waiting for something to happen to begin with? There is a breakdown somewhere in the system. In a population of over 380,000, you can’t tell me that only 4 people deserve to be banned from owning dogs.
My experience traumatized me, yes, but I was traumatized by people. I don’t fear or hate dogs, or the breed that bit me, because it really wasn’t his fault, it was the owners. I have also been rescued and protected by dogs, and in all my experiences the basic fact I have learned is how fickle humans can be. I could go on about the opportunities for topics that were missed in this article, the serious hard questions, but the fact remains that this is simply fear mongering smear. There’s no education in it. No voice for the animal. Which, in my opinion when you print something like this, you have a level of responsibility. It certainly won’t help prevent further attacks. For me, it will not help the stigma, or the fact that when people lean in to pet my dog, they step back when I answer their question as to the breed. They’ll continue to blame the breed, find it hard to believe she’s a “big spoon” cuddle bug and an obsessive licker. They’ll stand behind anti-bully measures - their condemnation, they’ll site this article (people already are in my office), and who can blame them when tripe like this continues to be printed?
-
Bert 08/26/2010 11:58:00 PM
It seems that the first thing everyone wants to suggest in order to correct this problem, is to make rules and regulations about owning specific breeds of dogs. Or an even more drastic measure, a breed ban of Pit bulls.
However, if we ban pit bulls, what about the dogs that are half lab, half pit bull? Who's to say that it takes after one breed or another. Or mixed breeds that look like a bully breed. Or a litter of pups with multiple fathers, (it CAN happen if the female breeds to more than one male while in heat) who is to say which puppies are half pit bull and which are not?
When you ban Pit Bulls you just open the door for another "tough looking" muscular breed to become the popular dog amongst the same people. They will abuse them, or train them to be aggressive, leave them unattended with children or let them run the neighborhood and then we will hear about all of the Rotweiler/Doberman/Cane Corso/Presa Canario/etc etc attacks in North Mpls or any other city
-
A mom 08/26/2010 9:43:00 PM
I'm sorry but when it comes to whether I value dogs or humans more, it's always humans. Pit bulls (and some other breeds) have been bred for aggression. There may be wonderful examples of how this has been trained out of them by responsible owners, but that fact remains. And there's NO WAY you can tell just by looking if a dog is properly trained or not. Not to mention the fact that kids in particular can be loud, jumpy, or just plain erratic, which tries even the most patient dog's nerves.
Out of an abundance of caution, I think there should be severe restrictions on where and how these breeds are owned and kept. If you're really, really into them and are a great owner, super. But you would need to prove it. Because living in daily fear of your neighbor's dog is NO WAY TO LIVE. That's just ridiculous.
-
caleb 08/26/2010 7:50:00 PM
i'd be curious to know how many attacks by other breeds happen each year. we never hear about those.
while i do agree with some of the points made, especially by many of the commenters, i do think that it's sensationalistic articles like this that have demonized the Bully Breeds.
my brother has an American Stafforshire Terrier, and she is the sweetest, most mild-mannered, friendly dog i've ever known. when people who don't know what breed she is meet her, they show nothing but love and affection toward her - but as soon as they find out that she's a "pitbull" they act as if she might hurt them. now i realize that she is well-behaved because she is well-cared for and socialized. And some other "pitbulls" aren't well-cared for or socialized and therefore need to be shown caution. I also realize that due to their physical makeup, if a "pitbull" attacks someone, the potential for serious injury is much higher than say, if a toy poodle attacked someone.
but instead of focusing an article on a specific breed, and a specific part of town - why not write an article about the problem of irresponsible dog owners in general? this article serves only to inflame negativity toward North Minneapolis.
-
Goog 08/26/2010 5:53:00 PM
Lets just blow up north minneapolis, seriously. According to this article, it's just a wasteland of vicious Killer dogs, drug dealers, and animal abusers.
-
Andrew 08/26/2010 5:43:00 PM
Great piece, Erin. I live in NE and it seems pit bulls are the dog of choice. Too often, we see our neighbors being dragged up and down the street by their dog, not the other way around. I think that has something to do with the owner of our property installing a chain-link fence. I can't imagine having to stand guard every time one of those dogs strolls by.
Thank you for bringing this story to the public's attention.
-
Laura 08/26/2010 7:50:00 AM
I am truly saddened by this article and how once again the Pit Bull breed has been labeled the “vicious dog”. It the writer wanted to write a story about dangerous dogs, go right ahead but they should NOT have smeared an entire breed based on the actions of a few due to bad owners. It makes me feel somewhat comforted that at the end of the article they address the subject of blaming the owner, but it distresses me greatly that the rest of the entire article was basically demonizing this wonderful breed. ANY breed of dog can be potentially “dangerous” and bite someone. I have a Pit Bull who is the sweetest dog and has never bit or tried to bite anyone or any dog. She was even attacked once when we were at the dog park by a miniature poodle and didn’t even snap at it in retaliation. It would have been nice for the writer to talk with some responsible Pit Bull owners and see what they and their neighbors had to say about the dogs. Sadly, that seemed to be not dramatic enough for this smear article. I would also like to say that I know Bernice Halberg and had the pleasure of meeting Hemi who was a very sweet dog. Both her and her fiancé were very loving and responsible dog owners. What the article neglects to emphasize enough is the fact that the dogs they took in were abused and that damage does not go away overnight. It takes a lot of patience and training for dogs to heal from those traumas but it can be done. This could have been a very informative article about the real harm neglectful and abusive owners cause to their dogs but instead you decided to take the easy route and pretty much claim Pit Bulls are vicious.
-
Shaun 08/26/2010 5:39:00 AM
What about this article was untrue? Pitbulls are primarily purchased by dog owners in North for the explicit purpose of intimidating others. Don't believe me? Then move here and live here like I do. I know of neighbors who keep them locked up in a garage for days on end (probably w/out food) as a form of violence training. I call about it and nothing happens. The author of the article clearly lays blame on the owners of these pets if you all happened to read to the end of the article. I'm surprised it took this long for an indepth look at this problem following the attack on Mr. Bloomquist.
-
dawn 08/26/2010 4:26:00 AM
This article saddens me deeply. These poor dogs are constantly taking the rap for irresponsible dog owners. If the dogs would have been border collies for example, the article would not have been so dramatic and gorey! It's always people that have never had any experience with or have never even met a Pit Bull that are the first to point fingers. I have owned a Pit Bull for 10 years and she has NEVER bitten anyone or another dog. Any dog can be trained to be mean.
If the writer had done their homework about PROVEN facts about Pit Bulls, they would know that Pit Bulls are NOT human aggressive. Thay have a tendency to be dog aggresive if not properly trained and watched, but they are no more aggressive towards humans than any other breed. I grew up with a little Terrier who hated the mailman with a passion. My Pit Bull has never so much as barked at the mailman.
Research your facts before dramatizing a story. If a minority hurt someone...are you as racist towards them as you have been towards Pit Bulls?!
Its unfortunate that this happened but the next time a dog bites someone in the metro and its NOT a Pit Bull, I would expect you to write a similar article villainizing the dog at fault.
And for as bad as this awful writer made it out to be, the mailman looks untouched in the recent photo in the article.
Your ignorance is so sad!
-
Rosalie 08/26/2010 4:18:00 AM
when I learned that Jen Wold of Gemini Rottweiler and Pitbull Rescue was being interviewed for this article, I was elated! Afterall, Jen has been working with this breed for 11 years and is extremely knowledgeable about them and what it takes to be a responsible pet owner. I would like to see the author, Erin Carlyle, write a counter story on the "Good Dogs of Minneapolis". Focus on the same breed Erin and write a positive story about all of the good things they have done. There are positive stories but of course they don't get the press. I'm disappointed in your article from the perspective that it is heavily one-sided, you didn't use the interview with Jen in it, and while you did focus on the roughest part of Minneapolis, you still could have talked about the good dogs in North. They are there..you just have to do your research and find them.
Let's see another more positive article Erin. You owe it to the breed.
-
Jennifer 08/26/2010 4:09:00 AM
All dogs require socialization, training, exercise,vaccinations, SPAYING AND NEUTERING, etc...all things that a responsible dog owner provides for their animal. The American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier,etc... all Bully Breeds, are wonderful dogs when in responsible homes with responsible owners. Whether you're a dog lover or not, none of us want irresponsible people owning any breed of dog. If you can't control your animal, whether it's a 10 pound mixed breed dog or 50 pound bully, then you shouldn't have one. It's the dogs that suffer because of the people.
-
David Foureyes 08/26/2010 2:48:00 AM
Adequately written article. Even-handed.
The fact remains: poorly trained dogs attack people. The article doesn't blame the breed, it gives the breed credit for being intelligent and not naturally harmful. But seriously people; stop defending bad owners and the weapons they breed. It's a lot easier to ban dogs than it is to ban stupid people.
It's too bad there isn't an easier solution than just killing dogs that bite children...but come on. Kill the dog, bar the owner from having dogs of any breed and move on. If someone swung open bear-traps around their heads while walking around your neighborhood, I'm pretty sure you'd want them to stop.
-
Jeanna 08/26/2010 12:47:00 AM
I have to say that I knew this article was going to be coming out, and I was very excited to read it. However, now that I have read it, I am deeply disappointed. The entire article is about "the dangerous pit bull". I would have liked to have read an article that was factual about the breed. It seems as though the writer isn't educated in this breed or this article would not exist. I have a pit bull, and she is truly the best dog. She loves kids, and snuggles with my kitten. Granted, I am a responsible owner and have done obedience training and also bring her to the park for socialization. These are key to owning any dog. I just cannot believe that the owners that were interviewed for this article were clearly irresponsible. Any responsible dog owner doesn't leave their front door open or let their dogs run the neighborhood. Those people shouldn't be allowed to care for any living being. These dogs are not scary. I want people to realize that. They are good family dogs. What the media is constantly putting in our faces is the negative side of this breed, which could very well be any breed.
-
Jen Wold 08/26/2010 12:09:00 AM
I run Gemini Rottweiler and Pitbull Rescue, and have done so for the last 11 years. I had been interviewed briefly for this article a couple of weeks ago, although no part of what I said made this story. I'm not sure why the story took this turn, but it is sad when the writer does not include people with another perspective to round out the article~ one that is factual as well as educational regarding Pitbulls. With all the bad publicity lately, it would have been refreshing to have an article show these dogs in a better light, one that is more true to the breed. I realize that this article focused mainly on the problem with dangerous dogs in this area of the city. However, if I was someone who knew nothing about the breed's true character, by reading this article , I would assume that Pitbulls are only owned by convicts and people with ill intentions and that they are all snarling , vicious killers. I can assure you they are not. A dog is only as good as his owner.
We , as rescuers and breed advocates , take every opportunity possible to educate the public. Not only about this breed, but about RESPONSIBLE ownership in general. We live our lives to ensure that all dogs are treated well and that owners are equipped with the knowledge of how important socialization, exercise and training are for EVERY dog. When we place a dog, we strive to place the right dog with the right family for it's needs. Of the nearly 1000 dogs we've adopted out, the vast majority live in homes with children. When a dog gets into trouble, 9 times out of 10 it is from failure on the owner's part.
-
Mungo 08/25/2010 10:39:00 PM
The solution to me would be to have the city kill any dog that bites someone, fine the owner, and jail the owner if it causes permanent injury. This guy's got a tattoo of a dog that ripped part of a kid's face off - after it had already bitten another child! He's supposed to be the good guy? We're not supposed to pay any attention to "the blood and gore of an incident" and instead pat the good dogs on the head? Tell that to the kids getting bit in the face. Fact is some dogs are dangerous because their owners are idiots and think they can train them by watching "the dog whisperer" and fiddling around on the internet. The rest of us shouldn't have to worry about our kids having their faces ripped half off because of these morons.
-
Shell 08/25/2010 9:31:00 PM
Yet another article about the bad pitbulls. Maybe next time, instead of starting off with the blood and gore of an incident, you could try taking the high road and focus more on the GOOD pitbulls or take a stand on the importance of the owners and how this was their fault.
Thanks for contributing to the problem, instead of the solution.
