Main Exhibits

When should a breed BE IGNORED?

WHEN BREED SHOULD BE IGNORED Can a law that bans or restricts ownership of specific breeds of dogs—called a “breed-specific law”—protect the members of your community from dog attacks? According to experts, the answer is no. Why? Popular breeds come and go. When ownership of one breed of dog is outlawed, those who want a dangerous dog simply turn to another breed. The Doberman pinscher—known as the dangerous dog breed of the 1970s—was replaced in popularity by the pit bull in the ’80s and the rottweiler in the ’90s. Breed-specific laws require that someone be able to prove that a specific dog is a member, or a mix, of that breed—not always an easy task. Boxers and bulldogs, for instance, may be mistaken for pit bulls. Any medium-large sized black and tan dog with a long tail may be mistakenly labeled as a German shepherd. Breed-specific legislation doesn’t acknowledge the fact that a dog of any breed can become dangerous. The law should protect your community from any such dog. Breed-specific laws are difficult, costly, and sometimes impossible to enforce. It’s one thing to require that every rottweiler in your community be muzzled whenever outside of the home; it’s another to fund and support adequate animal control staff to ensure that this happens. In 1987 the Cincinnati City Council banned all pit bulls within the city after a series of severe maulings and one human fatality involving the dogs. The ban was passed even though the state of Ohio and the city of Cincinnati already had statutes that allowed authorities to seize any dog known to have injured or killed a person or another dog. Nearly ten years later, the council’s law committee recommended that the ban be repealed, saying that it was unnecessary. The council recommended that pit bulls be handled like any other dogs and that owners be prosecuted only when the dogs were unrestrained or exhibited dangerous behavior. It made this recommendation in part due to the cost of enforcement. Confiscated dogs spent up to five months at the city’s contracted shelter while the cases against the dogs’ owners were being litigated. Many of the confiscated dogs were family companions with no history of aggression. Legislation that restricts breeds may actually create a population of dangerous dogs within your community. When a community imposes strict regulations on a specific breed of dog, owners of those dogs may end up chaining or caging the dogs for long periods of time. Dogs so chained or caged can be so desperate for activity that they become uncontrollable should they escape. Restricted dogs often receive little veterinary care because it is difficult for their owners to transport them to a veterinary facility without violating restrictions. Most importantly, restricted dogs who don’t get to experience normal opportunities for socialization and training will undoubtedly act in an unpredictable fashion when exposed to the real world

Public Comments

1. To me , BSL is wrong.. How I say it is not Breed Specific Legislation , but Bull Sh*t Laws. It is nothing but canine racism. Average number of people killed in American every year: cigarettes: 440,000 automobiles: 42,366 2nd hand smoke: 35,000 guns: 29,338 Pit Bulls: 3 http://www.esmondrott.com/kaospool.jpg http://www.bluepit.net/photos/blue_beast/images/04_jake_kids_jpg.jpg http://www.castlekennels.com/Graphics/Dogs/Reigning%20Shepherds/Left/Jewel/KidsNDog.jpg Those dogs look really vicious... Such killers.
2. Having spent most of my life in Cincinnati & worked for vets when all the 'Pit Bull' hysteria was going on, let me tell you...that ban was written that a Pit Bull had to be identified as such by a veterinarian, and not ONE vet in Cincinnati would do that. Vets knew it was a b.s. ban & tried to talk sense into the city council, but everyone was too emotional & worried about votes to listen to common sense dialogue. You are right: 'demon dog' breeds have been: German Shepherds, Doberman Pinschers, Pit Bulls, Rottweilers, and will soon be Cane Corsos, Presa Canarios &/or Dogo Argentinos...as a breed is banned, the 'thug' types just move on to another breed & the majority of the breed (which are innocent, loving pets) are put to death. Very sad.
3. Breed Bans Do Not Work. Breed bans are designed to punish the wrong people. You ban a breed; thugs simply take another macho looking breed and begin to make individuals of that breed the worst they possibly can. Now, ban that breed and they will find another. The people who are at the root of the problem do not socialize. They do not register/license their dogs and often the dogs do not get vet care. They breed for aggression and killing. The dogs are kept underground and hidden. A far cry from people who show, breed for stability and provide their dogs with the best care and training possible -- known as RESPONSIBLE gardianship. Don't get me wrong. There are stupid dog guardians that don't abuse or fight their dogs, but they are simply D U M B! For example, there was a case many years ago involving a Saint Bernard that killed a four year old. What was never published was the child was left UNATTENDED with the dog and had crammed a pencil down the dog's ear canal! The pencil stub was found upon necropsy. Again, D U M B. I'd say Dumber Than A Box Of Rocks, but that gives rocks a bad name. :) What I would support are BROAD BASED dog laws that encompass every breed and cross from the tiny Chihuahua to the largest Irish Wolfhound, from the mutt of unknown origin to the dog who takes Best of Breed at Westminster. I want to see laws that will take into consideration factors such as: 1) Who owned the dog and under what conditions was it kept? 2) Was the dog being used potentially as a weapon? 3) Was the dog properly under control? 4) Was the dog "justified" in the bite? (By justified I mean was there a reason the dog may have bitten -- was it being tormented?) In addition, the law must provide for: 1) Stiffer penalties for animal cruelty. 2) When a dog is suspected of being used as a weapon or is being used to guard illegal trade, the owner will be charged as though he had a loaded gun. 3) Enforce mandatory leash laws with stiff fines for breaking them.