Blame owners, not pit bulls

Three recent dog attacks here in Las Vegas, one of which was fatal, have once again drawn our attention to the much maligned pit bull terrier. However, pit bulls have the deck overwhelmingly stacked against them.

They are the most prevalent dogs in low-income and highcrime sections of our urban areas where they are often used as guard dogs by criminals, drug dealers and other irresponsible people. Their muscular stature combined with their reputation as being fierce fighters make them the dog of choice for many unsavory individuals.

But pit bulls are hands-down the most common victims of heartbreaking abuse and severe canine neglect. Many are emotionally and physically scarred because they have been chained up outside, often without adequate food or water, to be used as a cheap burglar alarm. Others have been used as “bait dogs” to prepare other dogs for illegal fighting.

Often, any dog with a “pit bull-like appearance” is referred to as a pit bull. But studies have shown that visual breed identification is highly inconsistent and inaccurate even among experts. Taken as a percentage of the total canine population, their rate of aggression is quite normal — even slightly lower than average, according to the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.

More and more evidence is pointing to the fact that pit bull terriers are no more dangerous than any other dog breed. They are remarkably loyal and loving and were once known as the “Nanny Dog” because they were so trusted with children. The National Canine Research Council reports “there is no scientific evidence that one kind of dog is more likely than another to injure a human being.”

It’s bad ownership, not bad dogs, that make dogs aggressive. Thebreedisn’ttheproblem—the owner is.

Darryl Cornelius, Las Vegas