Dog growled at the conductor!

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jan 15, 2012
Messages
4,296
Location
CWT
Got a chuckle out of this. A friend posted this on Facebook this afternoon from the eastbound California Zephyr in Colorado...

"Now 1.5 hours late. We had been making up time but local PD called to help remove a man and his so called service dog. The dog was a pit dog and growled at the conductor."
 
The term "pit dog" provided an instant mental image of a dog conducting an orchestra. :)
 
Oi --

The dog would have been wise to never ever mess with the train commander.

We all know that. A competent service dog should know that also.

"Don't ever mess with the funny hat"

Any dog should understand. Sorry that the dog's owner so clueless - and wasted a few hundred people's time.

There's a few riders that I would not help if the train crashes. Naah- I might help, but damn the sociopaths anyhow.
 
If a "service dog" is aggressive towards anyone, any business can legally eject that animal and the owner. The basic premise is that service dogs must be trained well enough that it's not an issue.

I was reading that the ADA doesn't require that a service dog providing emotional support be allowed into any accomodation or service. It has to be for a physical ailment.
 
Maybe the pit bull can direct him to the local jail to spend the night since most hotels don't take fighting dogs! Sounds like a Conductor that was In Charge of his Train!
most of these dogs aren't "fighting dogs" they are just beloved pets.
 
This sort of thing happens all too often. I am aware of situations involving barking, biting of employees, scratching of a baby, and uncontrolled "bathroom" activities. The law, as explained to employees, is that the passenger must be taken at his/her word when the animal is represented to be a service animal. On the other hand, REAL service animals are an absolute pleasure to work with.
 
Maybe the pit bull can direct him to the local jail to spend the night since most hotels don't take fighting dogs! Sounds like a Conductor that was In Charge of his Train!
most of these dogs aren't "fighting dogs" they are just beloved pets.
Thanks amamba, I know people have them for pets but originally they were bred and trained for dog fights that were held in pits! You still hear about raids on dog (and cocks) fights in the South, unfortunately its a big business with lots of idiots betting on them!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pit Bulls are awesome dogs. My best friend has one. She is so playful, friendly, and sweet. My only problem with her is when I go to his house, I get a doggy bath.

You can train them to be aggressive as all get out. And Reebok is aggressive- aggressively friendly. 60 lbs of rapidly launched pit bull knocks over my 375lb frame. But as I said, it's in friendship, not anger.

That being said, the kind of jerk who would take a pit bull onto a train (they as a rule do not like strangers not introduced to them by their masters) is the kind who wouldn't train them right anyway. Since a pit doesn't like strangers, them being in a crowd of them (as on a train) will make them very nervous and stressed.

I could see them growling at the conductor, if the conductor had negative vibes towards its master (not implying bad behavior by the conductor, by the way) it might growl. Pits are large and insanely strong. Them being nervous and stressed on a train is a recipe for problems. I commend the conductors choice, but defend the breed.
 
Maybe the pit bull can direct him to the local jail to spend the night since most hotels don't take fighting dogs! Sounds like a Conductor that was In Charge of his Train!
most of these dogs aren't "fighting dogs" they are just beloved pets.
Beloved by the owners and feared by others. If you live in the middle of nowhere then fine enjoy your pit bull attack pet. If you live near or travel with strangers then it is time to give it up. Hundreds of incidents all over the world have proven that attack pets are beyond the ability of attack pet owners to control. I am sick and tired of reading the same weak and spineless apologizing from attack pet owners and sympathizers. Enough is enough.

Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/14/pit-bull-attack-girl-kfc_n_5495190.html

Victoria lost her right eye in the [pit bull] attack and sustained a broken upper and lower jaw, a broken nose, and smashed cheekbones. She also lost the ability to move the right side of her face. "The right side of her face is paralyzed. She's got a lot of surgeries to go through and she won't even look in the mirror anymore," Victoria's grandmother, Kelly Mullins, told local news outlet 16 WAPT News. "When we go to a store, she doesn't even want to get out [of the car]. She's 3 years old and she's embarrassed about what she looks like. She's embarrassed and I hate it because she shouldn't be. It ain't her fault."
^ If you think you can look children like Victoria in the face and tell them how it's just a love bite from cherished family pet that went horribly wrong in way nobody could have ever predicted then be my guest. As for me I'm done pretending there are two equally relevant sides to this ridiculous debate. Owning an attack pet is a major responsibility that few owners are able or willing to honor. As such it's time to crack down on this loophole to completely preventable violence.
 
Maybe the pit bull can direct him to the local jail to spend the night since most hotels don't take fighting dogs! Sounds like a Conductor that was In Charge of his Train!
most of these dogs aren't "fighting dogs" they are just beloved pets.
Beloved by the owners and feared by others. If you live in the middle of nowhere then fine enjoy your pit bull attack pet. If you live near or travel with strangers then it is time to give it up. Hundreds of incidents all over the world have proven that attack pets are beyond the ability of attack pet owners to control. I am sick and tired of reading the same weak and spineless apologizing from attack pet owners and sympathizers. Enough is enough.Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/14/pit-bull-attack-girl-kfc_n_5495190.html
Victoria lost her right eye in the [pit bull] attack and sustained a broken upper and lower jaw, a broken nose, and smashed cheekbones. She also lost the ability to move the right side of her face. "The right side of her face is paralyzed. She's got a lot of surgeries to go through and she won't even look in the mirror anymore," Victoria's grandmother, Kelly Mullins, told local news outlet 16 WAPT News. "When we go to a store, she doesn't even want to get out [of the car]. She's 3 years old and she's embarrassed about what she looks like. She's embarrassed and I hate it because she shouldn't be. It ain't her fault."
^ If you think you can look children like Victoria in the face and tell them how it's just a love bite from cherished family pet that went horribly wrong in way nobody could have ever predicted then be my guest. As for me I'm done pretending there are two equally relevant sides to this ridiculous debate. Owning an attack pet is a major responsibility that few owners are able or willing to honor. As such it's time to crack down on this loophole to completely preventable violence.
THIS
 
Why do we hear the same tired, hackneyed rhetoric from both pit bull and gun proponents? Both guns and pit bills are extraordinarily dangerous in the wrong hands, both should be highly regulated, neither belong on trains.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Beloved by the owners and feared by others. If you live in the middle of nowhere then fine enjoy your pit bull attack pet. If you live near or travel with strangers then it is time to give it up. Hundreds of incidents all over the world have proven that attack pets are beyond the ability of attack pet owners to control. I am sick and tired of reading the same weak and spineless apologizing from attack pet owners and sympathizers. Enough is enough.
Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/14/pit-bull-attack-girl-kfc_n_5495190.html

Victoria lost her right eye in the [pit bull] attack and sustained a broken upper and lower jaw, a broken nose, and smashed cheekbones. She also lost the ability to move the right side of her face. "The right side of her face is paralyzed. She's got a lot of surgeries to go through and she won't even look in the mirror anymore," Victoria's grandmother, Kelly Mullins, told local news outlet 16 WAPT News. "When we go to a store, she doesn't even want to get out [of the car]. She's 3 years old and she's embarrassed about what she looks like. She's embarrassed and I hate it because she shouldn't be. It ain't her fault."
^ If you think you can look children like Victoria in the face and tell them how it's just a love bite from cherished family pet that went horribly wrong in way nobody could have ever predicted then be my guest. As for me I'm done pretending there are two equally relevant sides to this ridiculous debate. Owning an attack pet is a major responsibility that few owners are able or willing to honor. As such it's time to crack down on this loophole to completely preventable violence.
Is that the girl that got kicked out of KFC cause the other custormers complained about the way she looked?
 
Pit bulls are NOT attack dogs, period, any more than any other terrier, such as a West Highland White Terrier, a Scottish Terrier, or a Stafford Terrier, the breed from which the Pit must directly derives.

Any reasonably intelligent dog of size can be a vicious attack dog- German Shepard, Labrador Retrievers, and especially Full size Poodles. If that's how you train it and raise it, it will attack, and fight to the death, anyone that either you direct it to, or who attacks you.

A pit is a very strong dog and reasonably large and heavy. If trained to, or if it's master is in grave danger, it is a very effective fighter. But that does not reflect upon the personality of the dog. Pits are FRIENDLY.

And to further argue along a different line, personalities dog to dog (any dog) vary far more than personalities breed to breed.

To single out specific breeds as unsuitable for pets is one thing. To do so without knowing much about the dog is entirely different. Pits were indeed designed to fight other dogs- a distinct flaw in their personalities because they are indeed vicious killers of other dogs. But they were also designed to be easy for their masters to handle- and generally pits are more submissive to humans than a wide variety of other breeds.

Far too many good pits get destroyed- killed- because of ignoramuses like you, DA. Far to many really nasty, awful dogs get saved simply because they are small and cute because of the same ignorance. Far too many dogs go through life with nasty balance problems because people think docking their tails is cute. Far too many go through life hacking and wheezing, unable to breath properly because people think pug noses are cute.

Frankly most dog owners shouldn't own a dog. They don't know how to care for them. They don't know how to train them. They don't even know how to feed them- god knows why a basically carnivorous creature is largely fed corn. They rarely know how to control them.

But it's usually not the dogs fault. It's the imbecile that owns them. Pits, in the hand of the right owner (not the jackasses who own them because of their reputation, and tend to turn out abused animals who live up to said reputation) are a wonderful dog. One of the better companion dogs, and a good dog for people with kids especially.

Articles that talk about vicious pits usually also talk about their equally vicious owners. Find an article about vicious pits that come from loving families. And then, when you find their aren't any, start blaming the guilty- the owner.
 
Yes, I think so. (Edit: Posts crossed, re KFC incident.)

Re the pit bulls-- I'm an animal lover, and it makes me sad when gentle dogs are grouped with vicious (almost always only because people have taught them to be) dogs. I know pit bulls can be gentle pets. From what I've read, though, it's just that they are so strong and such good fighters that when one does go bad (or thinks it's just protecting its owner), it can be very, very bad and gets lots of publicity. I don't know the solution to this people-caused problem. I'm not sure I'd go so far as to try to ban the breed, which some places are doing. But you can't really blame those who are a little wary of the breed's reputation, earned or not. If I saw one approach my yard, I'd be taking my little dog-child inside in a big hurry, just to be on the safe side. (Even dog lover me.) I would not, however, try to hurt it. If it were a lab, I'd probably not be concerned unless it actually showed aggression. Sad situation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why do we hear the same tired, hackneyed rhetoric from both pit bull and gun proponents? Both guns and pit bills are extraordinarily dangerous in the wrong hands, both should be highly regulated, neither belong on trains.
Vicious dog = gun is a completely erroneous and uncalled for connection. The gun does nothing of its own volition. It is simply a piece of metal and wood or plastic. So far as I know there is no Constitutional issues involved with dog ownership, either.
 
I'm on the fence. I've heard pro and con about whether pit bulls are naturally nasty, or if it's just a matter of training. But in terms of what we're talking bout here, the breed doesn't really matter. If the dog (or other animal) is represented to Amtrak as a "service animal", then Amtrak has the right to expect the animal to be trained so that it can perform as a service animal performs. That means it does not show aggression of any kind, even if provoked. That means it can "hold it" and not soil the carpet. One shortcoming of the A.D.A. law is that Amtrak is required to take the owner at his word, and that word is not necessarily reliable. Then, when the animal displays problematic behavior, Amtrak has to deal with the consequences. As I said above, I have always enjoyed having true service dogs aboard the train. Some of them have been among my favorite passengers!

For what it's worth, I don't think a pit bull was ever involved in any of the problem events I mentioned above. Other breeds, yes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why do we hear the same tired, hackneyed rhetoric from both pit bull and gun proponents? Both guns and pit bills are extraordinarily dangerous in the wrong hands, both should be highly regulated, neither belong on trains.
Vicious dog = gun is a completely erroneous and uncalled for connection. The gun does nothing of its own volition. It is simply a piece of metal and wood or plastic. So far as I know there is no Constitutional issues involved with dog ownership, either.
Guns and pets do have laws that control where they can be taken/ used and they've been held to be Constitutional in most cases George!
The problem, as many have said, is keeping both away from lunatics,fanatics and the I just don't care types! Dogs (except for legitimate service animals) and Guns don't belong on Trains period! YMMV but your rights stop where others begin!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why do we hear the same tired, hackneyed rhetoric from both pit bull and gun proponents? Both guns and pit bills are extraordinarily dangerous in the wrong hands, both should be highly regulated, neither belong on trains.
Vicious dog = gun is a completely erroneous and uncalled for connection. The gun does nothing of its own volition. It is simply a piece of metal and wood or plastic. So far as I know there is no Constitutional issues involved with dog ownership, either.
I would submit that a normal dog doesn't fight and attack of its own volition, either. It takes a special kind of depraved person to train a dog to fight, just as it takes a depraved person to misuse a gun. Unfortunately both are all too common.
 
Why do we hear the same tired, hackneyed rhetoric from both pit bull and gun proponents? Both guns and pit bills are extraordinarily dangerous in the wrong hands, both should be highly regulated, neither belong on trains.
Vicious dog = gun is a completely erroneous and uncalled for connection. The gun does nothing of its own volition. It is simply a piece of metal and wood or plastic. So far as I know there is no Constitutional issues involved with dog ownership, either.
George, I thought the same thing, although I certainly agree with the highlighted part of FFL's statement. However, I have many AU friends, some of whom I suspect may not be gun rights proponents, so I was going to keep my thought to myself for the sake of smooth feathers and staying OT. But you're one of those AU friends, too, so I'm going to have to agree, and cringe. I don't know what guns have to do with dogs or growling at the conductor. (Not that Annie plans to wear six-shooters, a gun belt, and chaps on any train trips. LOL)

I am constantly surprised at how frequently train threads become political podiums.
 
While I wasn't there to see it happen, I understand that the dog that scratched the little kid wasn't particularly big or hostile. It was in unfamiliar territory, with constant unfamiliar motion. The kid walked past in the coach, and I think the dog just saw the kid as something strange and unexpected. True service dogs are trained to accept strange circumstances without reacting in this way. Most pets aren't. That doesn't mean most pet owners are irresponsible. It just means service dogs are very, very special, and that's why they are permitted on the trains and ordinary pets are not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top