Dumb or Evil, It's Your Call
Of course you know by know that pointing out the folly of BSL is my favorite pasttime. And, sadly, I have a seemingly unending flow of opportunities to make myself heard. The most recent example comes from Lakewood, Ohio, a suburb of Cleveland, where another either ignorant or evil City Councilman (Brian Powers) is pushing BSL on the heels of a single "pit bull" attack in January of this year. Below is my as my yet-unpublished response to the Councilman's OpEd justifying the breed ban. The twist here is that the local paper, the Lakewood Observer, has a residency requirement for publishing OpEd pieces. Hmm. Given that Councilman Powers directly mentioned me (http://lakewoodobserver.com/read/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/please-read-notesstanding-firm-on-pit-bull-ban-councilman-powers-responds-to-critics) in his response to his critics - nothing like always having the only voice / seat at the table - can you say "home-cookin'"? - I've asked them to reconsider their residency policy.
You can find Councilman Power's original OpEd on the Lakewood Observer's website - I'm not gonna give this guy anymore air time than he's already getting, especially given the outright lies he's spreading.
Below is my response to his OpEd. Happy reading!
Pit Bulls Are Just Dogs
By Charles R. Brettell
Let’s start here: “pit bulls” are just dogs – nothing more, nothing less. Like all dogs, they eat, sleep, love and play just like any other kind of dog because that’s what they are - just dogs. I know – I own 2 bully breed mixes and have included them in my family for the last 5 years.
It might strike some as odd that I include my dogs – “property,” as the law sees it – as family members, but anyone who has seen my 2-year old daughter play with her “doggies” (the first word she ever spoke), anyone who has received our annual Christmas letter (with accompanying family photo), anyone who has stopped me on the street to ask about my “beautiful” and “well-behaved” dogs quickly understands. So, yes, my dogs – my pit bulls – are part of my family.
And it is on behalf of my family that I feel a duty to speak out against the terrible wrong that breed-specific legislation (BSL) represents to law-abiding, responsible owners like me and the gross misstatements of fact made by Councilman Powers in his recent editorial in the Lakewood Observer.
Let me start by noting that I believe, as did our Founding Fathers, that that Government which governs least, governs best. While I acknowledge that a serious dog attack, apparently by a “pit bull type” dog, was the impetus for the proposed breed-ban and while my heart goes out to the victim and his family, I would still argue that, while tragic, a single occurrence of any event is not a sound basis for Legislative action.
Simply put, Government cannot protect you from every imaginable harm. Nor should they, nor would you (really) want them to, nor could any government afford to. Here, the specific harm sought to be prevented is so remote – 1 book calculates the odds of a fatal dog attack at 1 in 18,000,000 – that you have better chance of being struck by lightning.
As Councilman Powers correctly points out, current animal control laws – including current dangerous dog laws and, apparently, the leash law - are going totally unenforced. Given the current lawlessness, doesn’t it make more sense to simply start enforcing the existing animal control ordinances? Wouldn’t the very attack that spurred the push for a breed ban have been prevented if the City were just enforcing its leash laws? How much more simple a thing is it to do that than enforce a breed-ban, with its problematic breed identification issues and resultant costly litigation?
Let’s be honest: all dogs are capable of biting. Why not enact (and enforce) legislation that targets all dogs, regardless of breed, that have shown human aggression or can be shown (preemptively) to be a threat to humans? Breed-neutral legislation of this type is supported by virtually every animal welfare organization, including the Humane Society of the United States, the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA), the National Animal Control Officers Association and the Centers for Disease Control. And while we’re at it, why not fund bite-prevention education and awareness for children, the group most likely to be the victim of a dog attack?
Finally, ask yourself this: Why would Councilman Powers attempt to support his breed-ban position with falsehoods, half-truths & innuendo? Specifically:
The CDC and JAVMA reports he cites contradict his position, disclaiming the results of their studies as subject to uncontrollable variables (like breed identification) that render them virtually meaningless; both also support non-breed-specific solutions, not BSL. See, http://www.avma.org/advocacy/state/issues/javma_000915_fatalattacks.pdf.
Pit Bull Rescue Central believes that their information was deliberately taken out of context, failing to note that it was from dog-on-dog aggression discussion. On their blog they say are “disappointed that Councilman Powers used our information to mislead his readers” and that by his omission the Councilman “made it seem as if we were declaring that pit bulls are generally unstable in temperament. This is not true.” See, http://pitbullrescuecentral.blogspot.com/.
Rather than supporting BSL, the AVMA has actually gone on record to say that BSL is “inappropriate and ineffective.” They further state that “statistics on fatalities and injuries caused by dogs cannot be responsibly used to document the "dangerousness" of a particular breed.” See, http://www.avma.org/public_health/dogbite/dogbite.pdf.) (emphasis added).
As for the Michael Vick dogs, the reality is that these victims of abuse were placed under the control of a federally-appointed Special Master who released them to animal welfare organizations around the country, including a group called BadRap (http://www.badrap.org/) in Oakland, California. Virtually all of these dogs have all been re-homed to warm, caring families across the Bay Area without incident.
To his credit, the Councilman rightly pointed out the superb utility of pit bulls as working dogs – due to their smart, loyal, dutiful, and self-confident natures. Some examples include:
Search and rescue - like the "pit bulls" who participated in the search for the Columbia astronauts (http://www.forpitssake.org/sar.html);
Drug detection & police working dogs (http://www.lawdogsusa.org/home.html);
Therapy dogs (http://www.forpitssake.org/therapy.html), and
National championship Frisbee dogs, like this year's winner of Purina's Incredible Dog Challenge, Wallace (http://www.wallacethepitbull.com/).
Turns out, pit bulls are just dogs – with all the good and bad that comes with thousands of years of human companionship – not the vicious monsters Councilman Powers would have you believe. It takes human intervention to make them monsters – criminals, abusers, reporters . . . and terribly misguided, ill-informed politicians.
Of course you know by know that pointing out the folly of BSL is my favorite pasttime. And, sadly, I have a seemingly unending flow of opportunities to make myself heard. The most recent example comes from Lakewood, Ohio, a suburb of Cleveland, where another either ignorant or evil City Councilman (Brian Powers) is pushing BSL on the heels of a single "pit bull" attack in January of this year. Below is my as my yet-unpublished response to the Councilman's OpEd justifying the breed ban. The twist here is that the local paper, the Lakewood Observer, has a residency requirement for publishing OpEd pieces. Hmm. Given that Councilman Powers directly mentioned me (http://lakewoodobserver.com/read/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/please-read-notesstanding-firm-on-pit-bull-ban-councilman-powers-responds-to-critics) in his response to his critics - nothing like always having the only voice / seat at the table - can you say "home-cookin'"? - I've asked them to reconsider their residency policy.
You can find Councilman Power's original OpEd on the Lakewood Observer's website - I'm not gonna give this guy anymore air time than he's already getting, especially given the outright lies he's spreading.
Below is my response to his OpEd. Happy reading!
Pit Bulls Are Just Dogs
By Charles R. Brettell
Let’s start here: “pit bulls” are just dogs – nothing more, nothing less. Like all dogs, they eat, sleep, love and play just like any other kind of dog because that’s what they are - just dogs. I know – I own 2 bully breed mixes and have included them in my family for the last 5 years.
It might strike some as odd that I include my dogs – “property,” as the law sees it – as family members, but anyone who has seen my 2-year old daughter play with her “doggies” (the first word she ever spoke), anyone who has received our annual Christmas letter (with accompanying family photo), anyone who has stopped me on the street to ask about my “beautiful” and “well-behaved” dogs quickly understands. So, yes, my dogs – my pit bulls – are part of my family.
And it is on behalf of my family that I feel a duty to speak out against the terrible wrong that breed-specific legislation (BSL) represents to law-abiding, responsible owners like me and the gross misstatements of fact made by Councilman Powers in his recent editorial in the Lakewood Observer.
Let me start by noting that I believe, as did our Founding Fathers, that that Government which governs least, governs best. While I acknowledge that a serious dog attack, apparently by a “pit bull type” dog, was the impetus for the proposed breed-ban and while my heart goes out to the victim and his family, I would still argue that, while tragic, a single occurrence of any event is not a sound basis for Legislative action.
Simply put, Government cannot protect you from every imaginable harm. Nor should they, nor would you (really) want them to, nor could any government afford to. Here, the specific harm sought to be prevented is so remote – 1 book calculates the odds of a fatal dog attack at 1 in 18,000,000 – that you have better chance of being struck by lightning.
As Councilman Powers correctly points out, current animal control laws – including current dangerous dog laws and, apparently, the leash law - are going totally unenforced. Given the current lawlessness, doesn’t it make more sense to simply start enforcing the existing animal control ordinances? Wouldn’t the very attack that spurred the push for a breed ban have been prevented if the City were just enforcing its leash laws? How much more simple a thing is it to do that than enforce a breed-ban, with its problematic breed identification issues and resultant costly litigation?
Let’s be honest: all dogs are capable of biting. Why not enact (and enforce) legislation that targets all dogs, regardless of breed, that have shown human aggression or can be shown (preemptively) to be a threat to humans? Breed-neutral legislation of this type is supported by virtually every animal welfare organization, including the Humane Society of the United States, the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA), the National Animal Control Officers Association and the Centers for Disease Control. And while we’re at it, why not fund bite-prevention education and awareness for children, the group most likely to be the victim of a dog attack?
Finally, ask yourself this: Why would Councilman Powers attempt to support his breed-ban position with falsehoods, half-truths & innuendo? Specifically:
The CDC and JAVMA reports he cites contradict his position, disclaiming the results of their studies as subject to uncontrollable variables (like breed identification) that render them virtually meaningless; both also support non-breed-specific solutions, not BSL. See, http://www.avma.org/advocacy/state/issues/javma_000915_fatalattacks.pdf.
Pit Bull Rescue Central believes that their information was deliberately taken out of context, failing to note that it was from dog-on-dog aggression discussion. On their blog they say are “disappointed that Councilman Powers used our information to mislead his readers” and that by his omission the Councilman “made it seem as if we were declaring that pit bulls are generally unstable in temperament. This is not true.” See, http://pitbullrescuecentral.blogspot.com/.
Rather than supporting BSL, the AVMA has actually gone on record to say that BSL is “inappropriate and ineffective.” They further state that “statistics on fatalities and injuries caused by dogs cannot be responsibly used to document the "dangerousness" of a particular breed.” See, http://www.avma.org/public_health/dogbite/dogbite.pdf.) (emphasis added).
As for the Michael Vick dogs, the reality is that these victims of abuse were placed under the control of a federally-appointed Special Master who released them to animal welfare organizations around the country, including a group called BadRap (http://www.badrap.org/) in Oakland, California. Virtually all of these dogs have all been re-homed to warm, caring families across the Bay Area without incident.
To his credit, the Councilman rightly pointed out the superb utility of pit bulls as working dogs – due to their smart, loyal, dutiful, and self-confident natures. Some examples include:
Search and rescue - like the "pit bulls" who participated in the search for the Columbia astronauts (http://www.forpitssake.org/sar.html);
Drug detection & police working dogs (http://www.lawdogsusa.org/home.html);
Therapy dogs (http://www.forpitssake.org/therapy.html), and
National championship Frisbee dogs, like this year's winner of Purina's Incredible Dog Challenge, Wallace (http://www.wallacethepitbull.com/).
Turns out, pit bulls are just dogs – with all the good and bad that comes with thousands of years of human companionship – not the vicious monsters Councilman Powers would have you believe. It takes human intervention to make them monsters – criminals, abusers, reporters . . . and terribly misguided, ill-informed politicians.
posted by Bob at 10:07 AM
0 comments
