"Legislation is due,
laws are in order, and the situation is out of hand. Let's be
sure of our focus. Laws are for humans, not for animals who have
no say about the captive environment they must endure."
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
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?
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 BSL punishes the
dog, not the owner.
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".
A 10 Lbs Pomeranian killed a baby a few years ago... Obviously
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.)"
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 non
sense will continue with the next macho breed and will become
an endless race between breed specific legislators and unscrupulous
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...
Another good example is the Pressa Caniaro. 10 years ago no one had heard of those dogs. We now find them in local shelters, picked up as strays in the streets. Ironically, the breed became popular after two of them killed Diane Whipple in California - By portraying them as vicious and blood thirsty beasts the media has turned them into the new "dog du jour" among gangsters and thugs.
are some facts to consider:
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,
then comparing that to other dogs that are counted as individual
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". Try
this little quiz for fun: Find
the Pit Bull - See how many people you know can pick
out a pit bull from pictures, let alone in the middle of an
the Center for Disease Control site. Even the CDC supports the position that irresponsible
owners, not breed, are the chief cause of dog bites. They
have done studies that indicate that the most "dangerous
breed" of dog changes with popularity and reputation.
Positive pit bull
press - This site shows not only what the breed is about,
but the difference responsible ownership makes. Many of these
pages are "Pit bull rescue makes good" stories. This
site features, among other great stuff, rescue pits that are
saving human lives in Search and Rescue and US Customs Service.
The Diane Whipple case. One of the first times the owner
has been held responsible for the actions of their dog.
Note that the breed involved was the Perro de Presa Canario
(Canary Dog) from Spain, yet the brunt of the negative press
again targeted the pit bull, an all but unrelated breed.
The message is clear; lets 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?
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
Breed Ban IQ Test
1. If you were the sheriff in your town and you learned
that Toyotas were disproportionately involved in more accidents
than any other model, would you:
Ban all Toyotas and confiscate the Toyota of anyone caught driving
(b) Arrest the reckless drivers responsible for those
2. Which course of action in Question 1 do you think
(a) inconvenience the fewest number of people?
(b) be the more efficient use of taxpayer dollars?
(c) be more effective in preventing future
accidents involving Toyotas?
3. If your answer to Question 1 was (a) -- ban Toyotas
-- and the sheriff's department learned that, by a statistical
quirk, drivers of confiscated Toyotas were now perpetrating
further accidents by driving, say, Hondas, would you then ban
Hondas? If not, why not?
4. If your answer to Question 3 was, "Ban Hondas
too, dammit, something HAS to be done," then would you
propose a ban on ALL car models with names ending in "a,"
such as Kias and Mazdas, reasoning that all these brands are
pretty much bred for the same purpose? If not, why not? If so,
how would you deal with car brands that end in the SOUND of
"a," such as Chevrolet?
5. Are you beginning to understand that:
because most of the tens of millions of pet dogs are
NOT registered, "breed" cannot be defined in a meaningful
(b) that "miscreants" employ Pit Bulls, German
shepherds, Rottweilers, Dobermans, Akitas, Great Danes -- that
is, whichever dog is handy -- as personal tools of terrorism?
(c) that law enforcement authorities could
waste inordinate amounts of time (and, therefore, taxpayer dollars)
policing a breed ban, adding to their jobs a task perhaps even
more meaningless than enforcing jaywalking laws?
(d) that the people most likely affected by
a breed ban -- that is, those inconvenienced, harassed and
likely to suffer damage -- are the 99.9% majority of utterly
innocent dogs and people?
(e) most important, that breed bans do ESSENTIALLY
NOTHING to address the real problem: Human scumbags who abuse
Key: If your answer to any part of Question
5 is "no," I'm afraid you have flunked. Please go
back and reconsider your responses.
answer to the question, "What shall we do about the bank
robber who got away on a bicycle?" is not: Ban bicycles.
Real answer: If your dog hurts someone, you --
not the dog -- should be responsible. Anti-cruelty and anti-dog-fighting
laws already exist. Tell your mayor, and city or county or provincial
council to up the current penalties, and insist that judges enforce
those penalties against lawbreakers.
Test created by Paul Glassner, SF/SPCA
BSL: A group of laws that bans particular breeds, usually
pit bulls (a type of dog, not a breed) and sometimes
Rottweilers, German Shepherds, Akitas, Dobermans,
Chow Chows, and a few others. These laws are usually
passed after several attacks by a particular breed
so that city councils can assure citizens they are
“doing something” about a voter concern.
But breed bans don't
work. They target all dogs of a breed -- the innocent as
well as the guilty; are difficult to enforce; and do not
end the use of guardian dogs by criminals. If pit bulls
in their various incarnations are banned, drug dealers and
other felons switch to another breed or mix. In the meantime,
the ill-tempered terrier mix that bites the hand that feeds
it and the poorly-bred purebred that attacks the neighborhood
children pose a far greater danger to people than the obedience-trained
American Staffordshire Terrier that is a registered therapy
dog but cannot step foot inside the city.
Far better than breed-specific
bans are strict laws to control aggressive dogs of any breed
or mix. Known as generic vicious dog laws, they put restrictions
on the ownership of dogs that pose a danger to people, restrictions
such as confinement in locked, escape-proof kennels while
outdoors on the owner's property; muzzles when the dog is
off the property; and purchase of a liability insurance
Source: Dog owner's guide
get a fair shake in court?
Breed Bans: Is There
Important Fact: The ADBA registered 220,000 APBTs in 1999,
making them the #1 dog in America. According to the latest statistics,
Pit Bulls do NOT top the chart when it comes to deadly dog attacks.
About Dog Bite Statistics
The statistics on dog bite related fatalities vary considerably
between studies. Nevertheless, there are numerous problems with
most dog bite statistics. First and foremost, the vast majority
of these statistics provide raw numbers, and are not normalized
to reflect the prevalence of any given breed in the overall population
of dogs. Without this information, it is impossible to determine
the comparative risk of one breed over another from dog bite
Dog Bite Reports
Dog bite reports unchanged although fatal attacks by
animals always seem to grab headlines. Authorities say the numbers
of such incidents are not rising, according to a new study soon
to be published in the The Journal of American Veterinary Medical
Association in conjunction with the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention. The new study of dog bites through 1997 shows
that while overall numbers have remained nearly constant, the
number of pit bull attacks have declined but the amount of Rottweiler
attacks have climbed.
is an 8 out of 10 chance that a biting dog is male. (Humane Society
of the United States.) There is a 6 out of 10 chance that a biting
dog has not been neutered. (Humane Society of the United States.)
No fatal dog attack involving an altered dog was ever reported.
believe Pit bull mixes and Rottweillers are most likely to kill
and seriously maim, fatal attacks since 1975 have been attributed
to dogs from at least 30 breeds.