Reply #48: They based a "study" on 3 deaths over a 15 year period? Not enough bites to incite [View All]

hysteria and panic, so they try to goose it along? They saw far more death and injury from poisoning, drowning, and falls to children. 36,000 people a year are killed in cars vs 30 or so in total from dogs of indeterminate breed, yet they try to divert attention with this? Some public service.

If you REALLY want to promote actions that demonstrably reduce dog bites:

1: Education. Canada has regular dog-bite avoidance training for kids in school in at least two grades, and they contract out seminars to those who employ meter readers and postal employees. Check for dog bite statistics in Calgary - nearly non-existent. See how empty their shelters are. What they are doing works. (Google Bill Bruce at the Calgary Animal Services - truly amazing results, based on thoughtful policies).

2: Spay/Neuter. Just make it available - it's cheaper. In North Carolina they found that paying vets to perform spay/neuter for any and all comers was far more cost-effective than than any method of enforcement in reducing the number of strays and the number of bites. The Montana Spay/Neuter Task Force holds "Community Events", gatherings that encourage the community to co-operate in a spay/neuter effort. They have 12+ years of public data about scores of "Events". Not only does their special format of an "Event" dramatically reduce bites, strays, and shelter admissions, but interviews and letters from pet owners speak to a new respect for their pet and more attention to their behavior in an urban setting. We did one of these with a nearby community where there was a problem with strays. Performed 138 (mostly dogs) surgeries in a weekend. They did not have to pick up a stray dog for a year. Not only does it reduce the litters, but it gives people a chance to see that there are ways to take care of their dogs, and other people who care. It changes behavior of people, which is the key to this. Something a ban will NEVER do.

Bans are a teabagger's approach to problem solving - myopic, simplistic, hurts the most vulnerable while letting those who are most able to avoid penalties. It often starts with bitter, angry people who turn their fight to hurt a neighbor into a crusade. It is spread by sensationalized (and often unsupportable) headlines that even the reporters find unprofessional here, much like Bush's "War on Terror". Like the reporting about WMD's, false conclusions and half-truths such as "One body part is severed and lost in pit bull attacks every 5.4 days." lead to actions that don't make people safer, and get some killed. Trained professionals in animal control will tell you that the BEST identification is problematic, and if so, what if you ban the wrong breed? A closer look at most of these incidents prove that the identification was not so clear cut, that many were mostly indeterminate mixed-breed dogs.

Even if such a danger does exist, is there any value in overblowing it, in making it seem more common than it is, other than to scare you into following what may not be your wisest course? The dangers from other sources are FAR more likely to hurt your children, and bans don't work, but you have to read books like this one, or look at sites like this one to learn what really works. The "breed ban" folks won't tell you that, 'cause your safety is not their motivation.

They don't care about your safety any more than the religious right cares about your afterlife. They are about control, about assuaging their own tortured souls, spreading their black-hearted hatred across the land like nuclear waste. If they really cared, why aren't they insisting that your existing "leash law" be vigorously enforced? Perhaps because they get more satisfaction out of seeing the neighbors dog seized than watching your kids play safely?

You listen to them at your, and your children's, peril.