Tuesday, December 06, 2005

On Pit Bulls and Other Breeds: Column: Ban Breeding, Not Breeds. Humans Make Breeds "Bad"

From a column in a newspaper. I actually do not read “news”papers, but this column provides many good facts (proof) that point to the fact that many breeds are made bad by human cause. He uses the terms - "insecure scumbags". I agree.

Evans: Ban breeding, not breeds

December 4, 2005

(http://www.dailycamera.com/bdc/
columnist/0,1713,BDC_2490_4948,00.html)

The problem with pit bulls is people.
Though bred with powerful muscles and strong jaws, pit bulls are not
inherently prone to crazed attack (unlike some highly bred dogs, such as Dalmatians
and cocker spaniels).
But insecure scumbags sometimes abuse this powerful animal and misuse its
physiology in the service of violence. They try to make pit bulls mean.
And that's why pit bulls and pit-bull mixes were responsible for more fatal
attacks (66) than any other breed from 1979 to 1998, according to a study by
the Centers for Disease Control. If that seems alarming, keep in mind how
exceptionally rare a fatal dog attack is: Roughly 20 fatal attacks per year — a
stable number, according to the CDC — out of a population of more than 50
million dogs.
The CDC study was careful to note what the media rarely does: Many factors
figure into a dog attack, but human behavior is the key. The report offers
this list: "heredity, sex, early experience, socialization and training, health
(medical and behavioral), reproductive status, quality of ownership and
supervision, and victim behavior."
Of those eight factors, all but one — sex — can be laid largely at the feet
of humans, not dogs (humans even control heredity, i.e. breeding, and
health).
The CDC study found no evidence that breed-specific bans work. But that
hasn't stopped city after city, including Denver, from banning pit bulls.
San Francisco has a better idea: Instead of prejudicial bans — which force
families to sacrifice beloved, gentle pets on the altar of fear and political
pandering — the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in November passed an
ordinance (effective Jan. 1) requiring pit bulls to be spayed or neutered,
punishable by a $1,000 fine. Legitimate breeders will have to apply for permits.
What a great idea. After all, reproductive status is one key factor in
whether an animal will bite. And when you prohibit pit-bull breeding, you strike a
blow against repugnant pit-bull peddlers who profit on the insecurity of
losers and thugs.
"I recognize that there are responsible, loving owners of pit bulls and
pit-bull mixes in our city," said Supervisor Bevan Dufty, who crafted the city's
new law. Why can't every politician be that sane?
But why stop at pit bulls? We should apply San Francisco's mandatory
spay-neuter law to all dogs (and cats) nationwide. Dog-show people and legitimate
breeders could receive permits only under strict conditions, which would reduce
inbreeding and cruelty by a small minority of unethical breeders.
Too much "regulation"? Not really. The lives and welfare of millions of
animals outweigh someone's inconvenience. "Property rights"? People who think of
sentient, feeling creatures as mere property and sources of profit are the
root of all these problems, anyway.
I'd miss those wonderful mixed-breed dogs and cats. But that's a small price
to pay to reduce pet overpopulation and the concomitant euthanasia of
millions of animals a year. And in reducing the breeding of animals for profit, we'd
reduce the suffering of unwanted animals.
Speaking of people who work hard for the well-being of animals,
congratulations to my former colleagues at the Longmont Humane Society, which just
received a $5 million charitable gift. I know they'll put it to excellent use.
Shelters get a bad rap because they euthanize animals. But remember, they are
only providing a humane death — as opposed to starvation, being hit by cars,
even shot — for animals that other people were too irresponsible to care
for. Mandatory spay-neuter laws would make their jobs a whole lot easier.

Contact Clay Evans at (303) 473-1352 or _evansc@dailycamera.com_
(mailto:evansc@dailycamera.com) .

No comments:

Search for More Content

Custom Search
Bookmark and Share

Past Articles