On May 1, 2025, a pit bull attack on a Chihuahua named Penny unfolded on a crowded Manhattan sidewalk. Despite being restrained by chains, the pit bulls mauled Penny in full view of bystanders, many of whom tried to intervene. The NYPD’s response was to call the incident a “civil matter,” insisting no crime had been committed. This reaction contradicted New York law, which does provide mechanisms for holding owners of dangerous dogs accountable and for taking action against the animals themselves.
The attack on Penny underscores a broader pattern seen across the United States: law enforcement often fails to apply existing dangerous dog and anti-cruelty laws. Politicians respond by proposing new laws, such as the so-called “Penny’s Law,” rather than demanding the enforcement of what is already on the books. Thousands of complaints about loose and aggressive dogs go unaddressed in major cities every year, suggesting that the real issue is not a lack of legislation, but a lack of action. Other recent attacks, such as the killing of a service dog in Ohio and the mauling of multiple people and pets in Florida, reveal the national scale of the problem.
Dog-on-dog attacks aren’t just tragic for the pets—they also endanger people. Studies show that a large percentage of disfiguring dog attacks on humans occur when someone tries to rescue their pet from an attacking dog. Data from Merritt Clifton and the experience of Attorney Kenneth M. Phillips both indicate that one-third of serious mauling cases begin as dog-on-dog violence. Owners are frequently bitten while trying to protect their animals, which is a natural human response. These attacks are often made worse by owners who fail to control their aggressive dogs.
Penny’s case also highlights the continued public denial about the risks posed by pit bulls. Many dog owners, even those with small or vulnerable dogs, underestimate the danger of walking close to powerful breeds. Video footage of Penny’s mauling shows her owners trying to pass within inches of two pit bulls—one of which quickly lunged at her. The attack was foreseeable, and her owners had the last clear chance to avoid it. Legally and ethically, the responsibility to anticipate such danger is well supported by tort law and decades of case experience.
At the heart of this crisis is the absence of meaningful restrictions on pit bulls and other high-risk breeds. Pit bulls account for the overwhelming majority of fatal dog attacks on both people and other animals, despite representing only a small percentage of the U.S. dog population. Due to indiscriminate breeding, many urban pit bulls—often referred to as “bully mixes”—lack even the controlled traits once prized in fighting dogs. The result is a population of unstable, unpredictable dogs in environments not suited for them. Pit bulls now attack their owners or family members in more than half of fatal incidents.
To address these dangers, cities and states need three core laws: a dangerous dog law, an irresponsible dog owner law, and a dog bite statute that includes compensation for injured or killed pets. Shelters, rescues and breeders also can play a part by reducing the total number of pit bulls in the nation. Attorney Phillips’ Model Dog Bite Laws offer a ready-to-use framework for municipalities that lack strong policies or need to update outdated ones. Penny’s case, tragic as it is, provides a powerful opportunity to rethink how we handle the growing threat posed by dangerous dogs—and to finally act in the interest of public safety.
Read Phillips’ full analysis of Penny’s case and what it means for Americans: Penny’s Pit Bull Attack: A Wake-Up Call About Dangerous Dogs