New Mexico woman killed in attack by 4 dogs
5 replies
Topdawg13New MemberOP
Officer James Harrington found four pit bulls mauling Margaret Salcedo, 48, when he arrived in response to a 911 call from a neighbor who heard her screams for help, Police Chief Patrick Gallagher said Tuesday.
A young man driving by told police he tried to get out of his vehicle but the dogs threatened him and he stayed put, Gallagher said.
Harrington couldn't drive the animals off, and had to fire several shots at one of the dogs when it threatened him, the chief said. That animal fled, wounded, and Harrington was able to scatter the remaining dogs.
Harrington and emergency technicians gave first aid to Salcedo, but she died at Sierra Vista Hospital several hours after the attack in the central New Mexico community of about 7,500 people, Gallagher said.
"The wounds were very severe, bite wounds and tearing wounds to her extremities, so there was a lot of blood loss," Gallagher said.
The chief said he did not know Salcedo, but officers were told she does not own a car and walks where she needs to go. She has two grown children, he said.
The dogs' owners were not home when the attack occurred. The yard is fenced, but officers found several areas where the animals could have gotten out and into the neighborhood of single-family homes and mobile homes, Gallagher said.
The surviving dogs were taken to the Sierra Animal Shelter, where they are quarantined pending the end of the investigation, Gallagher said.
He said he expects the dogs will be euthanized once the investigation ends.
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
--Edmund Burke
Ohio FanaticsubscriberI hate bad dog owners. It's amazing that so many people aren't fit to be dog owners, let alone be parents.
and even though I've met some really well-trained pit-bulls that were friendly, IMO, it's a breed that should be banned. It hurts the good dog trainers, but for some reason the white trash loves to own pit bulls and it's not worth the risk.
testing
texanphinaticforum_veteranI don't really support banning them. The breed itself is fine - I know several pitt owners who never had a problem. The problem is solely with crappy owners, and if they can't get pitts, they will go for pinschers, dobies, sheps, or some other breed.
Besides, what do do with part pitts? Ban them or not? And then what about the breed that will replace them? To slippery of a slope imo.
And like guns and drugs, would banning actual curtail their prevalence among people who shouldn't have them?
Ohio Fanaticsubscriber"texanphinatic wrote:
I don't really support banning them. The breed itself is fine - I know several pitt owners who never had a problem. The problem is solely with crappy owners, and if they can't get pitts, they will go for pinschers, dobies, sheps, or some other breed.
Besides, what do do with part pitts? Ban them or not? And then what about the breed that will replace them? To slippery of a slope imo.
And like guns and drugs, would banning actual curtail their prevalence among people who shouldn't have them?
The "part pitts" is a relevant point. and it is a slippery slope. but IMO, there's a difference between the breeds, while they can all be dangerous with a crappy owner who doesn't train them correctly, there's a difference between a dog breed that was bred for fighting and killing and a dog breed that was bred for intense guard duty.
It's all about odds. I hear far less mauling stories with pinschers, dobies and sheps than I do pit bulls
testing
Fin Dforum_veteran"Ohio Fanatic wrote:
The "part pitts" is a relevant point. and it is a slippery slope. but IMO, there's a difference between the breeds, while they can all be dangerous with a crappy owner who doesn't train them correctly, there's a difference between a dog breed that was bred for fighting and killing and a dog breed that was bred for intense guard duty.
It's all about odds. I hear far less mauling stories with pinschers, dobies and sheps than I do pit bulls
There isn't a difference really. And to be honest, you hear more about pit bulls more for a number of reasons that have nothing to do with the genetics of the breed. Pit bulls are status symbols in lower income areas and cultures that fight dogs. The status comes from their rep as fighting dogs and that in turn makes them targets for that kind of lifestyle, which then leads to them being news which furthers their rep and hence the vicious cycle continues.
Dogs are individuals, its one the reasons we love them so much and pit bulls are no different. I guarantee there are more non dangerous pit bulls then there are dangerous ones, and by a very large margin.
The_Dark_Knightforum_veteranI'm torn on the issue of pit bulls. I know some people who have pit bulls tht are good loving owners and take care of their dogs, training them not to be viscious and always have positive control over them, but then again...
Pit bulls were bred for one thing and one thing only...dog fighting. They are viscious by breed. It's in their genes. I mean, there are some who own exotic animals such as lions and tigers and are good and loving to them, but you still think it's stupid and dangerous for them to have those animals. Why would owning a pit bull, who by its nature is just as unpredictable as that owner of a lion or tiger?
I don't know. One of my nephews owns a pit bull. Good dog overall even though he's monster and plays a little too rough for my taste. I just worry about the dog snapping one day and mauling his baby boy.
“The person you will spend the most time with in your life is yourself, so you better make sure you’re someone interesting”
Log in to reply.