Knuckles/BSL case?

Crossposting...not familiar w/the story, has anyone heard about this yet?

"Thanks to a last minute stay of destruction filed in the Solano County
Superior Court on Thursday (April 20th), Knuckles has a temporary
repreive from the death sentenced handed her by the Suisun City Police
(California). A new hearing for Knuckles has been requested and should
be on the court calendar in two weeks. That leaves only two weeks to
help spread the word about this much-loved Pitty the Suisum City
Police want to kill. Please send the below URL far and wide, and as
soon as possible. And please be sure to sign Knuckles' petition
(there's a link to it on the below website) Thanks!!!"

http://www.howl911.com/html/knuckles/save_knuckles.htm

 

Suisun is ten minutes from where I live! I read the link and will do what I can...
Already emailed the owner of Knuckles...

 

wowzors......

 

What were the "unfortunate circumstances" behind the case? Did she bite someone? Chase someone? One cannot withhold information in order to bring people to their side IMO.

 

Have you been to the website? I'm the one who created it on behalf of Tiffany and Knuckles and NO information has been withheld--it's all there on the website for anyone who bothers to take the time to read it.

SAVE KNUCKLES website:
http://www.howl911.com/html/knuckles/save_knuckles.htm

Case Background:
http://www.howl911.com/html/knuckles/save_knuckles_bg.htm

Petition for Stay of Destruction:
http://www.howl911.com/html/knuckles/petition.pdf

 

Yes. Sorry to say that since my last post, I have read up on what happened. I read that on numerous occasions this person's dog was allowed to run loose (escape or not, that is ENTIRELY PREVENTABLE....NO excuses!) & chase people/run up to people.

In my opinion that woman/owner should NEVER get her APBT back much less any other dog. Should the dog be destroyed? Who's to say that the dog was really just wanting to play as the owner insists? Of course, as an APBT owner, I really & truly want to believe that, but since the only witnesses are the ones the dog approached at a full charge, who knows what was on the dog's mind. Maybe the dog should be relocated, temperamanet tested, & put up for adoption through a reputable pit bull rescue, but under NO circumstances should the owner get this dog back.

It's "innocent" pit bull owners like this who refuse to accept they were irresponsible by not properly confining their pet who are a large part of the cause why BSL has ben instated all across the country. I, as a responsible APBT owner, cannot side with someone whose dog "accidentally" escaped time after time after time to run loose chasing people. I don't allow my dogs to do that nor will I defend those who do.

 

Ok, accidents do occasionally happen.

But who is to honestly believe that? For one, my dogs don't chase people & if I were being chased by a dog, the last thing on my mind would be that it was innocently wanting to play. Since the people being rushed at & chased didn't "understand" the dog's personality, are we to dismiss their feelings of fear?

So after having her dog run loose chasing people down, she refused to comply with the laws required in order for her to safely keep her dog. No excuses for that one. I cannot defend someone who refuses to do something b/c they say they "can't". If she cannot get proper liablity home owner's insurance for her dog, then she doesn't need the dog. Again, if you cannot properly take care of your animal, then you shouldn't have one. State Farm provides us with homeowner's insurance knowing what breed of dog we own, & were more than happy to provide us with a $100,000 policy....all for an extra $21 a year more than that of the basic liability policy.

 

"Accident" number 2.

If someone's 120lb German Shepherd was charging you, you could honestly say you'd stand there & be ready to play?

Minor though it might be, she AGAIN violated the court's conditions on which she could safely keep her dog, thereby knowingly put herself & her dog in this position. I cannot stand behind people who aren't responsible & do not feel they have to follow the rules.

Like I said earlier, I suggest relocating the dog (like another state) into a reputable pit bull rescue where she can be fostered & temperament tested before possibly being put up for adoption. But for her owner's selfish acts of not following the rules b/c she "accidentally forgot", she shouldn't be allowed to own another dog for quite some time....& NEVER again own a pit bull. JMO.

PS--I'm trying to help save the breed & protect responsible owners with great dogs. I cannot possibly put my own dogs lives on the line to help defend yet another irrepsonsible owner, who solely put her dog in this position.

 

I'm really sorry that you are so overly judgemental about a woman you do not know and a situation you have hideously twisted. Your first post started out with a complete and utter lie about this case:

"I read that on numerous occasions this person's dog was allowed to run loose "

WHERE DID YOU READ THIS? Certainly not from the SAVE KNUCKLES website, because you will not find this misinformation there. In the four years Tiffany has had Knuckles, Knuckles has escaped ONE TIME while in her care. The second time Knuckles was not in her care...but regardless, this does not amount to "numerous occasions." Please tell me and the other viewers of this forum where you "read" this information, as I for one would like to know.

Considering the vicious tone and baseless accusations of your first post, I didn't even bother to read the rest of your remarks. Bottom line, I and many others are trying to help Knuckles, as she is the victim in this situation. She has never harmed anyone or anything and does not deserve to die for her two acts of escape or for the crime of being a pit bull. Fortunately, the vast majority of people have the good common sense to see this as well as the kind-heartedness to help. You are definitely in the minority and I suspect there is nothing I or anyone else could say or do would change your cynicism.

 

Did you read my reasons? I blatantly copied what was written off your site about her case, & stated why I object to her getting her dog back. She knowingly & outright refused to follow the rules/limitations set upon her by the court after the first accident. You even state the dog dog wasn't in her care the second time it got loose. Well, according to the limitations set upon her, she relocated the dog without notifying the proper authorities & then shirked her responsibilities of being this dog's owner.

Again, if you bother to actually read my specific comments to certain aspects of this case, you will understand why I cannot stand behind an innocent owner who blatantly disregarded the laws on several occasions. Good day.

EDITED: Wanted to add, N......., that I am NOT against giving the dog a chance to be placed in a reputable pit bull adoption program to be fostered & temperament tested & then placed for adoption, but I AM against giving the dog back to the irresponsible owner who now wants other people to clean up after her.

 

Great posts, Miakoda. I agree with everything you said.

 

The petition:



MIKE ROWE SUISUN CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS ORDERED MY DOG TO BE EUTHANIZED. OFFICER HAS NO PETS OF HIS OWN, IS NOT A K-9 OFFICER AND DIDN'T EVEN ALLOW A PROFESSIONAL TO EVALUATE HER. SHE CHASED THE NEIGHBOR NEVER HAS BIT ANYBODY. OFFICER HAS DEMANDED A DEATH OF A PIT BULL TO HIM, BUT A MEMBER OF MY FAMILY TO ME.

IMO, I don't think a dog should be pts because it chased someone. Sure, find it another home, but since it has no prior history of being deemed "dangerous", other than "looking threatening", it should have to pay for its owners irresponsibliity with it's life??????