Marty
08-03-2005, 09:19 PM
Madison, WI -- Enforce dog laws already on the books
Denver's ban was a reaction to a problem they probably did not get control of over many years. Most cities have laws on the books to monitor dog ownership. They need to emphasize enforcing what they have. Dogs need a city license and current rabies vaccination. They cannot run at large or unsupervised except in designated areas. Animals exhibiting vicious behavior need to be destroyed. If these laws are made a priority, then breed discrimination would not be needed.
A city also needs to provide funding for senior citizens and low-income citizens to get their pets spayed or neutered at a nominal cost, and give them a discount on the license if it is done. Don't breed discriminate without working with the existing laws first. Education is the key. Once you ban one breed, it can become a slippery slope.
- Cindy Lease, Cottage Grove
Penalize owners, not dogs
Previous owners of my pit bull let her run and get hit by a car. She eventually had a limb removed. Even with pain, she's never been aggressive toward people, not even those who have inadvertently hurt her arm. But she's been repeatedly attacked by off-leash neighborhood dogs, like shepherds and labradors. Despite repeated incidents, their owners still walk them off-leash.
The pack mentality is basically canine. It's 100 percent the owners' responsibility. Make negligence a felony. Rule out multiples; pit attacks are rarely solo. Make bad owners responsible. Don't kill good pets because of resemblance.
- Chris Weber, Madison
'Pit bulls' slandered by their name
Pit bulls are loving dogs; they want to snuggle with you, just like other dogs. They are instant friends and have a tendency to move closer to you to show affection. Perhaps the name - a misnomer - exploits them to be mean. Cocker spaniels lead the way in biting incidents, not our beautiful pit bulls.
- Ralph A. Smieja, Waunakee
Pit bull aggression can be startling
I had never had an opinion regarding pit bulls until a recent experience. My husband and I were at the Verona dog park when down the walkway came two dogs without owners in sight. The first dog ran straight up to where we were sitting, aggressively focused on our 18-pound Cocker spaniel. He lunged at both of us. Until you witness this, it is difficult to understand the level of aggression.
My husband pulled our dog off the ground over his head, turning constantly to avoid the dog who was jumping and lunging. A family sitting nearby ran; others held their animals.
The owner's comment after she swore at us was: "It was just as likely that your dog could have killed my dog." No remorse, angry at us and not in control of her animal.
The park ranger told us that a week earlier a pit bull had attacked and seriously injured a black lab. The owner fled. I now know that people will actually leave a dog park if they know a pit bull is there. My opinion on a ban? Well, I think you know it.
- Monica Stephenson, Madison
People more of a threat than any dog
My pit bull, Ginger Ale, is a wanted dog. Some activists convinced she is a danger to society want her out of public parks, out of doggie day care centers, out of sight altogether. This is largely due to the fact that, of the five to 10 deaths reported annually as a result of dog attacks, roughly a third are caused by a pit bull. These statistics can be found under the banner of the CDC and other government sources online.
The tragedy of these deaths is undeniable. Knowing that any of our children can be a victim drives home the point that this is too many deaths, and something must be done. We must ban pit bulls.
But while working to protect our children, we should note another statistic, this one from the Web site for National Child Abuse Statistics (www.child helpusa.org), which reports that four children die in their homes as a result of child abuse by their relatives each day. Four kids dead every 24 hours. Some of these homes may even have pit bulls.
Comparing the two classes of perpetrators, it is easy to see where the threat to our children lies. Next time you look next door and worry about what kind of dog your neighbor has, try to tell what kind of parents they are. Because chances are, one of those parents is 146 times more likely to cause a child a fatal injury than the pit bull, chow chow or Pomeranian running around in the backyard. When do we start banning humans? Ginger Ale wants to know.
- Nancy Dietrich, Madison
Editorial understated dangers of pit bulls
Unfortunately, your editorial on pit bull bans continued to perpetuate the myths that enable certain DNA canine combinations to maim and kill.
First, regarding the notion that dangerous people and the lack of appropriate dog training make pit bulls dangerous to people: pit bulls are bred to be fighting dogs. It's in their genes. Gentle people and good obedience training cannot change their DNA.
Second, Rottweilers and Dobermans are also dangerous, so why go after pit bulls? It's because their killer jaws of steel can lock onto someone with such force that it is nearly impossible to get them to release. In addition, the blood lines that we commonly see have been specifically inbred to reinforce their killer instinct. However, since it is true that Rottweilers and Dobermans also have a vicious history, then the solution is obvious: Ban them all.
Third, pit bulls only account for about a third of human deaths per year by vicious dog attacks in the United States. The Centers for Disease Control reports that at least another third are pit bull mixes, which are often just pit bulls without papers.
It is not a coincidence that animal shelters are overflowing with pit bulls and pit bull mixes. It only takes one bite or attempted attack for nice people who got them because they are trendy or look cute to realize the mistake they've made. The statistics demonstrate the reality that only a few breeds of dogs are dangerous to people. So let's do the right thing: ban those breeds.
- Gail Pizarro, Madison
Blame 'trashy people,' not their dogs
For two years I have owned a bull terrier (the "Target" or "Spuds Mackenzie" dog). I have become anxious about the growing trend of breed-specific legislation banning pit bull terriers and even extending to all "bully breeds," which would include my dogs, Trixie and George. Our bull terriers have enriched our family with their fun-loving, comical, typically non-aggressive ways. I wonder if there will come a time when my family, our dogs included, has to relocate if our community adopts a bully breed ban.
Having worked as a child abuse investigator, I have seen firsthand the injuries that can occur when an unpredictable dog is left unsupervised with young children. The vicious dog of the time has gone from German Shepherds to Dobermans to Rotweilers and now pit bull terriers. These dogs seemed to be linked to a trashier element of the population. It's almost like we would like to ban the trashy people, but can't, so we ban something closely associated with them.
I am against breed-specific legislation. Punish irresponsible pet owners and their dogs on a case-by-case basis rather than punishing an entire breed.
- Melody Couch, Monroe
Lifetime of experience says pit bulls vicious
During my 95 years of living, I have made friends of many pit bull dogs, all of them owned by people I knew. They are not any smarter or more faithful to their owners than dogs that will not attack with little provocation. It is for that reason that I would never allow a pit bull to live in my home.
When I was 8, my brother, aged 6, and I were caught wading in a road gutter where we could feel the mud between our toes. Our mother told me to get two switches from a tree, which she intended to use to "teach us a lesson." Our Airedale ran up to her, grabbed both switches in his mouth and hid under the granary. Mother laughed and said, "Next time, I will keep the dog out."
If we had owned a pit bull, it may have attacked her instead of taking the switches. That's the nature of the pit bull - vicious. Pit bulls should be gradually eliminated so that no child will be unsafe on the street because of possible attack from those animals.
- Uel Soward, Black Earth
Breed ban penalizes gentle family pets
Every morning, my American Staffordshire Terrier and I walk at least two miles. After work, the happiness on his face is impossible to hide. I struggle to put my walking shoes on. He knows what is coming and nudges me, making it difficult to tie the laces. Oh, he is so happy!
He loves to stop for those he meets to get his head patted. He sits, a big grin on his face, tongue hanging out (watch out for big kisses). Kids? He loves kids! Remember Petey from "The Little Rascals" or Buster Brown shoes? He's the same kind of dog.
Dangerous? Hardly. Those who know him would tell you he takes up a whole lot of room on the couch. He is without doubt, the most laid-back dog I have known. Why would I ever let anyone take him away from me? That is absurd.
He didn't get a choice to be born a different breed. He is not a threat to anyone. He is just my dog. Take my dog away? A breed ban does just that.
- Steve Evans, Middleton
Denver's ban was a reaction to a problem they probably did not get control of over many years. Most cities have laws on the books to monitor dog ownership. They need to emphasize enforcing what they have. Dogs need a city license and current rabies vaccination. They cannot run at large or unsupervised except in designated areas. Animals exhibiting vicious behavior need to be destroyed. If these laws are made a priority, then breed discrimination would not be needed.
A city also needs to provide funding for senior citizens and low-income citizens to get their pets spayed or neutered at a nominal cost, and give them a discount on the license if it is done. Don't breed discriminate without working with the existing laws first. Education is the key. Once you ban one breed, it can become a slippery slope.
- Cindy Lease, Cottage Grove
Penalize owners, not dogs
Previous owners of my pit bull let her run and get hit by a car. She eventually had a limb removed. Even with pain, she's never been aggressive toward people, not even those who have inadvertently hurt her arm. But she's been repeatedly attacked by off-leash neighborhood dogs, like shepherds and labradors. Despite repeated incidents, their owners still walk them off-leash.
The pack mentality is basically canine. It's 100 percent the owners' responsibility. Make negligence a felony. Rule out multiples; pit attacks are rarely solo. Make bad owners responsible. Don't kill good pets because of resemblance.
- Chris Weber, Madison
'Pit bulls' slandered by their name
Pit bulls are loving dogs; they want to snuggle with you, just like other dogs. They are instant friends and have a tendency to move closer to you to show affection. Perhaps the name - a misnomer - exploits them to be mean. Cocker spaniels lead the way in biting incidents, not our beautiful pit bulls.
- Ralph A. Smieja, Waunakee
Pit bull aggression can be startling
I had never had an opinion regarding pit bulls until a recent experience. My husband and I were at the Verona dog park when down the walkway came two dogs without owners in sight. The first dog ran straight up to where we were sitting, aggressively focused on our 18-pound Cocker spaniel. He lunged at both of us. Until you witness this, it is difficult to understand the level of aggression.
My husband pulled our dog off the ground over his head, turning constantly to avoid the dog who was jumping and lunging. A family sitting nearby ran; others held their animals.
The owner's comment after she swore at us was: "It was just as likely that your dog could have killed my dog." No remorse, angry at us and not in control of her animal.
The park ranger told us that a week earlier a pit bull had attacked and seriously injured a black lab. The owner fled. I now know that people will actually leave a dog park if they know a pit bull is there. My opinion on a ban? Well, I think you know it.
- Monica Stephenson, Madison
People more of a threat than any dog
My pit bull, Ginger Ale, is a wanted dog. Some activists convinced she is a danger to society want her out of public parks, out of doggie day care centers, out of sight altogether. This is largely due to the fact that, of the five to 10 deaths reported annually as a result of dog attacks, roughly a third are caused by a pit bull. These statistics can be found under the banner of the CDC and other government sources online.
The tragedy of these deaths is undeniable. Knowing that any of our children can be a victim drives home the point that this is too many deaths, and something must be done. We must ban pit bulls.
But while working to protect our children, we should note another statistic, this one from the Web site for National Child Abuse Statistics (www.child helpusa.org), which reports that four children die in their homes as a result of child abuse by their relatives each day. Four kids dead every 24 hours. Some of these homes may even have pit bulls.
Comparing the two classes of perpetrators, it is easy to see where the threat to our children lies. Next time you look next door and worry about what kind of dog your neighbor has, try to tell what kind of parents they are. Because chances are, one of those parents is 146 times more likely to cause a child a fatal injury than the pit bull, chow chow or Pomeranian running around in the backyard. When do we start banning humans? Ginger Ale wants to know.
- Nancy Dietrich, Madison
Editorial understated dangers of pit bulls
Unfortunately, your editorial on pit bull bans continued to perpetuate the myths that enable certain DNA canine combinations to maim and kill.
First, regarding the notion that dangerous people and the lack of appropriate dog training make pit bulls dangerous to people: pit bulls are bred to be fighting dogs. It's in their genes. Gentle people and good obedience training cannot change their DNA.
Second, Rottweilers and Dobermans are also dangerous, so why go after pit bulls? It's because their killer jaws of steel can lock onto someone with such force that it is nearly impossible to get them to release. In addition, the blood lines that we commonly see have been specifically inbred to reinforce their killer instinct. However, since it is true that Rottweilers and Dobermans also have a vicious history, then the solution is obvious: Ban them all.
Third, pit bulls only account for about a third of human deaths per year by vicious dog attacks in the United States. The Centers for Disease Control reports that at least another third are pit bull mixes, which are often just pit bulls without papers.
It is not a coincidence that animal shelters are overflowing with pit bulls and pit bull mixes. It only takes one bite or attempted attack for nice people who got them because they are trendy or look cute to realize the mistake they've made. The statistics demonstrate the reality that only a few breeds of dogs are dangerous to people. So let's do the right thing: ban those breeds.
- Gail Pizarro, Madison
Blame 'trashy people,' not their dogs
For two years I have owned a bull terrier (the "Target" or "Spuds Mackenzie" dog). I have become anxious about the growing trend of breed-specific legislation banning pit bull terriers and even extending to all "bully breeds," which would include my dogs, Trixie and George. Our bull terriers have enriched our family with their fun-loving, comical, typically non-aggressive ways. I wonder if there will come a time when my family, our dogs included, has to relocate if our community adopts a bully breed ban.
Having worked as a child abuse investigator, I have seen firsthand the injuries that can occur when an unpredictable dog is left unsupervised with young children. The vicious dog of the time has gone from German Shepherds to Dobermans to Rotweilers and now pit bull terriers. These dogs seemed to be linked to a trashier element of the population. It's almost like we would like to ban the trashy people, but can't, so we ban something closely associated with them.
I am against breed-specific legislation. Punish irresponsible pet owners and their dogs on a case-by-case basis rather than punishing an entire breed.
- Melody Couch, Monroe
Lifetime of experience says pit bulls vicious
During my 95 years of living, I have made friends of many pit bull dogs, all of them owned by people I knew. They are not any smarter or more faithful to their owners than dogs that will not attack with little provocation. It is for that reason that I would never allow a pit bull to live in my home.
When I was 8, my brother, aged 6, and I were caught wading in a road gutter where we could feel the mud between our toes. Our mother told me to get two switches from a tree, which she intended to use to "teach us a lesson." Our Airedale ran up to her, grabbed both switches in his mouth and hid under the granary. Mother laughed and said, "Next time, I will keep the dog out."
If we had owned a pit bull, it may have attacked her instead of taking the switches. That's the nature of the pit bull - vicious. Pit bulls should be gradually eliminated so that no child will be unsafe on the street because of possible attack from those animals.
- Uel Soward, Black Earth
Breed ban penalizes gentle family pets
Every morning, my American Staffordshire Terrier and I walk at least two miles. After work, the happiness on his face is impossible to hide. I struggle to put my walking shoes on. He knows what is coming and nudges me, making it difficult to tie the laces. Oh, he is so happy!
He loves to stop for those he meets to get his head patted. He sits, a big grin on his face, tongue hanging out (watch out for big kisses). Kids? He loves kids! Remember Petey from "The Little Rascals" or Buster Brown shoes? He's the same kind of dog.
Dangerous? Hardly. Those who know him would tell you he takes up a whole lot of room on the couch. He is without doubt, the most laid-back dog I have known. Why would I ever let anyone take him away from me? That is absurd.
He didn't get a choice to be born a different breed. He is not a threat to anyone. He is just my dog. Take my dog away? A breed ban does just that.
- Steve Evans, Middleton