I found this amazing and horrifying.

THE BLOODY paw prints were still in the snow, and a bunch of white gauze lay nearby.

The pinkish snow was packed down where two pit bulls had attacked a 10-year-old boy – severely injuring his right arm and puncturing his neck, left arm and back with their teeth shortly after 11 a.m. yesterday.

The child had been walking with two boys who had both dogs on leashes. The dogs – one brown and the other white with brown spots – began fighting each other, then turned on the 10-year-old, said Capt. Ben Naish, police spokesman.

It was the third vicious pit-bull attack in Philadelphia in three days.

On Friday, a victim’s wrist was nearly severed. On Saturday, a woman was mauled to death. And last night, doctors were trying to save a little boy’s arm. All three attacks involved dogs known to the victims.

Now, I’m fully expecting the response that you can’t blame the breed and that pit-bulls are some of the sweetest dogs, but… they scare the hell out of me.  There are simply far too many of these stories.  And it’s the severity of these attacks – and the fact that the dog involved had no previous history of violence, but rather just snapped – that most concerns me.  And when it comes to maiming and death certain breeds stand out.

According to the Clifton study, pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes are responsible for 74% of attacks that were included in the study, 68% of the attacks upon children, 82% of the attacks upon adults, 65% of the deaths, and 68% of the maimings. In more than two-thirds of the cases included in the study, the life-threatening or fatal attack was apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal in question. Clifton states:

If almost any other dog has a bad moment, someone may get bitten, but will not be maimed for life or killed, and the actuarial risk is accordingly reasonable. If a pit bull terrier or a Rottweiler has a bad moment, often someone is maimed or killed–and that has now created off-the-chart actuarial risk, for which the dogs as well as their victims are paying the price.

Clifton’s opinions are as interesting as his statistics. For example, he says, “Pit bulls and Rottweilers are accordingly dogs who not only must be handled with special precautions, but also must be regulated with special requirements appropriate to the risk they may pose to the public and other animals, if they are to be kept at all.”

The life-threatening or fatal attack was apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal in question.  Either someone is lying or this is a big problem.  Let me be clear.  ALL dogs bite.  But what we’re dealing with when it comes to certain breeds is an attack so vicious and relentless it resembles the behavior of a wild animal rather than a household pet.

Erb was unable to stop the dog from clamping down on her daughter’s throat, and the dog was still attacking Staab when medics arrived, police said.

The attack was stopped only after responding police officers shot the dog to death. After the shooting, a second pit bull charged the cops, prompting them to kill that animal too, police said.

Staab was pronounced dead at 7:24 a.m. in her mother’s home.

Wow, just wow.  But these sorts of stories involving pit-bulls have become almost expected.  Seriously, when we hear about attacks like this our first thought isn’t Golden Retriever.  And, no, I’m not advocating outlawing certain breeds.  That said, I really don’t want to be in the same room with those breeds – which is my problem/phobia, not yours.

And just to add some HCR politics into the mix… if domestic violence can be classified as a preexisting condition then how long before insurance companies charge more depending on what breed of dog you own?