No. Strict laws needed to counter bite dangers
The pit bull ban should not be repealed; 42 countries have restrictions and bans on pit bulls for good reason.
In Canada, 660 cities and towns have breed-specific legislation that bans or restricts pit bull-type dogs, and defines them as dangerous, aggressive or vicious.
Special interest groups are proposing that, rather than regulate pit bulls in Ontario, their owners be “educated” and singled out only after their dogs have attacked or killed someone. Aside from the obvious detriment to victims, they fail to mention that breed-neutral laws lead to inconsistent monitoring of dangerous dogs and to municipalities hiding serious pit bull attacks in simple “bite” counts.
The Ontario ban is a proactive response to community safety. A bite from a spaniel may require stitches, but one “bite” from a pit bull can cause hospitalization, surgeries and even death. Hundreds of people — most of them children and seniors — are attacked, injured, bitten, or killed by pit bull type dogs in North America every week. As a cautionary tale, two-thirds of people killed by dogs in the U.S. have been killed by pit bulls this year.
Medical studies and expert opinions from doctors across North America consistently conclude that pit bulls are responsible for a disproportionate number of attacks and for a disproportionate amount of damage. Medical findings indicate:
á Pit bulls are responsible for a significantly higher number of dog bite-related injuries.
á Pit bulls are responsible for significantly greater trauma and bite injuries.
á Pit bulls are more than 2.5 times as likely to bite in several places than other breeds.
á Almost half of all injuries caused by pit bull-type dogs require surgery.
Pit bulls are the most overbred and euthanized dogs in North America, with taxpayers subsidizing their euthanization.
Abandoned pit bulls are held in shelters, sometimes for years, with taxpayers subsidizing their boarding. Taxpayers fund the cost of authorities implicated in serious attacks, including emergency responders, police, ambulances, hospitals, doctors and nurses, specialized surgeons, animal control services, municipal pounds and shelters, morticians, blood banks, coroners, public health officials, physical therapists, psychiatrists, social workers, courtrooms, judges, and local and provincial legislators.
The pit bull situation in Canada today is very different than it was in 2005. It’s not simply a matter of a few more pit bull owners feeling indignant their dogs must be muzzled and neutered.
The number of pit bulls in Canada and the U.S. has increased exponentially in 15 years. In 2019, the most serious issue for Canada, aside from increased breeding, is the cross-border transportation of abandoned dogs from U.S. shelters — a booming business for the pit bull lobby. Repealing the ban would open Ontario to an influx of pit bulls from the overwhelmed shelters of Michigan, New York, North Carolina, Georgia, Alabama and Florida.
In September 2017, the crisis caught the attention of CBC’s “Fifth Estate.” The report examined the claims of pit bull marketers and lobbyists who spend millions of dollars rebranding pit bulls as safe family pets. Without laws, regulations or government monitoring, pit bulls are entering Canada with no background checks and no records of where they go. Aggressive and easily triggered dogs are promoted to family homes with no safeguards or liability.
Speaking for National Pit Bull Victim Awareness, an organization that has supported thousands of victims of pit bull attacks, I am fully aware of the incongruencies of this issue.
No other type of dog needs lawyers and million-dollar lobbies to protect them. No other breed-specific group claims their dogs can’t be recognized or identified by people outside their group.
And no other group uses the tactics of the tobacco lobby to convince people their dogs are safe.
There are more than 300 types of dogs that won’t attack people, even if they’ve been abused or neglected. These are all red flags that should make policy-makers question the intentions of special interest groups much more closely.