Dear Editor,
Banning Pit Bulls would be like banning cars because people get killed in car accidents! Who’s responsible, the car or the driver/manufacturer? Any car can be deadly in the wrong hands or if built with defective parts. Same thing with dogs – any dog. Pit Bulls are no more responsible for the way they are bred, raised and trained, than cars are responsible for the way they are designed, built and driven.
Simply put, the best argument against breed bans is that they are costly and ineffective.
Breed bans are often a knee-jerk reaction from politicians who want to say they are “doing something,” after a highly publicized dog attack (of any breed). This is a useless exercise. What kind of message are we telling abusive and irresponsible individuals when legislation makes the dogs pay the price for their action? z
Criminals habitually break laws, so having an ‘illegal breed’ may indeed be attractive to undesirable individuals and entice them to breed and sell more ‘illegal dogs.’ If their dog is confiscated and killed, they don’t care. They will just get another one because the law punishes the dog, not the owner. z
On the other hand, law abiding and responsible owners, whose dogs love people and have never done anything wrong, can see their homes invaded, often without a search warrant, and their beloved family member dragged away (in front of their children) to be killed. Not because the dog was unstable or mean, but simply because of its breed. Meanwhile, the owners of truly dangerous dogs (of any breed) escape punishment because their breed is not targeted by legislation and therefore believed ‘safe.’ z
A 10 lbs Pomeranian killed a baby a few years ago. Obviously there was a problem with that particular dog, not the breed. “The baby’s uncle left the infant and the dog on a bed while the uncle prepared her bottle in the kitchen.
Upon his return, the dog was mauling the baby, who died shortly afterwards. (‘Baby girl killed by family dog,’ (Los Angeles Times, Monday, October 9, 2000, Home Edition, Metro Section, Page B-5.)”
Because of a serious lack of regulation in dog breeding many dogs inherit defective genes and are sold to irresponsible owners. A breed ban will not resolve the problem. This nonsense will continue with the next macho breed and will become an endless race between breed specific legislators and unscrupulous breeders.
A Pit Bull breeder was shut down last year because Pit Bulls were banned in Topeka, Kansas. All his dogs were seized and destroyed just for being the wrong breed at the wrong place. The man now breeds ‘African Boerboel,’ a rare breed from the Mastiff family, completely unknown to legislators. Unlike American Pit Bull Terriers, however, who are known for their love of people, Boerboels are serious guard dogs bred specifically as protectors. A poorly bred and irresponsibly owned Boerboel might actually be more dangerous than a poorly bred and irresponsibly owned Pit Bull. This is what a breed ban has accomplished in Topeka.
Here are some facts to consider:
‘Pit Bull’ is not a breed, but a ‘type’ that encompasses several registered breeds and crossbreeds. Therefore, statistics that claim ‘Pit Bulls’ are responsible for some percentage of attacks are lumping many breeds together, and then comparing that to other dogs that are counted as individual breeds.
Breed identification is left up to victim and witness testimony, and is often wrong. Due to negative press, biting dogs of almost any breed have been called ‘Pit Bulls.’ The message is clear; let’s stop targeting the dogs! Pit Bulls are no more dangerous than any strong and large dog. They just happen to attract more irresponsible and abusive owners than any other breed.
Do Pit Bull haters really think that a global breed ban would convince criminals who use these dogs as weapons to own Basset Hounds? And if they did, how long do you think it would take before Basset Hounds start making the news?
A breed ban will only remove Pit Bulls from good people’s homes and leave them in the hands of animal abusers who couldn’t care less about the law. Better think twice before supporting such a measure.
Yours faithfully,
Walter Narine
