Brian Harris

Tammie Bob

English 1102

December 3, 2005

Are Pit Bull Bans the Best Solution for the Problem of Dangerous Dogs?

            Right away, I understand why they call him "Meathead." Unlike others of his species, his skull cannot be empirically experienced.  It's not that I don't think it's in there somewhere.  It's just that it's covered by a thick layer of muscles.  Pet him, poke him on the top of the head -- you'll feel only muscle.  Solid muscle.

            Meathead is a pit bull.  He seems friendly enough, but I can't help but feel a bit unnerved around him.   Pit bulls have the most terrible of reputations.  And that mouth, look at it!  It's huge!  A pelican instantly comes to mind.  He opens it for a yawn.  Forget pelican -- the great white shark is probably his closest relative.  Before his gaping maw snaps shut, I move in for a closer look and am surprised when I see there aren’t two extra rows of teeth.  Maybe he's not a shark after all.

            He stands up and notices his own tail out of the corner of his eye.  Suddenly, he lunges!  "This is it for me," I think.  "It's my own fault for messing around with this dangerous animal."  I close my eyes and wait to be devoured.  Several seconds pass, broken by peals of laughter from behind me.

            "Oh, Meaty!" I hear Nancy exclaim.  Opening my eyes, I see Meathead furiously attacking.... his own tail. 

            "We love it when he does that," Cliff remarks.  "Tires him out."

            Nancy and Cliff are my neighbors, a couple in their late fifties who are Meathead's human companions.  Meathead is actually Cliff's son Paul's dog, and the couple is taking care of him while Paul is at college.

            "Aren't you afraid he'll turn on you one day?" I ask, a question which instantly embarrasses me because, well, it's dumb.  Of course they don't.  They obviously wouldn't keep him in their house if they did.

            "Um, sometimes.  Yes," replies Nancy.  Maybe it wasn't such a dumb question after all.  She goes on to explain to me that Meathead has already bitten four people: the guy from the electric company, someone who came over to fix the fireplace, Cliff's friend George, and Nancy's ex-husband, Bob.

            "He really hates Bob," Nancy says with a laugh.  Does he hate Cliff's friend George, too?  No, the attack on George was the result of a misunderstanding.  Apparently, George was leaving and went to give Cliff a hug, which the beast mistakenly interpreted as an attack and came to Cliff's aid.  Bob was merely nipped on the calf, a bite which didn't even break the skin or tear his pant leg.  Nancy dismissed it as a simple quest for attention.  Fortunately, George and Bob did not report the bites to the authorities. This was good for Meathead's sake, because his previous two victims did, prompting the city to put him on notice that the next Meathead attack they heard about would be his last. 

            Next, Cliff rolls up his shirt sleeve and shows me his forearm.  It is covered with red and purple abrasions.

            "Oh my God!  What happened to you?" I exclaim.

            "I periodically let him chew on my arm," Cliff explains, getting the dog's attention with a whistle, which causes him to abandon the chase of his own tail and run over to gnaw on Cliff affectionately.  "Wanna' try it?"

            No, I don't.  These people are crazy!  But like most pit bull owners, they are fanatically in love with this often feared and misunderstood animal and scared that a pit bull ban will come to our town.

            "What do you think of pit bull bans?" I ask them, finally hitting on an authentic stupid question.

            "We hate them," Cliff answers.  "It's not the dog; it's the owner," Nancy chimes in, perhaps unconsciously vocalizing the slogan of those opposed to breed specific legislation. 

            Breed specific legislation (BSL) is the term for laws, like the one being proposed in Chicago by Alderman Ginger Rugai (19th Ward), that bans a specific breed of dog.  In practice, however, these laws only ban pit bulls, as no municipality has banned any other type of dog.  Denver, Miami, and Cincinnati already have these laws on the books, and Ontario became the first Canadian province to ban pit bulls in August 2005.  Last month, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors narrowly rejected a total ban on the dogs, but mandated spaying and neutering and outlawed breeding. That they may be banned there outright, however, remains a possibility (Romney).  Chicago may be next.

            "How many people have to be maimed?" asked Alderman Isaac Carothers (29th Ward) after Rugai's bill was introduced on Wednesday. "How many people have to be killed by these vicious dogs before we take action?" (Washburn)

            He does have a point.  A lot of people have been maimed by pit bulls.  A lot of people have been killed by them.  A perfunctory search of Google News on the term "pit+bull attack" turns up stories like these:

·                    a 76-year-old Texas woman was mauled to death by six pit bulls as she worked in her yard (Associated Press)

·                    six people, including two children and the dog's owner, were attacked by three pit bulls that escaped from a home in Cary, Illinois (Associated Press)

·                    a 10-year-old Alabama boy was attacked by his babysitter's pit bull and nearly blinded

·                    and an elderly Elmhurst woman was attacked by a pit bull while innocently standing in her driveway

            All of these incidents occurred in the ten days preceding this writing, and are by no means a complete record of recent pit bull attacks in that time.  Yet are pit bulls are so dangerous that they must be banned?  No, they are not, because they are not inherently dangerous.  In this paper, I will explain why pit bulls bans are not a good solution to the problem of dangerous dogs, and offer better solutions to the problem.

            To determine if pit bulls really are dangerous dogs, we must first determine what a pit bull is.  This question is not that easy to answer, as "pit bull" is an unscientific term used to describe a variety of dog breeds believed to be descended from the Old English Bulldogge, a popular breed in the 18th century, now extinct.  In fact, "pit bull" is not a breed recognized by the American Kennel Club.  Determining which breeds are pit bulls depends largely upon who one asks.  Breeds that are most frequently called "pit bulls" are the Staffordshire Bull terrier, American Staffordshire terrier, American Bulldog, and English Bull terrier.  The fact that "pit bull" is an unscientific term does complicate the process of determining how dangerous they really are.

            The American Temperament Test Society is an organization that evaluates the temperament of different dog breeds.  Between 1977 and 2003, the organization held 960 tests, involving more than 24,000 dogs.  Each test, in which the dog is loose on a 6-foot leash and separated from his or her owner, takes 8 to 12 minutes to complete. "The test simulates a casual walk through a park or neighborhood where everyday life situations are encountered. During this walk, the dog experiences visual, auditory and tactile stimuli. Neutral, friendly and threatening situations are encountered, calling into play the dog's ability to distinguish between non-threatening situations and those calling for watchful and protective reactions." (ATTS)  Three judges evaluate the test, and the dog fails if it shows any unprovoked aggression, panic without recovery, or strong avoidance. 

            According to the organization's statistics, dogs that are often described as "pit bulls" have fared no worse than most other breeds of dogs.  Of 480 American Staffordshire terriers tested by the organization, 400 passed, giving the dog a passing rate of 83.3%; Staffordshire terriers have a passing rate of 93.3% (though the sample size of 59 dogs is quite low); American bulldogs have a passing rate of 81.9% (sample size: 116); and English bull terriers have yet to be tested.  To put these numbers in perspective, the Golden Retriever (sample size 659) has a passing rate of 83.6%, the Collie has a passing rate of 79% (sample size: 791), and the Chihuahua (with a small sample size of 34) has a rate of only 70.6%.  The dog breed with the lowest passing rate and a sample size of more than 100 is the Shetland sheepdog, at 66.7% (sample size: 459), with the Chinese Shar-Pei in second-to-last place at 69.7% (sample size: 201).  From this, we can plainly see that "pit bulls" display no more aggression than other breeds of dogs, and in fact display less than some of them.

            Similar results have been arrived at by Benjamin and Lynette Hart's 1985 study on dog personality traits.  In their study, in which dog handlers were surveyed, it was determined that the breeds who "snap at children" the most are the Scottish terrier, miniature schnauzer, West Highland white terrier, Chow Chow, Yorkshire terrier, and Pomeranian.  The breeds that demonstrated the most "territorial defense" are the Doberman pinscher, Akita, miniature schnauzer, Rottweiler, German shepherd, and chow chow (Coren, 169).  Notice how none of these breeds are those considered to be pit bulls.  Based on these results, it would appear that the most sensible breed to ban is the miniature schnauzer.

            Still, some studies do reveal "pit bulls" to have been the breed of dog most frequently involved in attacks on humans.  A 2000 study by Sacks and Sinclair has shown that "pit bull-type dogs and Rottweilers were involved in half" of the 238 dog bite-related human fatalities between 1979 and 1998 (Sacks and Sinclair).  They conclude, however, that, "Although fatal attacks on humans appear to be a breed-specific problem (pit bull-type dogs and Rottweilers), other breeds may bite and cause fatalities at higher rates" (Sacks and Sinclair). So it is not the inherent violence of the "pit bull," but some other factor that has caused "pit bulls" to have been so frequently involved in fatal attacks.

            They continue: "Because of the difficulties inherent in determining a dog's breed with certainty, enforcement of breed-specific legislation raises constitutional and practical issues" (Sacks and Sinclair).  This difficulty in determining the dog breed is one of the many problems associated with breed-specific legislation, and I know this from personal experience.  When walking my dog Tabitha -- a boxer mixed with a "hound" (like "pit bull," a breed that doesn't actually exist) -- I have had many people either approach me asking, "Is that a pit bull?" or run away terrified, shrieking, "It's a pit bull! Run!"  Once, I was walking past a young couple sitting on their porch steps when I heard one say to the other, "That's one of those dogs that kills children."  My Tabby does not kill children, although I could see her attempting to eat a child covered in bacon fat, which would really be more of a testament to her love of bacon than any inherent violent tendencies. Even the veterinarian once wrote down in his notes, under "breed," "pit bull," which I made him change to "boxer," because I do not want there to be any paper-trail accusing her of being a "pit bull," in fear of a ban like Rugai's.

            As I have shown above, there is no actually breed of dog as a pit bull, but even if there were, it would not be easy for many people to determine if a dog in question was a pit bull and, in fact, banned, which is one of the many problems of breed-specific legislation.  “There is really no way of defining what a 'pit bull' is and isn't," said Robert Duffy, president of the American Dog Association (Monti).  With this in mind, it is disturbing that many “pit bull” bans offer no due process of law, making a single individual -- the animal control officer -- the judge, jury, and executioner (Monti), which is inherently antithetical to American ideas of justice.  Rugai's proposed ban does just that (Lipman).

The problem with breed-specific legislation is that it assumes the problem is in the breed of the dog, but any breed can kill.  "Breeds responsible for human fatalities have varied over time. Since 1975, dogs belonging to more than 30 breeds—including Dachshunds, Golden Retrievers, Labrador Retrievers, and a Yorkshire terrier—have been responsible for fatal attacks on people," said Gail C. Golab, co-author of the study and assistant director of the American Veterinary Medicine Association Education and Research Division (Monti).  If a Yorkshire terrier, averaging about ten pounds and with tiny little teeth, can kill, then any breed of dog can.   If proponents of BSL really were interested in outlawing dangerous dogs, it would seem to me that they would seek to ban any breed of dog which can kill, which is apparently all of them.  Why draw the line at pit bulls?

The best solution to the problem of dangerous dogs is to determine which factors cause dogs to bite.  "Breed is one part of what can go into whether a dog will bite," said Humane Society of the United States spokeswoman Stephanie Shain, "but pulling out that one piece of five or six things just does not make sense" (Kass).  So what factors do cause dogs to bite?  According to a study by Kenneth A. Gershman and J.J. Sacks, those factors are: physical abuse of the animal, failure to neuter male dogs, and chaining the dog in the yard (although this last factor was found to be of "borderline significance") (Gersham).  If these findings are accurate, it would seem that the problem does indeed lie with the owner.  No dog should be abused, but pit bull bans would direct scarce law enforcement resources toward all owners of pit bulls, whether they are abusing an animal -- and causing it to be dangerous -- or not.  And every dog should be neutered, not merely to decrease aggressiveness in the animal, but to solve the problem of unwanted animals, which is where stray dogs come from. 

Many of the most dangerous pit bulls, such as the ones that killed an Evergreen Park, Illinois woman in the Dan Ryan Woods in January, 2003 -- the incident that prompted Rugai to propose her pit bull ban -- were strays (CBSNews.com). It seems to me that these problem of these animals' viciousness, then, is not their breed, but the fact that they were living in the Dan Ryan Woods, where they were no doubt very hungry and fighting for survival.  A total ban on pit bulls in the City of Chicago would direct law enforcement resources toward pit bulls who have never harmed anyone, instead of making sure that there are no stray dogs living in city parks.

In America, we punish people or animals for their actions, not for their genetic makeup.  Pit bull bans are not consistent with this ideal, and they do nothing to prevent attacks by dangerous dogs, since there is no enough evidence that pit bulls are inherently dangerous.  Even Meathead, I am happy to report, has not bitten anyone for more than a year, when he was neutered.

Works Cited

Associated Press.  "Ontario pit bull owners could face jail time."  Chicago Sun Times. 

Date of publication: August 30, 2005.  Date of access: December 3, 2005.  http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-pit30.html

Associated Press.  "Texas woman mauled to death by six dogs."  Chicago Tribune.  Date

of publication: November 27, 2005.  Date of access: December 3, 2005.  http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-brf-woman-mauled,1,2312646.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

Associated Press.  "Pit bulls go on rampage: 10-year-old boy is in critical condition." 

MSNBC.com.  Date of publication: November 6, 2005.  Date of access: December 3, 2005.  http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9950177/from/RL.2/

American Temperament Test Society.  "Breed Statistics."  ATTS.org.  Date of publication:

unknown.  Date of access: December 12, 2005.  http://www.atts.org/statistics.html

CBSNews.com. "Pit bull owners sought in Chicago." CBS News. Date of publication:

January 13, 2003.  Date of access: December 8, 2005. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/01/13/eveningnews/main536337.shtml

Coren, Stanley.  How dogs think: understanding the canine mind.  New York: Free Press,

c2004.

Gershman, K.A. and Sacks, J.J. "Which dogs bite?  A case-control study of risk factors." 

            Pediatrics.  1994.  Vol. 93, p. 913-917.

Kass, Jeff.  "Denver's pit bull ban roils owners." Christian Science Monitor.  Date of

publication: June 17, 2005.  Date of access: December 8, 2005. http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0617/p01s05-usgn.html

Lipman, Jonathan.  "'You see a pit bull off a leash, you better jump in a car': Alderman

renews call for pit bull ban in Chicago; Daley pledges to renew ban."  Daily Southtown.  Date of publication: December 1, 2005.  Date of access: December 8, 2005.  http://www.dailysouthtown.com/southtown/yrtwn/south/011syt1.htm

Monti, Dean J. "Responsible ownership the alternative to breed banning, other

restrictions."  American Veterinary Medical Association.  Date of publication: 2005. http://www.avma.org/onlnews/javma/nov00/s111500c.asp

Sacks, J.J. and Sinclair, L.  "Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United

States between 1979 and 1998."  Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association.  2000, vol. 217.  p. 836-840.

Romney, Lee.  "San Francisco approves law regulating pit bulls."  Los Angeles Times. 

Date of publication: November 16, 2005.  Date of access: December 3, 2005.  http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-pitbull16nov16,1,449635.story

Washburn, Gary.  "Chicago proposal would ban pit bulls."   Newsday.com.  Date of

publication: December 1, 2005.  Date of access: December 3, 2005.  http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-chi-pitbullban1201,0,7251832.story?coll=ny-leadnationalnews-headline