Pit Bull Research Paper
Pit Bull Prohibition Tell me, what is the first thing that comes to mind when someone mentions a Pit Bull? I can't speak for everyone, but most of you didn't think of some cute, cuddly, playful puppy. Most of you envisioned a savage, snarling, devil dog, chained to post in an abandoned yard totally focused on tearing you to shreds. Such stereotypes are created and amplified by scandalous media reports which contribute greatly to societies' growing fear of these dogs. Fear implores a responsibility for the government to protect its people. So, Pit Bulls are being killed as a result of ignorance and fear, while dog bite related injuries and fatalities continue to rise because the true cause, irresponsible owners, is overlooked.
The public has been manipulated to believe all Pit Bulls are vicious. The medias' eagerness to report the latest stories, and gain viewer interest ratings, provides us with stories fabricated with inaccurately identified breeds and false facts using exaggeration and unexamined evidence such as: …show more content…
Cortland Pit Bull Mauling Death WBNG.com (Channel 12) Dec. 9, 2002 [The victim died from blunt force injury. It was later revealed that the victim was beaten to death by an acquaintance over a drug debt.]
and doesn't fully investigate, or purposely ignores, critical contributing factors specific to the attack (The Breed Issue 3). Sensationalizing individual incidents of dog attacks has generated an
unfortunate and inaccurate public and political perception as to the dangerousness and predictability of Pit Bull type dogs (Fatal 1). Ultimately, this misperception calls for disaster by initiating breed discriminatory laws while failing to address owner irresponsibility as the foundation attacks, therefore allowing for the continuance of dog bites and fatalities to occur.
In response the government adopted Breed Specific Legislation (BSL). This statute is directed toward one or more specific breeds and calls for the restriction or prohibition of these breeds. It identifies a dog as "dangerous" solely based on identity, regardless of the individual dogs' past and present behavior. Pit Bulls and breeds commonly referred to as Pit Bulls are frequently singled out and discriminated against in application of different forms of BSL (BSL in the US 1-4). In Ohio, although Pit Bulls are not completely banned, the state meticulously restricts them and automatically deems "vicious", all dogs belonging to any breed commonly referred to as a Pit Bull, their mixes, and dogs bearing resemblance. Owners of these breeds are required to carry a $100,000 liability insurance policy on the dogs, and must keep them properly confined when on the owners' property and muzzled, caged, or on a six-foot leash when in public. In Toledo, one Pit Bull per household is permitted and it must me muzzled and restrained or confined in public. Lucas County Dog Warden, Tom Skeldon, has confiscated and euthanized 690 Pit Bulls simply based on identity with no consideration of the dogs past or present behavior (Constitutional Dogfight 2). Ohio's interpretation of Breed Specific Legislation poses a ban on a breed that technically does not exist. It attempts to ban all Pit Bull type dogs, using a broad implied definition without specifying exactly what breeds are affected.
It is essential to understand that a Pit Bull is NOT a breed. It is a nickname given to a mix of breeds, irresponsibly cross-bred for the purpose of spectator fighting, and may show aggressive tendencies. The term, Pit Bull, is commonly mistaken and used as reference to registered breeds including the American Staffordshire Terrier, the American Pit Bull Terrier, and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier which were all bred for their companionship and loyalty (Pit Bull Press 1). Due to the difficulty in accurately identifying which dogs are Pit Bulls and which are actual breeds, all guilty of resemblance are automatically, inherently dangerous to society.
People are at fault because we train these dogs to be vicious; we are the ones who are inherently dangerous to society. Gang members and criminals use Pit Bulls as status symbols of power and aggression in anticipation of relaying an intimidating persona. Pit Bulls are unusually powerful and posses a high tolerance to pain, which is common knowledge so when obtained for intimidation, fighting, or malicious purposes the owners have an advantage. Money-hungry, remorseless, backyard breeders supply pups that are inbred or have a poor genetic background. They are placed into inadequate environments, with irresponsible owners who proceed to torture them by starving them, electrocuting them, injecting them with steroids, and beating them, until they become feral and vicious fighters. Pit Bulls not emerging victorious from a fight are either murdered or completely abandoned (Twining 2). The behavior of a dog is directly influenced by the use or function he plays in the life of the owner. Any dogs acquired to protect, guard, fight or intimidate are obliged to behave aggressively. Chained dogs will be more protective of their restricted space and resources (i.e. food/water bowls) and are denied the option of fleeing a situation it sees as threatening (NCRF 3). Studies have taken place, which investigate factors contributing to an incident from which we are presented the following information; Pit Bull type dogs are one of the most popular in a dog population of about 53 million. Over 4.7 million dog bites are recorded each year in the US and over 800,000 of these attacks are serious enough to require medical attention. From Jan. 1, 1965 through Jun.30, 2005 there have been at least 513 fatalities. Over 88% of dog bit fatalities are 2-year-old children left unsupervised with a dog(s) or the child wandered off to the location of the dog. Attacks made by two or more dogs accounted for 32% of fatalities, which is explained as "pack mentality" and related to us as "mob mentality. Over 25% were inflicted by dogs either directly encouraged or indirectly permitted to behave violently. Gender and reproductive status were not totally accessible so of 134 fatalities, within a 6 year range, 92% were unaltered males and 8% were unaltered females
(NCRF 1).
When dealing with such incompetence, displeasing repercussions were inevitable. Insurance companies are participating in breed discrimination while punishing responsible owners. Corresponding to society's reaction to Pit Bulls, insurers began refusing to write homeowners' policies for specific breed owners because of the risk factor believed to be involved with them. In the event an insurer is willing to write a policy to a Pit Bull owner, it is extremely costly, usually around $200 extra a month. Either way families are forced to decide between a place to live safely and a beloved member of their family (Cunningham 1).
Not only does it affect Pit Bull lovers, but taxpayers as well! Whether you are an advocate of the statute or not, you still have to contribute to the wasted dollars spent on additional control officers, housing, health care, and court costs. Counties are estimating BSL enforcement costs to average approximately $750,000/year and are still unable to enforce the laws effectively, not including city costs (Does BSL Cost Taxpayers 1).
Additionally, BSL does not make exceptions for member of these breeds who are valuable assets to their communities, such as search and rescue dogs, therapy dogs, assistance dogs, or drug dogs. Local laws banning specific breeds would apply to service dogs, meaning disabled people would be limited in their travels. Some would have to surrender their pets, the way they function in everyday life, because their dog would be considered vicious (Pit Bull Press 2)! Could you imagine telling a blind lady her Pit Bull, her eyes to the world, is vicious by law and she could no longer keep him?
A new law, HB 189, has been introduced to the Ohio Supreme Court, clarifying that all Pit Bulls are not considered vicious. The law will instead focus on the regulation of truly dangerous dogs of any breed. Hearings would be granted to owners where they will be given the opportunity to challenge a "vicious" classification, and owners will be held responsible for the actions of their pets (HB 189 1).
Declaring a dog vicious based on breed alone is insignificant when attempting to eliminate dog bites and fatalities. Irresponsible owners who obtain their dogs for criminal intentions train them to act vicious. Laws made to ban a breed are not going to stop CRIMINALS from owning them or even from training other breeds for the same purpose. BSL is not the solution and has become the problem. It diverts the attention from the owners training their dogs to behave dangerously. In the meantime eating away our tax money and wasting valuable time and resources that could be put to better use punishing the real perpetrators, using HB 189, and saving peoples' lives.
1.
"Breed Specific Bans Spark Constitutional Dogfight" National Geographic News. 7/7/04. p.96.
2. Fatal Dog Attacks. Ed. Karen Delise. 2002. Web Spinners Design Co. 11/12/2005. http://www.fataldogattacks.com.
3. Pit Bull Press. Ed. Dawn Capp. 9/20/2000. Dog World. 11/7/2005. www.pitbullpress.com.
4. Does BSL Cost Taxpayers Money? Ed. S. Zendorff. 2004. Understand-A-Bull. 11/7/2005. http://understand-a-bull.com/BSL
5. BSL in the US. Linda S. Weiss. 2001. Animal Legal & Historical Center. 10/28/2005. http://animallaw.info.
6. Cunningham, Larry. "The Case Against Dog Breed Discrimination by Homeowners' Insurance Companies" Connecticut Insurance Law Journal. 11 Conn. Ins. L. J. 1 (2004)
7. HB 189. 2005. ASPCA. 11/12/2005. https://secure2.convio.net/aspca/site/Advocacy.
8. NCRF Data on Fatal Dog Attacks. Ed. Marci Grebing. 2005. National Canine Research Foundation. 11/20/05.
http://ncrf2004.tripod.com.
9. Twining, Hillary. "Managing the Stigma of Outlaw Breeds". 10631119, Mar2001, Vol. 8, Issue 1. 11/20/2005. http://web11.epnet.com.
The public has been manipulated to believe all Pit Bulls are vicious. The medias' eagerness to report the latest stories, and gain viewer interest ratings, provides us with stories fabricated with inaccurately identified breeds and false facts using exaggeration and unexamined evidence such as: …show more content…
Cortland Pit Bull Mauling Death WBNG.com (Channel 12) Dec. 9, 2002 [The victim died from blunt force injury. It was later revealed that the victim was beaten to death by an acquaintance over a drug debt.]
and doesn't fully investigate, or purposely ignores, critical contributing factors specific to the attack (The Breed Issue 3). Sensationalizing individual incidents of dog attacks has generated an
unfortunate and inaccurate public and political perception as to the dangerousness and predictability of Pit Bull type dogs (Fatal 1). Ultimately, this misperception calls for disaster by initiating breed discriminatory laws while failing to address owner irresponsibility as the foundation attacks, therefore allowing for the continuance of dog bites and fatalities to occur.
In response the government adopted Breed Specific Legislation (BSL). This statute is directed toward one or more specific breeds and calls for the restriction or prohibition of these breeds. It identifies a dog as "dangerous" solely based on identity, regardless of the individual dogs' past and present behavior. Pit Bulls and breeds commonly referred to as Pit Bulls are frequently singled out and discriminated against in application of different forms of BSL (BSL in the US 1-4). In Ohio, although Pit Bulls are not completely banned, the state meticulously restricts them and automatically deems "vicious", all dogs belonging to any breed commonly referred to as a Pit Bull, their mixes, and dogs bearing resemblance. Owners of these breeds are required to carry a $100,000 liability insurance policy on the dogs, and must keep them properly confined when on the owners' property and muzzled, caged, or on a six-foot leash when in public. In Toledo, one Pit Bull per household is permitted and it must me muzzled and restrained or confined in public. Lucas County Dog Warden, Tom Skeldon, has confiscated and euthanized 690 Pit Bulls simply based on identity with no consideration of the dogs past or present behavior (Constitutional Dogfight 2). Ohio's interpretation of Breed Specific Legislation poses a ban on a breed that technically does not exist. It attempts to ban all Pit Bull type dogs, using a broad implied definition without specifying exactly what breeds are affected.
It is essential to understand that a Pit Bull is NOT a breed. It is a nickname given to a mix of breeds, irresponsibly cross-bred for the purpose of spectator fighting, and may show aggressive tendencies. The term, Pit Bull, is commonly mistaken and used as reference to registered breeds including the American Staffordshire Terrier, the American Pit Bull Terrier, and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier which were all bred for their companionship and loyalty (Pit Bull Press 1). Due to the difficulty in accurately identifying which dogs are Pit Bulls and which are actual breeds, all guilty of resemblance are automatically, inherently dangerous to society.
People are at fault because we train these dogs to be vicious; we are the ones who are inherently dangerous to society. Gang members and criminals use Pit Bulls as status symbols of power and aggression in anticipation of relaying an intimidating persona. Pit Bulls are unusually powerful and posses a high tolerance to pain, which is common knowledge so when obtained for intimidation, fighting, or malicious purposes the owners have an advantage. Money-hungry, remorseless, backyard breeders supply pups that are inbred or have a poor genetic background. They are placed into inadequate environments, with irresponsible owners who proceed to torture them by starving them, electrocuting them, injecting them with steroids, and beating them, until they become feral and vicious fighters. Pit Bulls not emerging victorious from a fight are either murdered or completely abandoned (Twining 2). The behavior of a dog is directly influenced by the use or function he plays in the life of the owner. Any dogs acquired to protect, guard, fight or intimidate are obliged to behave aggressively. Chained dogs will be more protective of their restricted space and resources (i.e. food/water bowls) and are denied the option of fleeing a situation it sees as threatening (NCRF 3). Studies have taken place, which investigate factors contributing to an incident from which we are presented the following information; Pit Bull type dogs are one of the most popular in a dog population of about 53 million. Over 4.7 million dog bites are recorded each year in the US and over 800,000 of these attacks are serious enough to require medical attention. From Jan. 1, 1965 through Jun.30, 2005 there have been at least 513 fatalities. Over 88% of dog bit fatalities are 2-year-old children left unsupervised with a dog(s) or the child wandered off to the location of the dog. Attacks made by two or more dogs accounted for 32% of fatalities, which is explained as "pack mentality" and related to us as "mob mentality. Over 25% were inflicted by dogs either directly encouraged or indirectly permitted to behave violently. Gender and reproductive status were not totally accessible so of 134 fatalities, within a 6 year range, 92% were unaltered males and 8% were unaltered females
(NCRF 1).
When dealing with such incompetence, displeasing repercussions were inevitable. Insurance companies are participating in breed discrimination while punishing responsible owners. Corresponding to society's reaction to Pit Bulls, insurers began refusing to write homeowners' policies for specific breed owners because of the risk factor believed to be involved with them. In the event an insurer is willing to write a policy to a Pit Bull owner, it is extremely costly, usually around $200 extra a month. Either way families are forced to decide between a place to live safely and a beloved member of their family (Cunningham 1).
Not only does it affect Pit Bull lovers, but taxpayers as well! Whether you are an advocate of the statute or not, you still have to contribute to the wasted dollars spent on additional control officers, housing, health care, and court costs. Counties are estimating BSL enforcement costs to average approximately $750,000/year and are still unable to enforce the laws effectively, not including city costs (Does BSL Cost Taxpayers 1).
Additionally, BSL does not make exceptions for member of these breeds who are valuable assets to their communities, such as search and rescue dogs, therapy dogs, assistance dogs, or drug dogs. Local laws banning specific breeds would apply to service dogs, meaning disabled people would be limited in their travels. Some would have to surrender their pets, the way they function in everyday life, because their dog would be considered vicious (Pit Bull Press 2)! Could you imagine telling a blind lady her Pit Bull, her eyes to the world, is vicious by law and she could no longer keep him?
A new law, HB 189, has been introduced to the Ohio Supreme Court, clarifying that all Pit Bulls are not considered vicious. The law will instead focus on the regulation of truly dangerous dogs of any breed. Hearings would be granted to owners where they will be given the opportunity to challenge a "vicious" classification, and owners will be held responsible for the actions of their pets (HB 189 1).
Declaring a dog vicious based on breed alone is insignificant when attempting to eliminate dog bites and fatalities. Irresponsible owners who obtain their dogs for criminal intentions train them to act vicious. Laws made to ban a breed are not going to stop CRIMINALS from owning them or even from training other breeds for the same purpose. BSL is not the solution and has become the problem. It diverts the attention from the owners training their dogs to behave dangerously. In the meantime eating away our tax money and wasting valuable time and resources that could be put to better use punishing the real perpetrators, using HB 189, and saving peoples' lives.
1.
"Breed Specific Bans Spark Constitutional Dogfight" National Geographic News. 7/7/04. p.96.
2. Fatal Dog Attacks. Ed. Karen Delise. 2002. Web Spinners Design Co. 11/12/2005. http://www.fataldogattacks.com.
3. Pit Bull Press. Ed. Dawn Capp. 9/20/2000. Dog World. 11/7/2005. www.pitbullpress.com.
4. Does BSL Cost Taxpayers Money? Ed. S. Zendorff. 2004. Understand-A-Bull. 11/7/2005. http://understand-a-bull.com/BSL
5. BSL in the US. Linda S. Weiss. 2001. Animal Legal & Historical Center. 10/28/2005. http://animallaw.info.
6. Cunningham, Larry. "The Case Against Dog Breed Discrimination by Homeowners' Insurance Companies" Connecticut Insurance Law Journal. 11 Conn. Ins. L. J. 1 (2004)
7. HB 189. 2005. ASPCA. 11/12/2005. https://secure2.convio.net/aspca/site/Advocacy.
8. NCRF Data on Fatal Dog Attacks. Ed. Marci Grebing. 2005. National Canine Research Foundation. 11/20/05.
http://ncrf2004.tripod.com.
9. Twining, Hillary. "Managing the Stigma of Outlaw Breeds". 10631119, Mar2001, Vol. 8, Issue 1. 11/20/2005. http://web11.epnet.com.