Yesterday the Seattle P-I reported on efforts to ban pit bulls in the city. The council declined to pursue the matter for the moment, but dog owners are getting organized and gearing up for what they see as a likely battle down the road. The odds just turned further against them. As if on cue, two pits attacked a 71-year-old Seattle woman the same day the article ran. Fortunately, she’s recovering.
With high-profile attacks like this one, it’s tempting to run the pit bulls out of town. A similar overreaction a few years ago led to Denver killing 1,600 dogs and banning ownership within the city. But there’s not much evidence in favor of breed-specific legislation. It penalizes innocent dogs and owners instead of directly addressing negligence. It also misses the point that the breed that seems most dangerous at a given time depends a lot on how popular it is. A few decades ago, Huskies, German Shepherds, and Saint Bernards would have been bearing the brunt of these laws — all breeds that owners desiring aggressive dogs can still legally purchase under a ban on pits. Lots of details are in my earlier post on the subject.
And as always, don’t panic. As animal behaviorist Temple Grandin reminds us:
Permalink - Share/Save - Comments (4)…it’s really not necessary to be hyper-vigilant about the genetics of dog bites when you’re choosing a pet. Serious dog bites are so rare that from 1979-1994 only .3 percent of the U.S. population got bitten badly enough to seek medical care. When you consider the fact that just about everyone in America who isn’t living in a prison or a nursing home has fairly regular exposure to dogs, that’s a very small number.
Jacob Grier is a freelance writer, barista, mixologist, and magician in Portland, OR. He writes, eats, and drinks a lot. His articles have appeared in The Washington Post, Reason Online, The Oregonian, and other publications.
Follow me on Twitter
Wait… 900,000 a year get bitten and require medical attention? That’s a huge number.
Plus, I’m almost never exposed to dogs, and a lot of people in urban settings have limited exposure.
I’m not advocating for banning any breed or anything like that, I’m just saying that Temple Grandin might be understating the case for the seriousness of dog bites.
Wait. Upon further reading, that stat might be 900,000 total in 15 years. Which is significantly less bad.
Still… stats sucks. You can use statistics to prove anything even remotely true.
If nothing else, the legislation would keep Sarah Palin out of the city…
Touche!