Eight-year-old boy mauled to death by neighbour's pit bull in Bloemfontein

[Pitbull]

It is from the source. As supplied.

Right, so you do agree that some dogs can be identified as a "pitbull". I suppose that is a start.

Ofc you can... again, covered this in the previous thread.
My concerns are, all these "Pitbull" attacks being reported with no proof it was an actual pitbull. This one is an exception, well done!

 

[s0lar]

I'm one of those pro-freedom types, I don't like pitbulls or guns.

Then we are on the same page. Do you now see the argument is in your head?

Were you perhaps teased as a child? You act like it.

 

[Neptuner]

I agree aggressive dogs should be laid to rest, I never disputed that. I just said it had to be on a case to case basis, and people should still be free to own them if they should that they are able to.

Stop being an anti-freedom fascist.

Today you really shining as an A-class liberale troll hey. After all your freedom fronting you willing to slaughter what in my veiw is 90% of pitties in SA.

 

[Gyre]

Then we are on the same page. Do you now see the argument is in your head?

Were you perhaps teased as a child? You act like it.

We are not on the same page, I don't want to take things away from people just because I don't like them.

What makes you ask that? You feel like your teasing is being wasted?

 

[s0lar]

We are not on the same page, I don't want to take things away from people just because I don't like them.

What makes you ask that? You feel like your teasing is being wasted?

Who said anything about taking anything away? Please do quote my post.

You are deranged.

 

[Gyre]

Today you really shining as an A-class liberale troll hey. After all your freedom fronting you willing to slaughter what in my veiw is 90% of pitties in SA.

Luckily it's not up to you - try taking someone's pitbull, gun or alcohol and see how you're rewarded

 

[konfab]

Trespassing in a crime. The fact that my dog which is fully contained in the confines of my property gets a hold of said trespasser and kills him. Doesn't make the dog or me guilty of anything. You tried this stupid argument in the other thread too and failed... Rinse and repeat.

The mere act of trespassing don't give you the right to be negligent with your animals in such a way that allows them to kill someone

This is what the law states you would have to do to defend yourself if your pibbles killed or injured someone.

A defendant in an actio de pauperie can raise various defences in order to avoid liability. A defendant to this action can firstly raise a defence in terms of which he or she alleges that the animal that caused the harm was provoked by the culpable conduct of the party who suffered the damages, a third party, or by the conduct of another animal. The person raising such a defence will bear the onus of proving the same.

The defendant can also try to escape liability by alleging and proving that a third party in charge of the domesticated animal negligently failed to prevent the animal from injuring the plaintiff. For example, a person whose dog injures another person whilst in the care of a dog sitter who fell asleep in the park could raise this defence in circumstances where, for example, the dog sitter took the dog for a walk and took the dog off its leash. The dog sitter in these circumstances could have and should have kept the dog on its leash, which would have prevented the injury. A plaintiff in such circumstances might not succeed with a claim against the owner of the dog and will need to institute a claim against the third party – the dog sitter in this case.

A defendant can thirdly defend the action by alleging and proving that the plaintiff was unlawfully present at the premises where the injury was inflicted by the domesticated animal. It is important to note in this regard that the plaintiff must not only have had a lawful purpose to be on the premises, but that they must have had a legal right to be present on the premises. Amler’s Precedents of Pleadings state that only someone with an invitation or permission, whether implied or express, will have a legal right to be present on a premises.


The last defence that falls within the scope of this article is the volenti non fit iniuria. The defendant must allege and prove in terms of this defence that the plaintiff knew of the risk of sustaining an injury from the animal and that the plaintiff voluntarily accepted such risk.

https://www.mblh.co.za/OurInsights/ArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=4748

In case law, a bunch of criminals went and damaged the property's gate, said pibbles then did their thing and tore the arm an innocent person. Said person won R2.4 million from the dog owner.
https://businesstech.co.za/news/pro...l-south-african-dog-owners-should-know-about/

 

[Gyre]

Who said anything about taking anything away? Please do quote my post.

Touche, I misinterpreted your "gun rights redneck types", my apologies.

 

[s0lar]

Touche, I misinterpreted your "gun rights redneck types", my apologies.

You still have serious issues. Making a bit of an arse of yourself here.

 

[Gyre]

The mere act of trespassing don't give you the right to be negligent with your animals in such a way that allows them to kill someone

This is what the law states you would have to do to defend yourself if your pibbles killed or injured someone.

https://www.mblh.co.za/OurInsights/ArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=4748

In case law, a bunch of criminals went and damaged the property's gate, said pibbles then did their thing and tore the arm an innocent person. Said person won R2.4 million from the dog owner.
https://businesstech.co.za/news/pro...l-south-african-dog-owners-should-know-about/

Would that not be like criminals breaking into a car, releasing the handbrake, the car rolling down the hill and hitting an innocent person?

I ask because it seems like the owner did what he could to keep the dog away from the public and the dog was also under distress after people broke in? Was it perhaps not his attitude after the fact that affected the case?

 

[Neptuner]

Luckily it's not up to you - try taking someone's pitbull, gun or alcohol and see how you're rewarded

Stop trolling everyone on this thread, isn't there a pride parade you need to prepare for?

 

[Gyre]

You still have serious issues. Making a bit of an arse of yourself here.

I've refrained from reporting people, so if you're done with your points, I suggest we both go on our way.

 

[Gyre]

Stop trolling everyone on this thread, isn't there a pride parade you need to prepare for?

Completely irrelevant to the thread and the topic. Have fun seething at people enjoying their freedoms to own any dogs they want

 

[Pitbull]

The mere act of trespassing don't give you the right to be negligent with your animals in such a way that allows them to kill someone

This is what the law states you would have to do to defend yourself if your pibbles killed or injured someone.

https://www.mblh.co.za/OurInsights/ArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=4748

In case law, a bunch of criminals went and damaged the property's gate, said pibbles then did their thing and tore the arm an innocent person. Said person won R2.4 million from the dog owner.
https://businesstech.co.za/news/pro...l-south-african-dog-owners-should-know-about/

You said it in your own example above ...
So dogs got out after obviously failing to gain entry, and the dogs were not contained on the property after the fact. Absolutely nothing from my example above
but hey " google: Pitbull bites person, claim paid /win" I don't have hands big enough for this facepalm.

I can't even. How does this compare to my example above? You jump my wall/fence and get mauled to death. How does this example disprove that? Actually, your intentions are clear now. You will try your utmost best and twist any argument on this into something someone will miss. Not playing your silly little game. I'll let you have a discussion with those dumb enough to do so.

Have a great evening.

 

[s0lar]

I've refrained from reporting people, so if you're done with your points, I suggest we both go on our way.

Sounds like a threat when you were the one to single me out.

 

[Neptuner]

Completely irrelevant to the thread and the topic. Have fun seething at people enjoying their freedoms to own any dogs they want

and respectfully so and not at the expense of an innocent 8yr old getting ripped to shreds.

 

[Gyre]

Sounds like a threat when you were the one to single me out.

You responded to me first, while I was addressing somebody else.

 

[Gyre]

and respectfully so and not at the expense of an innocent 8yr old getting ripped to shreds.

At the expense of a negligent human who raised the dog poorly and didn't secure their yard. The dog didn't place itself in that situation or that home.

I have dogs and I have children, I wouldn't want anything bad to happen to any of them.

 

[s0lar]

You responded to me first, while I was addressing somebody else.

You should be able to know who you are replying too. Thats a really lame excuse.

 

[Gyre]

You should be able to know who you are replying too. Thats a really lame excuse.

Good day.