“During World War I, these dogs stood for American courage and were featured in a series of patriotic wartime posters” (Twining 25). A canine once known as a sign of American courage is now regarded as public enemy #1, at least when it comes to dogs. This perspective of pit bulls being evil creatures is relatively new. It all started in 1987, when an article was published “in U.S. News and World Report proclaimed that pit bulls were ‘The Most Dangerous in America’” (Twining 26). Why did they say pit bulls were the most dangerous in America? “The article's author claimed that ‘America's baddest dog’ was in a separate category from Shepherds, Dobermans, and Rottweilers because they cannot ‘chomp through a chain-link fence’ like pit bulls” (Twining 26). From the perspective of a person who has personal experience with pit bulls, this statement is ludicrous! Although pit bulls may be very powerful, they cannot ‘chomp’ through a chain link fence. Perhaps the problem is not necessarily just the media witch-hunt, but also the general population lacking the ability to separate fact from fiction. This allows legislators to present and pass discriminatory laws saying these animals are ‘inherently vicious’.
The perspective of these animals being inherently vicious is just ignorant. There are many documented cases showing that almost any dog can be vicious and cause fatal injuries when attacking,”Dr. Gail C. Golab, one of the study's co-authors, was quoted as saying, ‘[s]ince 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’” (Campbell par. 14). This proves that not just pit bulls can be vicious, but nearly any breed can be. My viewpoint of this is people are responsible, not the dogs. People want to kill dogs because of how other people train them, just as people want to censor the media because parents aren’t teaching their children right from wrong. Speaking of the media, the media is constantly and endlessly demonizing these poor animals. Read this excerpt explaining the statistics of media coverage of dog attacks, “A 2008 report on media bias by the National Canine Research Council … compared the type of media coverage given for dog attacks that occurred during a four-day period in August 2007 with intriguing results. Over the first three days, there were three dog attacks; two of the victims were hospitalized and the other killed. All of these attacks were committed by breeds not considered to be vicious. Of these three attacks, the most covered by the media was the child killed by the attack of a mixed-breed, which only warranted 2 articles in the local paper. On the fourth day, two pit bulls attacked a woman, who was in turn hospitalized. This story ran in over 230 national and international newspapers and magazines. This story was also covered on major cable news networks” (Campbell par. 16). This type of coverage emphasizes how biased the media can be on this issue. Is it any wonder people are scared of these animals?
It is easy for the media to point the finger at these animals and say they are vicious because pit bulls are genetically more powerful than most breeds of dogs, which is the reason why many unsavory people wish to use these animals for criminal purposes, such as vicious guardians for drug dealers and dog-fighting. As previously mentioned, the laws do not stop the outlaws; it only creates cause for persecuting upstanding citizens. Of course because of these laws, there have been many arrests and many dog-fighting rings have been stopped. In the eyes of the law this is wonderful, but considering that many of these dogs still met an early death with a needle, was it really a job well done? I think not. The killing of these dogs seems inevitable and is all due to the actions of humans. Another reason I do not believe just breaking up a dog-fighting ring is a job well done is this question; did they also stop the person breeding the dogs for this purpose? The answer, more often than not, is no. Usually when a dog fighting ring is brought down, the only people that are caught are the ones fighting the dogs. The breeders usually are not present at these events, or no one gives them up as the breeder. Therefore, once the case is over its back to life as usual. The breeders continue to add more dogs into the equation, and the others continue to fight them. The current Dog Warden in Lucas County, Ohio has killed over 15,000 pits since 1987, yet dog-fighting rings continue to be prevalent in the inner-city of Toledo, due to this reason.
The next question in mind is does breed specific legislation really help? Most breed-specific legislation is based on at least one of two principles,” (1) that the breed in question has a record of bite frequency that supports the view that the breed shows a high level of aggression toward people; and (2) that the breed has a potential to be dangerous because of its physical characteristics and its functional history” (Collier 17).
Although these seem to be good indicators of whether an animal is vicious, there is not enough empirical evidence to prove beyond all doubt that pit bulls are ‘inherently vicious’. A report by Dr. Stephen Collier shows this,” the primary problem is that reliable data do not exist for the number of attacks relative to breed population” and “The evidence does not sustain the view that this is a uniquely dangerous breed, and breed-specific laws aimed to control it have not been demonstrated by authorities to be justified by its attack record” (17). Other reports comparing ‘vicious breeds’ to Golden Retrievers have yielded interesting results,”Comparing the results of golden retrievers and breeds affected by the legislation, no significant difference was found. A scientific basis for breed specific lists did not exist” (Schalke 92). This was proven through vigorous testing procedures including “veterinary examination, learning test, dog-human-, dog-environment-, and dog-dog interaction bouts, and obedience” (Schalke 92). Aside from the fact that most places that have breed specific legislation are based purely on opinion and speculation, other reports show that it has been ineffective.
This problem of breed specific legislation, which is due to mainly media coverage, can be easily changed by the media giving the same amount of exposure to all dog attacks, rather than just emphasizing attacks by pit bulls and other vicious breeds. More education should be presented to the public about dog breeds and training. After less media demonization and more education, perhaps legislators will allow dogs, which are normally killed or banned due to the accident of birth, to live. Perhaps after this is done, these canines may once again be regarded as the beautiful animals they truly are.
Works Cited
Campbell, Dana M. "Pit Bull Bans: The State of Breed-Specific Legislation." GPSolo 6.5(2009):36-41. Ebscohost. Print. 3 Dec 2009.Collier, Stephen. "Breed-specific legislation and the pit bull terrier." Journal of Veterinary Behavior 1. (2006): 17-22. OhioLink. Print. 3 Dec 2009.
Schalke, E. "20: Is there a difference? Comparison of golden retrievers and dogs affected by breed specific legislation regarding aggressive behaviour." Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research 2.3 (2007): 92. OhioLink. Print. 3 Dec 2009.
Twining, Hilliary, Arnold Arluke, and Gary Patronek. "Managing the Stigma of Outlaw Breeds: A Case Study of Pit Bull Owners." Society & Animals 8.1 (2000): 25-52. OhioLink. Print. 3 Dec 2009.
