 Letters in Toronto to Papers - Ontario Needs YOURS
The Good: Quote: http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?
pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1107816609684&cal
l_pageid=970599119419
Feb. 8, 2005. 01:00 AM
Won't make Ontario safer
Passing Bill 132 will likely rack up enormous costs of enforcement with very little to show for it
Bryant must hold firm on bill to ban pit bulls
Feb. 6.
I'm surprised to see the Star fall for the bad science and sensationalizing of provincial Attorney-General Michael Bryant. Ontarians demand rational laws that will protect us from real dangers - the individual dangerous dogs that can be found on occasion in any breed due to an accident of birth or, too often, poor or deliberately cruel treatment by owners who promote attack
behaviours. Bill 132 doesn't provide this: It bans several breeds of dogs and a vaguely-defined type of dog that has already led to hysterical accusations by uninformed citizens against other breeds including labrador retrievers and other smooth-coated dogs. It provides for the police to enter a home and seize a "menacing dog" without any warrant or any criteria of what constitutes that behaviour - a provision that could lead to tragic consequences.
I don't know what research the editor consulted in preparing this editorial, but the many experts who testified at the recent hearings were united against the ban. Respected authorities testifying for the Ontario Veterinary Medical Association and its American equivalent told the committee that pit bulls aren't a "breed apart" and that they don't have locking jaws as commonly reported by some strident fearmongers. Furthermore, as cited in the hearings and documented in the public record, science shows that "pit bulls" have never killed a child in this country. "Pit bulls" account for just 4 per cent of Canadian dog bite related fatalities (husky type dogs account for 39 per cent), and "pit bull" type dogs are involved in less than 5 per cent of all serious dog bites in our country.
The city of Calgary applied a stringent policy that has reduced dog bites by 70 per cent - far greater success than Winnipeg achieved when it banned "pit bulls." In Calgary, citizens are protected from irresponsible dog owners and dangerous dogs of any breed without any extra cost to the taxpayer, because the city stringently enforces the registration of all dogs.
In 1998, Courtney Trempe of Stouffville was killed by a bull mastiff. She would not have been protected by a breed ban. Her mother asked the Liberals, at the hearings, not to ban one breed but rather to target all dangerous dogs and irresponsible owners. Had generic dangerous dog legislation been in effect in 1998, her daughter would still be alive. If the current government would act on the recommendations of the coroner's inquest into her daughter's death, we could prevent virtually every recent dog attack.
Rational science shows that banning "pit bulls" won't make Ontarians safer and will likely rack up enormous costs of enforcement with little to show for it. Ontarians deserve better: They deserve a law that provides for dog bite prevention education in schools, targets all dangerous dogs for immediate restriction, refuses to allow irresponsible dog owners to acquire new animals, allows municipalities and police forces to enforce these limits and works
to put down incorrigible individual animals before they can inflict serious harm. Bill 132 won't do that and that's why we should demand more from our legislators.
Janice Liedl-Myatt, Sudbury, Ont. | The Bad: Quote:
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?
pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&call_pageid=971358637177&c=Arti
cle&cid=1107643814322
Feb. 6, 2005. 01:00 AM
Bryant must hold firm on bill to ban pit bulls
It happened quickly. A 78-year-old Belleville man was walking past a parked car last Monday outside a grocery store when a pit bull, left alone, lunged at him through a partly open window. The elderly man was rushed to a local hospital after receiving a serious gash and punctures.
In a Burnaby, B.C., park, a 48-year-old disabled man on an outing last weekend had his face ripped open by a pit bull being walked by a teenager.
In Edmonton last weekend, 10 police officers were called out to scour city streets, looking for a normally "sweet and lovable" pit-bull cross that viciously attacked its owner's landlord.
In Pittsburgh, Pa., a pit bull attacked a 10-year-old boy last Monday. The boy now faces a series of painful rounds of reconstructive surgery.
All these pit-bull attacks, as well as others, occurred in the past week.
There have been too many such stories for too long — and too often involving innocent victims who were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
That's why it is imperative that Ontario Attorney-General Michael Bryant and the Liberal government follow through on their commitment to ban pit bulls in the province.
After hearing from victim upon victim during four days of public hearings into the proposed ban, Bryant is more determined than ever to eliminate this breed from Ontario.
"Pit bulls are inherently dangerous, and no matter what the nurture, they pose too great a risk to public safety," he says.
But in recent weeks, opponents of the bill to ban pit bulls have been trying to portray him as a politician out for cheap, headline-grabbing legislation.
The dog, pit-bull supporters are arguing, is being unfairly targeted and is the victim of shoddy science. The dog has no more propensity for violence than other dogs, they claim.
Supporters contend that bad dogs are found in every breed and that vicious behaviour usually stems from irresponsible owners, not the dog.
They also are urging that instead of targeting a specific breed, the province should focus on getting tough with bad owners.
Punishing the owner after a pit bull attack is a good idea, but unfortunately it would do nothing for victims whose faces had already been torn to shreds by a vicious pit bull.
Bryant is on solid ground in his quest to ban pit bulls.
When another breed of dog is "bad," it may become a public nuisance. But a "bad" pit bull can pose a true public hazard, as headlines each week across Canada and the U.S. show.
When it comes to deciding between a person's right to own a pet of his or her choice, versus public safety, it is no contest.
History has shown pit bulls present an unacceptable gamble — for our streets, our neighbourhoods, our playgrounds.
Research shows that pit bulls are among the dogs that bite most often. And when they do bite, their powerful jaws and natural aggressiveness have combined to create the most serious of consequences. Most dogs that bite will snap and release, but pit bulls are prone to hold on and tear at their victims.
It is just such behaviour that has led to the dog being banned in many jurisdictions. And it's why Toronto Police Chief Julian Fantino, whose officers often have to shoot repeatedly to stop an attack, is supporting the ban.
Last fall, Bryant introduced a sensible bill that would allow current owners to keep their pit bulls, although they must be muzzled and leashed in public and be neutered or spayed.
The Conservatives and New Democrats oppose a breed-specific ban. They should reconsider their stand.
And Bryant and Liberal MPPs should stick with their plan to pass the legislation quickly.
Such action is critical because a community has a right to protect itself against potentially dangerous animals — poisonous snakes, lions or, yes, pit bulls. | The proof is in the pudding. This Editor had to go across the country to get his attacks to print. I'm sure if we did the same for any other breed, we could find the SAME result. Dogs bite across the world every day. Some are reported and some not (yes, even some pit bull bites are NOT reported). But this is what we're up against. PLEASE WRITE SOMETHING - ANYTHING TODAY!!!!
I'd like to add that we should ALL be writing letters to our own area papers. People read them. From the large to the small papers. Here in High Park, we have the Villager. Up north at my parents place, they have the Advocate and the Era Banner. These papers reach a lot of people! And the rural areas have MPPs too. 
We need to pull the public over to our side and we don't have long to do it. Let's bombard everyone with GOOD information and flood them with the overwhelming data AGAINST this ban.
We only have a week to do this - before the Legislature comes back.
Who's with me? 
__________________
Parker, Can CH Hemlock's Echo V Highline Can/Am CD, RN, HCT, TT, CGN
Valen, Hemlocks ICame ISaw IConquered
Last edited by TrishB; 02-08-2005 at 10:42 AM.
|
02-08-2005, 10:36 AM
Linear Mode
