Man's best friend or worst enemy? (Image: audreyjm529)
In 2005, after a few headline-grabbing incidents of pit bulls mauling small children, the Ontario government moved to ban any new pit bulls in the province. (Being anti-child-mauling is an easy call for a politician.) It’s now five years on—is the ban working? Predictably, the Toronto Humane Society (THS) says no.
Reports the Toronto Star:
There were 5,714 incidents in 2004, the year before the Liberal government rolled out breed-specific legislation to ban the sale and importation of pit bulls. Owners were required to get their pit bulls spayed or neutered, and must muzzle and leash them in public.
Despite the law, the Humane Society found the number of dog bites dropped slightly to between 5,350 and 5,500 in the last four years.
“It is clear that the new law has not worked. It has not reduced the number of dog bites and increased public safety. All it does is punish one breed of dog,” said society spokesman Ian McConachie.
That law was pushed through by Michael Bryant, the former attorney general who now faces serious charges related to the death of a cyclist. The law was opposed by, among others, the THS, which has spent the last year battling charges of animal cruelty. If it was possible for Bryant’s reputation to be even more tarnished, this might do it. (Though the Globe points out these numbers are hardly iron-clad.) Of course, THS isn’t a neutral party in this, seeing as they just recently had to put down Bandit, the dog whose attack on a child started all this.
In an argument between a disgraced AG and a scandal-plagued animal shelter, is there a way they could both lose? We can’t think of one, but we’re confident they’ll both find a way.
• Pit-bull ban hasn’t reduced bites: THS [Globe and Mail]
• Humane society says new law doesn’t nip dog bites [CBC]
• Pit bull ban hasn’t cut dog bites [Toronto Star]
The pitbull ban is stupid but not nearly as stupid as Ian McConachie. He wouldn’t know what a pitbull was if he had one hanging off his face.
April 30, 2010 at 11:18 am | by LeanneListening to THS which has already shown itself to be a bunch of liars and not researching to see the severity of these bites compared to those of pit bulls, is a fool’s folly. Seems like THS may have received a “donation” that is fueling this ridiculous stance. Check out what is happening in the US with pit bulls and how they are mauling and killing record numbers, see if this is how Toronto wants to be. http://www.pitattacksbystate.blogspot.com
April 30, 2010 at 1:43 pm | by NoPitsWhen the Ontario bill was passed, testimony was heard from a variety of different experts in the field of animal welfare who have experience with dogs – trainers, veterinarians, shelters, etc. With only 2 exceptions, they all agreed at the time that the breed ban would not work.
http://www.dogwatch.net/bill132.pdf
In the United States, every single national organization of professionals in working with canines — including our national animal control association – is opposed to breed bans.
http://stopbsl.com/bsloverview/the-lack-of-professional-support/
The reason is simple. Every time it has been tried, it has failed to increase public safety — and only lead to innocent family pets being taken from people’s homes — and problems with deterimining breed type becomes a costly expense for cities and taxpayers (look no further than the recent struggles in Brampton).
If a society wants to improve public safety, they will focus all of their efforts on targeting the small minority of irresponsible dog owners who are causing problems. There is no other way that has shown itself to be successful.
April 30, 2010 at 2:39 pm | by BrentNopits. That’s a unique interpretation you have of the word liar there. Michael Bryant was the one after all who ignored advice from veterinarians and other people familiar with animal behaviour while claiming to be taking the advice of experts and telling tall stories neighbourhood children being chased by 150 pound Pit Bulls. Can your biased sites with all their skewed statistics explain why they are “killing in record numbers” now and not 40 years or 80 years ago? Nope. And why is it legitimate places of research never come up with the sort of hogwash statistics found only on anti-Pit Bull sites?
http://www.journalvetbehavior.com/article/S1558-7878(07)00236-5/abstract
April 30, 2010 at 5:43 pm | by Ingenskitsnak.BSL has and always will fail to protect the public; it only serves to endanger us all by putting a band aid solution. We need to adopt Calgary’s model (who is is the most effective) and go after the real issue at the end of the leash; irresponsible dog, abusive dog trainers and bad breeders.
April 30, 2010 at 5:49 pm | by Meaghan EdawrdsI’ve looked at the list of “experts” who opposed the ban. I would hardly expect support from 15 Staffordshire Terrier, AmStaff, and AmPitBull clubs. I would hardly expect support from the breeder lobbies. I find it sad but unsurprising that there is no support from the veterinary associations and humane organizations, but I suppose everyone knows which side their bread is buttered on.
And I think that a few experts who testified in support of the ban were left off the list: notably, Tom Skeldon, Lucas County Dog Warden (who had worked with and seen the excellent results from the pit bull-specific legislation in his county) and Alan Beck, behaviourist and Director of the Centre for the Human-Animal Bond at Purdue Veterinary School.
April 30, 2010 at 6:18 pm | by ShannonAh, I see the pro-ban loons are out. To bring Shannon up to date, dog killer Tom Skeldon stepped down on Jan 1/2010, Toledo’s breed-specific legislation has been ruled unconstitutional and Toledo has stopped enforcing its ban. I suggest that Shannon research the bounty paid to Lucas County dog wardens for dead dogs to understand why there may have been such a fervour to ban and kill.
There is no such thing as a “pit bull”. Even an Ontario government lawyer stated that in court. That is a slang name for a dog of a certain shape. The four pure breeds usually named in breed-specific legislation (“BSL”) are so rare, I doubt that many have met one. Any “substantially similar” description of a “pit bull” encompasses many pure breeds of dogs other than those named in the Ontario BSL and countless crossbreed and mixed breed dogs. If taken literally, all Labrador retriever owners, all Boxer owners, all Rhodesian Ridgeback owners and the owners of numerous other pure breeds should be compelled to comply with BSL.
The Ontario Liberals’ breed-specific legislation (“BSL”) is a badly written, hastily cobbled together piece of legislation dropped on the public at a time when the Liberals’ public approval rating was very low. The Liberals’ BSL is unfounded, unjust, inhumane, vague, shoddy, proven ineffective and proven fiscally irresponsible. It was promoted by the former Attorney General Michael Bryant who, despite his bombast and hyperbole, was unable to pick a “pit bull” from a series of pictures.
The Ontario Liberals ignored the dog experts who told them that BSL was ineffective and fiscally irresponsible. The Liberals refused to institute a centralized dog bite registry; do you wonder why?
BSL has been proven ineffective and fiscally irresponsible. BSL has been repealed in many jurisdictions, most recently and notably the Netherlands. The City of Toledo, formerly a death camp for dogs of a politically incorrect shape, has ceased to enforce its BSL. There are many other jurisdictions that have repealed their BSL because of the facts. The U.K., despite ten years of BSL and killing thousands of dogs, has a skyrocketing dog bite rate; dog attacks in Wales have gone up 60% under the U.K.’s BSL. Scotland has passed a bill which aims to “influence the behaviour of the dog owner in order to improve the behaviour of the dog”.
A U.S. county estimated in 2003 that it cost $63,000 to seize and kill one dog. With exchange and inflation, I would estimate that figure to now be $80,000. That is before protests to city hall, going to court and additional expenses. Is it good use of hard-earned taxpayers’ dollars to spend that money seizing and killing one unoffending dog?
A dog’s shape does not predetermine or predict its behaviour. Another fact is that the owner is always responsible for his/her dog’s behaviour. It is the human element that determines a dog’s behaviour, not the dog’s shape.
Unoffending dogs have been seized from their owners’ homes, the most recent cases exposed to the light of day being those in the City of Brampton. These dogs had done nothing wrong but be a politically incorrect shape.
In summary: Breed specific legislation is unfounded, unjust, inhumane, vague, shoddy, proven ineffective and proven fiscally irresponsible. It legislates law-abiding people into second-class citizenship solely on the shape of the property they own – their dogs. It kills dogs solely because of their shape. It does nothing to reduce dog bites and attacks by dogs of other breeds and types.
In short: BSL is BS-L.
April 30, 2010 at 9:10 pm | by Social MangeI will also point out that breed-specific legislation is one tool in the animal “rights” extremists’ toolkit in an ongoing effort to eradicate domestic animals and eliminate one’s right to own a pet of any kind.
So-called animal “rights” groups usually believe that an animal’s only right is to die at the end of a needle.
April 30, 2010 at 9:12 pm | by Social MangeI love NoPits’ and Shannon’s uninformed and slightly whacky comments. Ooh, maiming and killing in record numbers…what a truckload of rhetoric without a single scrap of truth or fact to back it up.
Must be the crowd of U.S. crazy people, the ones who missed their rabies shots, on the loose again. Geez, don’t let ‘em run with scissors.
I’ve always believed that “duh, kill da pit bullz” is redirected racism; these people have hate burning deep in their twisted souls but can’t speak against people of colour, so they vent their sick hatred on beings without a voice, animals.
April 30, 2010 at 9:17 pm | by Social MangeI’m already up to date, thanks. Skeldon resigned because of a smear campaign by a politician and a newspaper. Toledo will now begin to pay the price of not standing up for the man.
No such thing as a pit bull? Funny how your side can always identify one on free-spay-and-neuter-for-pit-bulls-day. @@ DOLA defines pit bull and the definition has stood through 3 court challenges – I think it’s adequate.
Perhaps I should bring *you* up to date – the Netherlands has re-tabled breed specific legislation and it is currently making its way through legislation there. They have had so many incidents with pit bulls since the repeal that they want it reinstated.
All that said, I think that government money would be better spent regulating containment, licensing and insurance for breeds, like pit bulls, deemed high-risk. Just having to pay the premiums to carry $500,000 liability for your dog would keep pits out of the hands of the underbelly of society. And if they weren’t in those hands there’d be precious few out there to cause problems.
April 30, 2010 at 10:05 pm | by ShannonI just re-read your post. Did you really claim that breeding has nothing to do with behaviour? Seriously? Are you mildly retarded?
Have you never seen a 6 month-old border collie spontaneously herd? How do you explain the way a 10-week old retriever fetches everything in sight? Ever watched a pointer, without ever being exposed to one of its own kind and with no training whatever, drop into a point as a duck flies up? Have you spent ANY time around dogs?
Behaviour is hereditary. This isn’t hard to understand. If it wasn’t no one would breed dogs. Dog-dog aggression is also hereditary – that’s why Ch. Chinaman’s line still does so well in dogfighting, which is still rampant all over the US and Canada, don’t kid yourself. Pits were bred for and retain intra-dog aggression. Some lines sport severe human aggression as well (ie Chinaman’s). Most of the time, humans get hurt trying to step between their dog (or cat, horse, goat, pot-belly pig, etc) and the attacking pit bull. Dog aggression is genetic, its real, and it isn’t okay.
April 30, 2010 at 10:54 pm | by ShannonYou want stats, this site has all the stats you could ever possibly want about the epidemic of pit fatalities and maulings. http://www.DogsBite.org And calling a compilation of media reports (www.pitattacksbystate.blogspot.com), their links and the stories, biased is ridiculous. Believe it or not, there has never been a worldwide media conspiracy to “get the pits”. Funny how when it comes to legislation there is no such thing as a pit bull but when it comes to getting free spay/neuter or breeding, there is definitely a breed called the “pit bull”. Just google and see all the hits for pit bull yet you try to convince the public there is no such thing. The only two sources that track by breed, DogsBite and Animal People News, both agree that pits have been killing people in the U.S. at the rate of one person every 22 days for the past four years. Pits are killing people at a higher rate than that since the beginning of 2010.
You want credible people who are for bans, then that info is also on DogsBite, the site pit nutters don’t want you to see. Don’t let the next news headline describe how you failed to do your duty to stay informed about these dangerous dogs.
And Toledo Ohio had three serious pit bull attacks in three days a week ago. Miss Skeldon yet, Toledo? The State of Ohio has declared pits vicious. The Courts in several states have done the same. Either the pit nutters wake up and own what pits are doing, or they will suffer from bans on pits, it’s all their doing. Pit lovers put pits in the shelters, pit lovers breed dangerous pits, not the pit “haters”.
April 30, 2010 at 11:50 pm | by NoPitsThere is two cities in Montana that due to banning them has totally eliminated pit bull attacks. The reason is that there are no pit bulls in the cities anymore. It will take time to reduce the number of pit bull, the results are not going to be overnight unless they are completely removed.
May 1, 2010 at 1:35 am | by mutt2010 USA DOG-RELATED FATALITIES
1. April 14, 2010——-AGE: 7 Days-PIT BULL.
2. March 08, 2010 —-AGE: 9 Months-Rottweiler (2).
3. March 04, 2010—–AGE: 65-PIT BULL.
4. February 28, 2010–AGE: 4-Rottweiler.
5. February 18, 2010–AGE: 10 Days-PIT BULL (attacked at 5 days old).
6. February 20, 2010–AGE: 3-American Bulldog.
7. February 20, 2010–AGE: 38-PIT BULLS (6).
8. February 18, 2010–AGE: 11 Days-Siberian Husky.
9. February 12, 2010–AGE: 5-PIT BULL.
10. February 07, 2010-AGE: 63-Rottweiler mix.
11. January 17, 2010–AGE: 56-PIT BULLS (4-6).
12. January 09, 2010–AGE: 3-PIT BULL.
Ban the Breed Because of its Deeds!
When I read some of these posts I thank G-D that us Humans are so perfect,we do not Murder,Rape,Hi-jack and do not encourage Drug-Dealing or Paediaphilia.Also I do beleive that BSL is nothing more than Cold-Blooded Murder.
May 2, 2010 at 2:01 am | by selwyn marock South AfricaThis law belonged to Adolph Hitler and is now being practised by Failing Politicos in exactly the same way as he did.Aiming the campaign at the “Stupid Masses”with the help of unscrupulous media who create the hype.The only difference is in Hitler’s time the Victims were 2 legged now the Victims are 4 legged.
The bottom line people to the caliber of Skeldon,Bryant and Mçguinty are Evil and will do anything to retain power,fortunately Bryant(the cyclist murderer) and Skeldon(the Dog Murderer) have been removed from positions of power.
Now it is important that the Decent Human Beings remove Mçguinty and his Lying Liberals,Vote them out.
“All that is needed for Evil to Succeed is Decent Human Beings Do Nothing”-Edwin Burke
Since when have American statistics had anything to do with Canada? There are less than 1000 purebred dogs regulated under DOLA in Ontario. Our ex AG has killed the same amount of people in Ontario as one of these purebreds have….ONE. The rest, which are covered under the substantially similar clause, are unknown/mixed breeds.
DogsBite, pitattacksbystate and Clifton combined have less experience in breed identification than the papers they pull their stats from. It’s not a “Pit Bull” just because they say it is. Skeldon got paid, per dog, to kill. Of course he’d support the wholesale slaughter of any substantially similar animal.
People with an agenda like those cited above can NOT be trusted to speak the truth. Do your part. Investigate yourself using proper info from Canada.
May 5, 2010 at 1:21 am | by Janine