Fighting BSL in your neighborhood...

Cruentus · Oct 11, 2006

Some of you might recall previous posts regarding Ontario and the fight against Breed Specific Legislation, or BSL. Well, sometimes BSL gets revisited in our own neighborhoods. It is important, regardless of what breed of dog you own, to fight it through your municipal and state government when the issue is on the table. Feel free to contact me or use any of this information if the issue ever comes up in your area.

This was the document that I presented to the Oxford Twp. Council today. A determination will be made in 2 weeks. Needless to say, I don't think it will be going through...

In regards to the recent press regarding “pit bull” type dogs, and the possibility of revisiting breed specific legislation that would ban this or any specific breed from our community

- Paul Janulis

It has been empirically proven that breed specific legislation is ineffective, unenforceable, impractical, uneconomical, a violation of civil liberties and property rights, and inhumane. It is a fact that there is no specific breed of domestic dog that is inherently vicious, only irresponsible owners that create the problem. It is a fact is that any dog, especially medium to large breed dogs, could be dangerous in the hands of someone irresponsible. Any legislation that would be passed or enforced needs to address irresponsible owners. Legislation banning a type of dog breed does not achieve this goal.

This document is intended to detail the facts regarding breed specific legislation, and “pit bull” type dogs, so that the council will be informed if any future decisions are going to be made regarding dog legislation. I will also recommend a course of action to help legislate responsible dog ownership. I hope that everyone is willing to look at actual evidence on this issue, rather then the mythology and hype. I also hope that the interest of the council is in looking at the facts and doing what is best for the community rather then looking for a scapegoat issue to politicize and grandstand over.

I hope that this document will provide helpful information regarding the issue of dog breed legislation.

Fact: No domestic dog breed is inherently dangerous. In fact, ANY and ALL dogs can be dangerous if left to their own devices, or under the care of irresponsible owners.

There is no evidence in existence that points to inherent dangerousness or violence in a specific breed of domestic dog.
Breeds of dogs are essentially identical to that of races in humans. All domestic dogs regardless of breed are genetically identical in the same way that all humans of different races are genetically identical. The logic that we should ban a dog breed due to inherent dangerousness is the same faulty logic as proposing that we need to ban Eastern Europeans or Arabic men or (insert race here) due to inherited aggressiveness.
Evidence supports that breed does not determine aggressiveness or dangerousness in dogs.

A 5-year study published by the Cincinnati Law Review states that “Statistics did not support the assertion that any one breed was dangerous.”

<LI value=2>No reputable dog organization agrees with the idea of inherent dangerousness of dogs. The American Kennel Club, the United Kennel Club, the Canadian Kennel Club, The Centers for Disease and Control, The Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, The American Canine Foundation etc., etc., etc., does not believe in a dogs inherent dangerousness due to breed.
Studies done by Temperament Testing Societies, and doctorate credentialed dog behaviorists and ethologists have all concluded that breed characteristics have nothing to do with aggressiveness. The reason for dog aggressiveness always boils down to environmental factors.

You will not find one reputable study that determines that dog aggression can be attributed to breed characteristics. The AKC issued a statement in 2001 specifically against breed specific legislation. “To provide communities with the most effective dangerous dog control possible, laws must not be breed specific. Instead of holding all dog owners accountable for their behavior, breed specific laws place restrictions only on the owners of certain breeds of dogs. If specific breeds are banned, owners of these breeds intent on using their dogs for malicious purposes, such as dog fighting or criminal activities, will simply change to another breed of dog and continue to jeopardize public safety.” [American Kennel Club, American Kennel Club Statement On Dangerous Dogs, available at http://www.akc.org/love/dip/legislat/dangerous.cfm (last visited March 10, 2001). ]

Fact: Due to media coverage, there is a lot of misconception surrounding the issue of dog attacks in general, making people believe there is a real epidemic in certain areas, when there is not.

You are 25 times more likely to die from being struck by lightening then a dog attack.
According to the federal AIS or federal Abbreviated Injury Scale, on an injury scale from 1-6 with 6 being considered fatal, over 99% of dog bites fall into the 1-rating category. A 1 rating means that it is very minor with quick recovery and no lasting impairment. This is compared to “slip and falls” which average a 4 rating, meaning requiring weeks to months of healing and possibility of minor permanent impairment.
Some sources will state misleading statistics regarding dog bite frequency, such as 99% of the population is likely to be bitten by a dog. What they fail to state is that 99% of those bitten aren’t injured or even hurt, making these numbers absurdly mundane and akin to paper cuts and minor kitchen accidents. It is also true that 99% of children will fall off their bikes, an obviously mundane statistic because most children don’t receive permanent injury from bike accidents.
The researched numbers make bicycles, automobiles, bathtubs, strollers, bedroom slippers, and 5-gallon buckets more dangerous and more likely to injure or kill a person then a dog attack.
Advocates of the idea that there is dog bite epidemics often misrepresent statistics. One of many examples can be found on a popular “dog bite law” advocacy Website that states “getting bitten by a dog is the second most frequent cause of visits to the emergency room.” When you research the source of that statement, you find that dog bites were NOT in fact a frequent cause to visits to the emergency room at all, but were only second as compared to 9 other activities.
Dog bites usually don’t occur on the street, but within the dog’s residency or property. 73% of all fatal dog attacks occurred in or on the property of which the dog resides.
In the 36-year period from 1965 to 2001, 431 people died from dog attacks. This is compared to 39,600 children who were killed by their parents, 936 people killed from contact with hot tap water, and 1,692 who were killed by lightning in the same period. Children are over 100 times more likely to be killed by their parents or caretaker then by a dog.
The rate of dog bites compared to dog ownership has remained relatively flat over the many decades that these records have been kept.
The rate of dog bites has remained flat in locals, including areas like Ontario where drastic breed restriction is in effect.
Many experts, statisticians, and systems theorists believe that the statistical rate for dog bites is currently as low as it could get.

Fact: There is a lot of mythology surrounding “Pit Bulls” specifically, and the breeds physical capabilities, temperament, or damage potential, when in fact there is no proof that “Pit Bull” type dogs have damage potential that is any different then any other medium to large sized dog breed.

“Pit Bull” type dogs are not proven to have poor temperaments. In fact the opposite is true. According to the American Temperament Testing Society (ATT), a professional research group that tests dog breeds every year, “Pit Bull” type dogs (American Pit Bull Terriers, American Staffordshire Terriers, etc.) consistently test with over 80% having good temperaments. They consistently do better then Golden Retrievers, Labs, Dalmatians, Beagles, and many other known family dog breeds.
“Pit Bulls” have no specialized jaw mechanism, such as special locking jaws or enzymes, that make it’s bite capabilities any different then any other dogs. According to Dr. Brisbin from the University of Georgia, "The few studies which have been conducted of the structure of the skulls, mandibles and teeth of pit bulls show that, in proportion to their size, their jaw structure and thus its inferred functional morphology, is no different than that of any breed of dog. There is absolutely no evidence for the existence of any kind of 'locking mechanism' unique to the structure of the jaw and/or teeth of the American Pit Bull Terrier."
“Pit Bull’s” do not have 2000lbs (or any other extraordinary number of pounds) of bite pressure. Evidence demonstrates that their bite strength is no different then any other medium to large breed dog (average of 320 lbs. compared to humans 120 lbs.).
There is no evidence of “Pit Bulls”, or any dog breed for that matter, having the propensity to “turn” on their owners or household members.
There is no evidence of “Pit Bulls” having extraordinary physical capabilities in comparison to other large, athletic breeds.
“Pit Bulls” are not inherently aggressive towards humans.
Statistics that report that “Pit Bulls” are responsible for more attacks then other breeds are distorted. There is no recognized breed that is called a “Pit Bull.” “Pit Bulls” are a “type” that encompasses many breeds (American Pit Bull Terrier, Staffordshire Terrier, Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, American Bulldog, pit bull mixes, etc.) not a single “breed.” This is similar to other “types” like Spaniels (Brittany, English Springer, Cocker, Water, etc,) and Retrievers (Golden, Water, Labrador, etc.). So these statistics are generally comparing the larger category of “type” to the smaller category of other “breeds,” making this an unscrupulous comparison.

Fact: Breed Specific Legislation is impractical and ineffective because it does nothing to combat the real problem of irresponsible dog ownership.

People who are irresponsible with “Pit Bull” type dogs will be irresponsible with any dog. They will be just as irresponsible with a Labrador Retriever, German Shepherds, etc.
Dog bite statistics have never gone down as a whole in area’s where breed specific legislation has been inacted. This fact is often misrepresented. An example can be seen from the Ontario Attorney Generals office, where statements were made referring to Winnipeg, and how the rate of “Pit Bull” attacks went down since the breed was banned. What they failed to mention was that dog attacks and fatal dog attacks went up, with incidents replaced by other breeds.
Dog bite statistics can actually increase after breed specific legislation is passed. This is because irresponsible owners often don’t want the hassle, and often let the banned breed loose, and purchase another large dog breed. They treat the new dog irresponsibly as well, leading to more dog attacks. This can also be seen in the Winnipeg, Ontario example. They banned “pit bulls” in 1990, when that year there were 214 reported dog bites with only 10 attributed to “pit bull” type dogs. The decade to follow saw an increase of 50 more dog bites a year on average then the previous decade before the ban, with immediate spikes in bite incidents from German Shepherds and Shepherd Crosses.

Fact: Breed Specific Legislation is uneconomical because even if there exists the ability to enforce the legislation via a local animal control department, spending the resources on regulating unproblematic dogs due to breed restrictions is wasteful to Village and County resources and taxpayer dollars.

The Village of Oxford does not have an animal control department to enforce a dog breed ban. So, the burden of this would fall on the Oxford Police, thus distracting them from other more important duties.
Considering the unreasonableness of a dog breed ban, dedicating taxpayer dollars to such an unreasonable cause would be wasteful and unethical.
Many municipalities recognize the facts and the costs of breed specific legislation. Cities like Waterford are cited as examples of breed specific legislation in effect. But the fact is that many cities have repealed breed bans (Detroit, Eastpoint, Saginaw, etc.) and breed bans are on the decline here in Michigan and other states rather then the increase.
Passage of breed specific laws that are only enforced on complaint cause two problems: they create disrespect for the law if the authorities require compliance only upon complaint, and they provide ammunition for neighborhood feuds.

Fact: Breed Specific Legislation is unenforceable because it is impossible too visually or characteristically tell exactly what a “pit bull” is.

There is no breed of dog classified as “Pit Bull.” No dog breed standard organization (like the AKC) recognizes the “Pit Bull” as a breed. “Pit Bull” or “bulldog” is a type of dog like Spaniels or Retrievers. So, there are many different breeds and mixes that could fall under the category of “pit bull.”
Because “Pit Bull” is a type of dog and not a breed, no one knows on a consistent basis what actually is a “Pit Bull” and what isn’t. So, there is no standard of determination.
Breeds cannot be determined medically, genetically, by blood test, or through any other means other then pedigree paperwork. So, law enforcement and the court system will not be able to consistently tell what a pit bull is or isn’t.
There are countless cases where mastiffs, lab mixes, and other mix dogs are mistaken as “pit bulls”. The media usually reports dog attacks as “pit bull attacks,” regardless of breed. There are about 20 or more different dog breeds that could be and have been in the past mischaracterized as pit bulls.
The only way to actually enforce a breed ban is to confiscate and euthanize any and all dogs that could potentially be a “pit bull,” as the province of Ontario has attempted to do recently. This is costly, impractical, and extreme. This, along with other civil liberty issues, has caused the Liberal McGuinty Government of Ontario to lose support of its citizens in favor of a more conservative approach. As we have also seen in Canada and other cases like in the State of Ohio, to attempt to enforce breed specific legislation would mean a lot of families losing their pets and time consuming and costly lawsuits to follow.

Fact: Breed Specific Legislation is an unconstitutional endeavor, and a violation of civil liberties and ownership rights.

Breed Specific Legislation is specifically un-American. It assumes that we need to take away ownership rights for some sort of “collective ideal,” with no basis or evidence that this ideal would be good for the community or society.
When attempts to enforce BSL are made, lawsuits often occur. When people are willing and able to contest breed bans in court, they often win, costing the state and municipality money.
Many court decisions, as seen recently in OHIO VS. COWAN, and including the Supreme Court case of NICCIA VS. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, concludes that breed specific legislation is unconstitutional. 12 U.S. State governments have passed laws making it illegal for a municipality to pass breed specific ordinances. The reason it is considered unconstitutional is because a hearing has to take place to determine if an individual dog is dangerous based on evidence; this assumption cannot be made without a hearing due to breed or any other non-evidence-based reasoning.
Banning a breed or particular mix of breeds punishes those dogs that are reliable community citizens, therapy dogs, assistance dogs for handicapped owners, search and rescue dogs, drug-sniffing dogs, police dogs, etc., and drives them out of the community. There are many “Pit Bull” type dogs that have been used for therapy, search and rescue, and so on.

Fact: The end result of Breed Specific Legislation is always inhumane cruelty to animals.

Breed specific laws only propagate the false public perception of certain dog breeds being dangerous or anti-social. This means less good dogs going to good homes, and more dogs are left stray, or ending up in the hands of criminals (dog fighters, drug dealers, etc.), and more dogs not being adopted out from centers, and more dogs being euthanized.
Only 1 and 600 “Pit Bull” type dogs will find a home due to Breed Specific Legislation and public perception. 599 dogs on average out of 600 will be euthanized.
Dogs confiscated due to breed misconceptions don’t always end up euthanized. In Ontario, the new breed ban specifies that confiscated dogs can be moved to research facilities for experimentation. That means that someone’s family pet can be moved from a loving environment to a torture facility where products are tested on them.
Social Stigma and Breed bans means less standardized breeding, and more underground and hobby breeding. This is directly responsible for overpopulation of the dog breed.
About half of all animals Euthanized in the U.S. each year are “pit bull” type dogs. About 3 million “pit bulls” are euthanized annually from a total of 4.5-6 million animals (cats and dogs) euthanized yearly. This is due to breed bans, social stigma, and overpopulation from the breed bans and social stigma.
Due to the social stigma against “pit bulls,” and the subsequent attraction to the animal by criminal elements, “pit bulls” are the most abused and neglected dogs on the planet.
When people believe that a dog is viscous, whether erroneous or not, they are willing to do horrific things to make a statement. “Pit Bulls” have been victims of torture, poison, shootings, being light on fire and impailed while alive, and various horrors. See cited resources for more information.

Recommendation:
Irresponsible dog ownership is an issue that every community needs to address. Breed Specific Legislation fails to address these real problems, and only succeeds in creating horrible consequences for a community. I propose that the existing, non-breed specific laws are better enforced to solve the problem. If the council feels that a new ordinance is needed, then I strongly urge that the council follows the American Kennel Club’s (AKC) recommended guidelines, and that the council looks to communities with more successful, non-breed specific legislation for example. To avoid making such a terrible mistake with any proposed ordinance or legislation I suggest you contact the American Kennel Club in New York and ask for their draft version of a dangerous dog law.

Fun Facts about “Pit Bulls”

Many celebrities and prominent people in history have owned “pit bulls.” Some of these include President Roosevelt, Thomas Edison, Michael J. Fox, and Mary Tyler Moore. Even Helen Keller had American Pit Bull Terriers as therapy and aid dogs.
“Pit Bulls” are frequently used for therapy work, search and rescue, and police work because of their diverse abilities.
“Pit Bulls” were once called “the nanny’s dog” in early America and England because they were known to be great with children and families.
“Pit Bulls” were the most popular dog during the World War I and II era, and were the mascot for the U.S. in both wars.
“Pit Bulls” have been given military medals for service, like Sgt. Stubby, a Pit Bull war hero. Stubby was wounded in action twice, he saved his entire platoon by warning them of a poison gas attack and he single handedly captured a German spy.
“Pete The Pup” from the original Little Rascals series was an American Pit Bull Terrier. He was chosen because “pit bulls” at that time were known for being great with kids, and easily trainable.
“Pit Bulls” have been around for centuries, and was once known as the “all American family dog.”

Picture taken around 1910. Courtesy of American Farm Foundation

Contact:
Paul Janulis
248-722-1634
[email protected]

Resources:
There are many resources regarding “Pit Bulls” and Breed Specific Legislation. I have confined my cited sources here to online resources for ease of access. The information provided in this document can be found in these resources. There are many more resources as well that are not listed here.
Articles and sites on Breed Specific Legislation

http://www.animallaw.info/articles/arus74fordhamlrev2847.htm
http://www.animallaw.info/articles/aruslweiss2001.htm
http://www.forpitssake.org/legislation.html
http://www.goodpooch.com/BSL/failedBSL.htm
http://www.dogplay.com/Articles/MyArticles/bsl.html
http://www.dogwatch.net/fight_ontario_ban/pit_bull_facts.html
http://www.goodpooch.com/MediaBriefs/GPpitbulls.htm
http://www.goodpooch.com/bsl.htm#BSLsupport
Articles and sites on Dog Attacks

http://goodpooch.com/BSL/dogbiteepidemic.htm
http://www.fataldogattacks.com/
http://www.la-spca.org/dedication/talk/t_judge.htm
Articles and Sites on “Pit Bulls”

http://www.badrap.org/rescue/myths.cfm
http://www.austinlostpets.com/kidskorner/2October/pitbull.htm
http://www.pitbulllovers.com/pit-bulls-ten-things-you-should-know.html
http://www.workingpitbull.com/
http://www.workingpitbull.com/aboutpits.htm
http://www.workingpitbull.com/history.htm

Cases of “Pit Bull” Mistaken I.D.
http://www.understand-a-bull.com/BSL/MistakenIdentity/WrongId.htm
Court Cases on Breed Specific Legislation

http://www.understand-a-bull.com/BSL/BSLCourtcases.htm
On “Pit Bull” Overpopulation Problem

http://www.happypitbull.com/overpop.htm
Medical Information and Statistics

http://www.nibs.org/MMC/MitigationSavingsReport/14-AppendixF.pdf#search=%221-6%20classification%20of%20injury%20by%20severity%20level%22
http://www.injurycontrol.com/Hank/reprints/dogbitejbr71203.pdf
http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/odds.htm
Ontario Pit Bull Ban as an Example of both Extreme and Poorly Written Legislation

http://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/dola-pubsfty/dola-pubsfty.asp
Incidences of Abuse, Torture, and Cruelty Stemmed from Social Stigma against the Breed

http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/sadreality.php
AKC Website to Request Information on Recommended Guidelines for Dog Legislation

www.akc.org

Cruentus · Oct 11, 2006

Here is the thread on the issue in Ontario Canada:

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=38378&highlight=Pit+Bull

Fighting BSL in your neighborhood...

Cruentus

Grandmaster

Cruentus

Grandmaster

Aircraft crashes into New York building

300 Million and Counting

Latest Discussions

Forum statistics

Share this page