Judy
04-22-2006, 03:44 PM
Pit bull ban in jeopardy
Apr. 22, 2006. 01:00 AM
The province should move quickly to appeal a debatable ruling by a Sarnia justice of the peace that could greatly affect Ontario's pit bull ban.
Jody Kirby was charged with failing to muzzle, leash and sterilize her dog, Tidus, as required under the law. But she was cleared when justice of the peace Helen Gale was not convinced the dog was a pit bull. It is believed to be the first successful challenge to the pit bull restrictions.
That law lists several breeds that are subject to a ban and also covers any dog that looks "substantially similar" to those targeted breeds.
In Kirby's case, the court was given a veterinarian's letter confirming her dog had some pit bull features. An animal control officer was even more specific, testifying that the heavily muscled dog had the same jawline as one of the banned breeds.
There seems ample cause for an appeal in this case. The stakes are high.
Ontario's pit bull ban is a fundamental public safety measure. Having owners of these dogs muzzle, leash and sterilize their animals is not too much to ask to prevent a further mauling of children and other people by these powerful animals.
The ban must not be rendered toothless by quibbling over what a pit bull looks like. As it is written, the law makes sense: If a dog's physical characteristics resemble a banned breed, it is covered by the ban.
If opponents of the ban persist in challenging the law by arguing about a dog's appearance, then the province should sharpen the definition of "pit bull" by amending the law to include detailed physical descriptions, such as jawline measures and ratios.
The ban is worth preserving. Most Ontarians understand the type of dog that it covers. But measurable definitions may be necessary to help some see what is obvious to others.
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1145657411713&call_pageid=968256290204&col=968350116795
bsl workshop
Apr. 22, 2006. 01:00 AM
The province should move quickly to appeal a debatable ruling by a Sarnia justice of the peace that could greatly affect Ontario's pit bull ban.
Jody Kirby was charged with failing to muzzle, leash and sterilize her dog, Tidus, as required under the law. But she was cleared when justice of the peace Helen Gale was not convinced the dog was a pit bull. It is believed to be the first successful challenge to the pit bull restrictions.
That law lists several breeds that are subject to a ban and also covers any dog that looks "substantially similar" to those targeted breeds.
In Kirby's case, the court was given a veterinarian's letter confirming her dog had some pit bull features. An animal control officer was even more specific, testifying that the heavily muscled dog had the same jawline as one of the banned breeds.
There seems ample cause for an appeal in this case. The stakes are high.
Ontario's pit bull ban is a fundamental public safety measure. Having owners of these dogs muzzle, leash and sterilize their animals is not too much to ask to prevent a further mauling of children and other people by these powerful animals.
The ban must not be rendered toothless by quibbling over what a pit bull looks like. As it is written, the law makes sense: If a dog's physical characteristics resemble a banned breed, it is covered by the ban.
If opponents of the ban persist in challenging the law by arguing about a dog's appearance, then the province should sharpen the definition of "pit bull" by amending the law to include detailed physical descriptions, such as jawline measures and ratios.
The ban is worth preserving. Most Ontarians understand the type of dog that it covers. But measurable definitions may be necessary to help some see what is obvious to others.
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1145657411713&call_pageid=968256290204&col=968350116795
bsl workshop