My Photo


follow us in feedly

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Best Of KC Dog Blog

Become a Fan

« Deteriming what is dangerous -- the military and base breed bans | Main | Manchester, Mo repeals breed-specific law »

September 25, 2012


Laura Prowicz

For two years I have been saying this...Why do you (pick a pro-BSL person, any pro-BSL person!) get to sit in judgement of me and my pets? It's all the same thing! It's all about finding someone who is an "expert" so that they can sit in judgement of me. It's discrimination against pet owners who happen to like dogs that have blocky heads. BSL has all of the hallmarks of discrimination: no due process, vague descriptions that don't hold up legally, singling out one pet owner out of all of the pet owners just based on the type of dog she prefers, some Government "official" making a decision that he or she has a right to pass judgement on my choice of animal I prefer. It's all the same thing. you're on the right track, if we would start tying it all together we'd be rid of it.

Jen Brighton

I chuckled more than once reading this, Brent. Thanks for the levity, even if it was unintended.

As we all know, DBO gets the spotlight because it (and its knockoffs) are the ONLY group that a reporter comes across in an Internet search that claims BSL works. In the time a reporter has to write his/her article, he/she doesn't seem to have the time to delve into the reality behind DBO and thus DBO gets the air time. Sad, but true.


Jen, I hear you. It is almost impossible for me to see things like comparing dogs to bears/tigers/wolves/etc and not get a chuckle -- but the "pit bull lobby" thing is probably the most commical.

Colleen M

Actually ugh and I cringe to mention it, but so does "peta". Of course Peta also is not in favour of anyone "owning" companion animals either. At least the Canadian Medical Veterinary Association wrote an open letter to the government of Ontario urging them to repeal BSL and explaining why it doesn't work, as of so far it has fallen on deaf ears, however.

Colleen M

I meant that "Peta" also supports BSL.


Thanks for the mention, Brent.

I really wish this whole idea that reporters have to present both sides of an issue, regardless of how silly, would die out.

Sometimes there is no valid opposing view. That is certainly true of BSL. Not one expert supports it and what's more, so many places that had it have removed it because it simply does not work.


Yeah Colleen -- I wouldn't call anyone at PETA much of an expert on anything outside of euthanizing animals. I can't imagine how anyone takes them even remotely seriously


Sorry - but peta does not euthanize animals - they downright kill them. I have this thing about telling the truth and by using the "e" word to describe killing, I think we are giving the wrong impression.

As far as your BSL and "BS" -, you are right on there. Why is anyone listening to her?


DBO has a disclaimer that reads,

"No professional advice"

"The Site and its Site Materials is for non-commercial, educational and research purposes only and is not intended to replace or substitute for any professional advice."

In reading their disclaimer, it is evident, DBO is for entertainment purposes only.


Great post! And as a further positive addendum to the story, an editorial was published the following week written by Rebeka Breder and Rebecca Ledger.

Breder is the leading animal lawyer in BC, having worked on some of the highest-profile dangerous dog and animal law cases. Ledger is an academic researcher who has published several peer-reviewed studies on animal behaviour and is with the University of British Columbia, one of Canada's most prestigious post-secondary institutions.

Many of us wrote in support of Breder and Ledger's editorial, asking them why their voices weren't sought from the beginning! Unlike Mr. Hume, whose experience with dogs begins and ends with having them in his home, these people study dog aggression variables as a profession and have no reason to be anything but objective.

John Richardson

Great post, Brent. I recall emailing in on an absolutely horrid article that mentioned Tom Skeldon back in the early 00's and the reporter was such a dope about being "even handed". I just said, "Look, NO ONE who understands dogs in general and Pit Bulls in particular consider Skeldon anything but a charlatan", to which they replied "We understand there are strong feelings on both sides." Sure, there are strong feelings on both sides. But there isn't strong KNOWLEDGE on both sides. "Even-handed" does not necessarily mean "fairly represented".

The comments to this entry are closed.