Two Ohio lawmakers are using the letters to the editors in their local newspapers to sell their ideas on banning 'pit bull' dogs in their cities...and when you dive into the logic, it's a bit scary.
We'll start with Councilman Brian Powers in Lakewood. This is Powers' second letter to the editor in as many weeks. Powers begins his letter by expressing his seeming frustration about how much attention his 'pit bul' ban has gotten. He blames most it on out-of towners and out of state special interest groups, but seems to ignore the reality that the people in his own community don't support it either. At the first city council meeting when people were allowed to speak, 19 of the 20 people spoke out AGAINST his ordinance. At the last meeting, according to the media reports, "over 100" people showed up at the meeting with "Most" of them being against the ordinance -- and many wearing t-shirts and buttons denouncing the ordinance. Seems that Powers is in a bit of denial that this is affecting people in his own community. And maybe he should realize that the reason his ordinance is getting so much attention is because the people who know the most about these types of ordinances know they are complete failures and have seen many places overturn the bans because they are inneffective.
Councilman Powers then calls our one out-of-town blogger Charles Brettel (who has written a letter combating Powers' comments to the newspaper, but the newspaper refuses to run the letter but still allowed his name to get singled out in the letter).
Powers defends his position by taking a quote off the PBRC website. I have an awful lot to say about this whole bit, but let me just leave it at my top 3 list:
1) Quotes off websites are not support for ordinances. Having a goal, and proposing a solution that will achieve that goal are reasons for ordinances. If an ordinance has been a failure at achieving the desired goal in every single instance, it's a bad ordinance.
2) PBRC and many groups like them do a lot of great things. However, it has become commonplace for many of these groups -- in the interest of fully educating their potential adopters - -to put the worst case scenerio on their websites. Many people like Powers are taking these quotes, the ones for the worst case scenerio, as being the rule, not the exception. These groups need to do a better job of providing averages and worst case scenerios.
3) I find it interesting that Powers uses a group like PBRC and points to them as the experts, but then doesn't pay any attention to the pages and pages of information on their website that talk about the ineffectiveness of the type of legislation he is proposing. Either they're experts or they're not Mr. Powers.
Powers concludes with denouncing actualAmerican Temperament Test Society numbers about the temperament of these types of dogs and then states that 'pit bulls' accounted for 110 deaths between 1982 and 2006 (I'm assuming these are Merritt Clifton's flawed stats). But let's assume this number is true. That is 110 deaths over a 25 year time period for the entire United State of America (and this may include Cliffton's Canada numbers too) That is roughly four 'pit bull' fatalities a year over 25 years.
Most population estimates put the total number of 'pit bulls' at about 8% of the overall dog population (many shelters, especially in urban areas, have an intake of 40-50% being labeled as "pit bulls"). Based on this number, that would put the total population of "pit bulls" in the US to be roughly 6 million 'pit bulls'. So that would mean that Powers' legislation is targeting a type of dog because it has somehow been "genetically engineered" to be more dangerous and yet each year 99.999933% of these types of animals are innocent? Doesn't sound like 'genetically engineered to kill" to me. Especially when you consider that cities like Cincinnati and Little Rock are now out using police resources (taking away from helping with crimes like murder, traffic violations, rapists, drug trafficking, etc) to enforce their bans.
If this were really about public safety, Powers would look at places like Calgary, that have successful models for his improving public safety.
Meanwhile, Whitehall's Jacquelyn Thompson writes a letter/plea for help as discusses why she proposed a ban in Whitehall. It's quite obvious from reading her letter that she has completely lost any sense of reality when it comes to this issue.
Thompson starts off talking about our yearning after World War II to improve our country's living conditions and end violence by forming the United Nations. However, according to Thompson, since the assassination of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr., our country has once again immersed ourselves in violence and has since then become a race to the bottom as we reduce our country to the "lowest common denominator". "We are in the midst of the latest manifestation of the age-old battle between civilization and barbarian," she writes.
And get this, "pit bulls are representative of the new order". Yes, "pit bulls" are causing our society to be spiraling downhill. She even goes so far as to say her fellow council members "chose to come down on the side of darkness when they voted no on the ban."
Really Ms. Thompson? Of all of societies ills, 'pit bulls' are the problem?
According to recent reports, over 2.2 million US Citizens were in prison or jail. Another 4.8 million are on some type of parole or probation. A good many of these people are there for illegal drug-related activities In 2006, 17,034 people were murdered in the US. Another 92,455 were forcibly raped, another 862,947 people were assualted. Anywhere between 12-15% of people in the US live below the US poverty line, including 30% of African Americans under the age of 18. Our inner city schools in many areas are failing these youth and not giving them a better chance to escape this cycle. Every year, the Child Protetive Service estimates that about 3.25 million children are abused by their parents.
And 'pit bulls' are the problem with our society? Really? Get a grip Ms. Thompson. "Pit bulls' are not the "symbol for the new order" or the "Dark side" or anything else. They're dogs.
I have been gone and have returned to this, trying to catch up. There is far too much to comment on -- so many subjects, so many opinions, theories, etc etc. Excellent post that should be discussed forever!
1) I would like to comment that with so little time, I have come to rely on Brent, Michelle, Donna, and those who agree with them to educate me on dog issues. My mind is not closed -- I read everyone's opinions and knowledge, and usually stick with what very obviously makes the most sense. I already know how much research these people have gathered and studied for us, as well as the extensive knowledge they have acquired. It is very deeply appreciated and I hope that these folks realize how much good they are accomplishing thru their mission of hard work, blood, sweat, and tears.
I won’t bother commenting on the idiots who are trying to destroy our dogs – that’s too long a rant. But I want to add a couple of things that I am learning, from personal experience:
1) Tiny dogs are, as far as I am concerned, an increasing problem at my off leash park. These are not just small dogs, they are tiny toys,dogs you can hardly see until they are under your feet. Dogs that are brought to the park as fashion accessories. I know it is wrong to generalize any dog population, but too many of these dogs charge, snarl and badger larger dogs. I know they have their reasons and I realize that they do not like the looks of my dogs or their manner of approach.
I must be responsible for my dogs' reactions, but, it is difficult, when I have chosen an area of the beach as far away from the crowd as possible for my 'pit bull type mix' to swim, and people purposely bring their tiny dogs to my side and throw them in the lake, next to my swimming dog. Or walk them on a leash right under my nose, as I am retrieving the large stick from my excited dog. The owners either think it's 'cute' for their little dog to try to take my big stick, or they are not paying any attention at all. Important to note, that once again, it is the tendency of the owners that is a problem, not the breed of dog.
The place that once was a haven -- to get away from the boundaries and restrictions of our apartment and work, to get out into the open world and experience nature and unleashed exercise, has become a nerve wracking, stressed out struggle. All because people do not understand or care about dog behavior. Small children -- unattended, running, screaming, arms flailing are an increasing problem as well. The height of excitement and stimulation is too high for most dogs. Unfortunately, my tension rubs off on my dogs, so we must work all the harder.
I used to return home de-stressed and 'deprogrammed'. Now I go home in knots, exhausted.
2) Related to the above and comments about breeds, behavior, inherent traits, etc, I would like to plug the book I am currently reading, which many of you have probably already read, 'The Dog Listener.' We have not taken the care or the time to learn how our dogs communicate, therefore, we are not communicating with them effectively or kindly. We expect them to understand and obey OUR commands, thru discipline and training, in spite of the fact that we do not take the time to understand THEIR inherent nature and ways of communication.
Ms. Fennell teaches us how to understand our dogs' needs and how to convince them to follow our lead, willingly, just as they do in the wild. No leash jerking, no harsh words, no anger or frustration.
Because we share our homes w/ so many dogs, we MUST learn how to co-exist in peace with them or we will lose them ALL.
3) I believe that those who are gathering stats on ‘pit bulls’ are still doing injustice to pit bulls. It is not only that the media has been purposefully irresponsible, but also because 'pit mixes' are labeled as 'pit bulls' while OTHER mixes are labeled as 'mixed breeds'.
If studies and stats counted all GS mixes as GS’s, then the same smear campaign could be waged against them or almost any breed. Are lab mixes counted as ‘labs’ in bite stats? Unless we know that someone involved in a story is a breed ID expert, which is next to impossible, the headlines and the stats are worthless.
Our dogs, ALL dogs are in serious danger because of human failures. I am appalled at the human behavior in all of this. To me, this is a very serious and horrible sin. Someday, we will realize it is unforgivable.
Thank you to those who never stop fighting and for arming us with such important information. To those who want to debate all the negative aspects and theories regarding dogs, I would ask, could we let some of this crap go and better use our energy and knowledge to help our dogs, whatever the breed or debated 'inherent' traits??
We already know that any dog can be taught to attack and/or fight. I agree that people need to be more educated about certain breed tendencies, such as terriers’ and border collies’ needs for rigorous exercise and challenge. But I believe it is destructive to harp on origins like fighting for the same reasons already stated in comments. It’s as unjust as it is to label humans’ personality traits according to the history and location of their ancestors, and how they may have lived.
Posted by: Becky | June 21, 2008 at 04:06 PM