A South Carolina mom who had both her arms amputated after being savagely mauled by three pit bulls has received the devastating news that she won’t be able to get prosthetic limbs due to the severity of her wounds.

Kyleen Waltman, 39, was critically injured when she was attacked by the dogs on a sidewalk in Honea Path northwest of Columbia on March 21.

“We thought her right shoulder was going to be good and they were able to fit it with a prosthetic, well yesterday they found an infection in the bone and had to remove more of the bone,” Amy wrote.

“So now she will not be able to have regular prosthetics on either shoulder,” she wrote.

She said her family would be going to court Thursday for the appearance of the dogs’ owner, Justin Minor, who faces three misdemeanor charges of owning a dangerous animal that attacked and injured a human, rabies control violation and dangerous animal not permitted beyond premises unless restrained.

“It could’ve been prevented,” Wynne has said. “If the dogs were locked up or if the dogs were chained up, or if they were never there to begin with, this would’ve never happened.”

A shoulder level amputation is one of the most traumatic surgeries a person can undergo.

This woman had bilateral shoulder level amputations.

She’s 38 years old and a mother of three, and now will spend the rest of her life without arms.

Imagine being the mother if three children and never being able to help them get dressed or brush their teeth or cook them a meal or hug them ever again.

I think I’d rather let sepsis set in and take me.

According to previous news reports:

Kyleen Waltman, 38-year-old mother of three, was attacked by the dogs about 10:30 a.m. Monday in Honea Path, her sister, Sheena Green, told WYFF News 4.

“This is the most horrific thing I’ve ever seen,” Kyleen’s sister Amy Wynne said.

She said a man found Waltman in a ditch still being attacked.

Green said the man had to go get a gun and shoot it in the air to get the dogs off of Waltman.

The owner in this case is a piece of shit, but a $5,000 fine and 36 months in jail wasn’t enough of a deterrent to keep him from owning these dogs.

I keep saying it, I see a pit bull off its lead, I’m not going to shoot a gun into the air and scare it off.  I’m going to put a bullet right through its center of mass and finish it off.

Spread the love

By J. Kb

20 thoughts on “If I see a loose pit bull I’m going to shoot it”
  1. Shocking, but not surprising.

    A lot of this because laws about loose dogs are pretty weak. There is very little that can be done until after an attack happens. I looked into it because my neighbor has a couple of pit bulls that are loose, and I have two young <10 kids. Its basically a small fine if they are caught by police off property, and they are allowed to be off leash on the property, at least in my state. So its not worth it for the cops to do anything. I now have to carry religiously anytime I go outside. And I will be quick to defend if I need too.

    The law should be (at least for big dogs) they must be leashed or contained by walls at all times, and any evidence (pictures/videos/eye witnesses) should be allowed to note when its not happening, and more than 3 violations is immediately seizure.

    Yes that is harsh, but look at this lady. She had no arms, and likely soon to have no colon or esophagus! Just because some asshole didn't keep his dogs locked up.

  2. They can sue in civil court … but unless the owner is very wealthy or has very good insurance, I don’t expect they’ll recover anything close to what would be a “reasonable” amount.
    Not that there is, really, a “reasonable” amount in this case that could compensate for the damage done, no matter how much they are awarded in terms of damages.

  3. Only one way to set things right. Go full Kaiser Sose on the dog owner and the complete family. Leave everything skeletons and ashes.

  4. Thats been my moto for 15plus years. I have read to many stories about these dogs, NONE Good unless it’s a Piece defending them.

    My kids hate me for it when i say it. Oh well.

    I’ve heard all the BS about
    … ..this one is different, its how they are raised etc etc etc.

    I’ve told them time and time again, Those Dogs are different than others. When they go, they Deflagrate like a Nuke.

    I think i’ll forward this to them.

  5. I had a pair of pits charge me one evening. I was very, very lucky because they started “play bowing” and acting friendly. I still backed away slowly, and as soon as something distracted them, I departed the area. The owner’s fence had blown down, allowing them to get out. As I said, I was very, very fortunate. I highly doubt that I’ll get that lucky a second time, so I go fully prepared now.

  6. If you start popping off shots a random animals without any evidence they posed a threat, you have no one but yourself to blame when you get gunned down like the dangerous, armed lunatic everyone in the line of fire justifiably believes you to be.

    1. When I was a kid in rural Oklahoma, we had a bad problem with feral dogs. City folk would drive out in the country and kick their dog out of the car. These dogs would usually starve, but sometimes they formed packs that would kill calves and calving cows. We all knew everybody’s dogs on everybody’s farm in the area, and work dogs don’t wander very far from their ranch, so any time we saw a dog we didn’t recognize out in a pasture, we’d shoot it. Since I grew up that way, I didn’t think anything about it, but one time in college, I made the mistake of telling this story in front of a classmate who was a PETA type. She thought I was a monster. The fact that PETA has executed millions more dogs than I ever did didn’t seem to make a difference.

      1. Feral dogs are a clear and obvious danger to every person and animal around them.
        Shooting someone else’s pet for no reason other than because you don’t like the breed is something else entirely.

  7. Make owners criminally liable, as if they’d done the attacks deliberately, and prosecute them accordingly, and this would end.

    The policies for stray pits should be “shoot on sight” as well. I don’t care who loves them, or how gentle some of them are. Loose = dead. Make them as hard to get and keep as tigers, and hold owners criminally responsible for attacks, and the problem ends minutes after the first owner goes to the Big House for a 10-20 year stretch.

    The local pounds in SoCal are 90% unadopted and unwanted pit bulls, and 99% of their owners and former owners are too stupid to own them, or pretty much anything else. When you see a neighbor’s 9-year-old girl screaming as she watches pieces of her kitten go flying from a pit bull’s mouth, because the jackass twat who owned it couldn’t control it even with a leash, you don’t forget. And the landlord threw her ass out the same day.

    The 1% who can take care of them appropriately can pay for the privilege, and they’ll do a fine job.

    With 200-500 dog breeds in the world for the other 99% to choose from, this is one that should all but disappear.

    1. Because criminal liability and regulation work so well and have ended all other problems in the world!

      The problem, is a people one, and not a dog one in my estimation. Big shocker that scumbags and hood rats do scumbag and hood rat things like keep large dogs and train them to fight and for aggression, or just as bad some times don’t train them at all. Another big shocker, like wow lots of the same scumbags and hood rats who do this do lots of the other crime….. The common denominator I see there are the people and not the dogs.

      I’m not some lover of the pitbull breed but man, the absolute dripping irony of everyone using exactly the same arguments antigun people use for banning and demonizing guns gets used on the pitbull thing by some of the most fervent defenders of gun rights! The total lack of logical consistency is incredible!

      Here, now you can’t defend banning pitbulls. Dogs have a long historical use in military and police applications as both weapons and tools, and therefore fall under the umbrella of arms.

      1. I was told by a pitbull breeder that a lot of the non-owner problems (i.e. the animals have been properly cared for and trained, but have serious behavior problems even so) lies in the breeding. There are some “lines” of pits that have been bred to be family-compatible, and are comparatively docile. They are good dogs when not abused or mis-trained. There are also “lines” that have been bred as attack/guard dogs, and that produce aggressive, hyper-alert dogs. No, it is not the fault of that family of dog that he is a very, very bad fit for 95% of situations. However, he is still a very bad fit, and far too many of those are sold under false pretenses as “good family dogs” or are dumped.

        I’m not a dog breeder, but this does fit the pattern I’ve seen in horses (an ill-tempered sire begets ill-tempered, hard-to-train mares who throw ill-tempered offspring.)

      2. You can really compare an inanimate object to a thinking animal? The last time I checked, no gun has ever jumped up and run anyone down to shoot them.

      3. Nice try at moving the goalposts from pitbulls to “all dogs”, but you’re not quick enough at Three Card Monte to pull it off.

        The problem isn’t “criminals” per se here, it’s people who should be arrested for gross criminal negligence getting treated as law-abiding by pretending this is a dog problem, when it’s actually an owner problem.

        By definition criminals don’t obey laws. Yet we still have laws. Funny how that works. Everybody wants to be gangster, until doing gangster things entails a stretch in prison.

        If Steve or Suzy PitbillLover wants to either invest the proper diligence into owning one, or face a term in the Graybar for not doing that due diligence, it’s their call.

        Either way, the problem shrinks to relative insignificance.
        Call me when there’s a problem with wild tigers on the loose in every city (like there has been with pitbulls for 30 years and counting), and you win the point.
        Fail to do so, and you forfeit the objection.

        And if you’re going to call them “arms” (and give the English language a triple hernia in the process), you’re entirely responsible for what happens when one of yours costs somebody else any damage whatsoever, including criminal charges for gross negligence. And those arms, without fail, are destroyed as a consequence of any mischief.

        Okay, so let’s do that.

        Congrats for helping prove my side of the argument for me.
        A little less “everything is the 2A! Eleventy!” hysteria, and a little more common sense, if you please.

        1. @Aesop

          “Nice try at moving the goalposts from pitbulls to “all dogs””
          I did not move the goal posts by saying all dogs are arms. Much like I don’t move the goal posts when I say swords are covered just as much by arms as firearms. Pitbull, a breed of dogs, are arms. There is that better? I thought that would be implicit in calling ALL dogs arms that it included pitbulls….

          “it’s actually an owner problem”
          yup don’t see where we disagree there.

          “Call me when there’s a problem with wild tigers on the loose in every city”
          Well, other than obvious here, you know comparing between a dog breed that exists everywhere plentifully in this country and a difficult to obtain and the exotic species that has never existed naturally in recorded human history on this continent, an animal such as a tiger, if you could go down to your local shelter or kitty mill and get one, I’m sure way more of the finest people would have one.

          “And if you’re going to call them “arms” (and give the English language a triple hernia in the process), you’re entirely responsible for what happens when one of yours costs somebody else any damage”
          Yea, 100% agree. Don’t know where or when I didn’t…. Also arms, per the dictionary, “weapons collectively”. I think we will all agree that anything, used in the correct manner, animate property included, can be a weapon. Its not so much that dogs are arms and therefore protected but more so that dogs are also arms and therefore protected.

          My point is you are asking daddy gov to stick his long nose more deeply into something than is necessary and the incredible irony that such arguments being made are the very same used by the antis to fight for banning guns. Not to mention you say hey regulation doesn’t work, so lets do more of it!

          If a pitbull isn’t the high capacity magazine, fully semi automatic, assault weapon of the dog world that ABSOLUTELY no one NEEDS to own one of except properly trained LEO/MIL, then I don’t know what is. Well it was probably rotweilers in the 80s. And probably german shepherds at some point. And… well hopefully you get the point.

          Why shouldn’t everything that falls under the 2A umbrella be 2A? You want more regulation of you, the law abiding citizen whom you admit is going to be the only one following the law while the criminal doesn’t?

Only one rule: Don't be a dick.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.