Pit Bull Attacks Lead Many Cities to Consider Banning Breed
Published: January 26th, 2009 • Comments: 3
In response to pit bull attacks and other dog bites caused by animals thought to have a vicious propensity, many cities and states have passed or considered legislation that restrict or ban certain types of dogs.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that approximately 310,000 people received medical treatment for dog bites in 2007, and that likely only represents a small percentage of the actual number of bite injuries, since many are not reported.
A study published by the CDC in 2000, indicated that pit bull-type breeds were the cause of one-third of all reported dog attack deaths between 1979 and 1998, with 118 pit bull attacks. Rottweillers were found to be the second highest, with 67 Rottweiler attack deaths during the time period.
According a new article by the Associated Press, during the 2007-2008 legislative session, 86 proposals to ban or restrict certain vicious breeds of dogs were introduced throughout the country. These breeds include pit bulls, Rottweilers, Staffordshire bull terriers and American Staffordshire terriers, to name a few.
The legislation, which is often introduced in response to a particularly tragic animal attack, are usually opposed by many dog owners and breeders, who favor a “punish the deed, not the breed” approach to the dog bite problem.
Even without the restrictions or bans, animal owners can be subject to substantial liability through a dog bite lawsuit and could also face fines or other criminal penalty for failing to maintain adequate control over a dog that is found to have a vicious propensity. However, many dog owners do not carry insurance coverage, especially in urban areas with higher numbers of rental properties, leaving victims without any source of compensation for irresponsible dog owners’ negligence.
In Ohio, a state law was passed in 1987 requiring owners of purebred pit bulls to confine their dogs and carry at least $100,000 worth of insurance coverage for potential pit bull attack lawsuits.
Comment by Tamara on 26 January 2009:
Dangerous dog registries, dog-owner’s liability insurance, and “One-Bite Rules” rely on punishing dogs and owners after-the-fact, which contributes nothing to prevention. In contrast, the 7-Step Dangerous Dog Risk Mitigation Protocol, available at no cost from http://www.PreventDogBites.com, is a “proactive” approach: potentially problematic dogs are identified by objective criteria and adequately contained BEFORE they bite.
Comment by Maryland Dog Federation on 27 January 2009:
You mention the 2000 CDC study, but you misrepresent the findings. Their study was based on a review of news articles. Only news accounts that mentioned the breed of dog were counted. Almost one quarter of the news accounts were not counted in this report because the breed of dog was NOT mentioned. Since the the lack of mention of breed usually indicates that it was NOT a \”pit bull\” or Rottweiler, it is a high likelihood that the numbers you quote are very skewed. Here is the statement of one of the researchers, Dr. Gail Golab, in response to the kind of misrepresentation perpetrated in your article: \”It is frustrating for me personally because people who want to enact Breed Specific Legislation keep using the report to try and make a case against pit bulls. The whole point of our summary was to explain you can\’t do that.\”
Also, the vast majority of breed specific legislation proposals are defeated, usually very soundly. Most recently, Montana legislature defeated a state ban in January 2009. I believe the vote was 17-1 against.
Comment by Jamie on 19 April 2009:
I have been around Pit Bulls and Rotts my entire life. I know from experience, not heresay, that Pits and Rotts are not dangerous unless owned by dangerous people. Baniing a breed only results in law abiding citizens like myself to lose their INNOCENT dogs… If you ban guns, are the criminals going to rush out of the woodwork to hand over their guns? Of course not. It is the same with these dogs… The people that own them for the wrong reasons do not care about the law. Therefore only innocent Pits and responsible owners will be affected…