Apr 20

TARA HAGAN
(video http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid34284524001?bclid=0&bctid=78909918001)

The Observer

A group of dog owners set up camp at Sarnia’s city hall Monday to protest Ontario’s ban on pit bulls.

“Basically, it’s not right to be cruel to animals,” said Josh Atkinson, organizer and owner of Justice, a five-year-old pit bull.

“The City of Sarnia and a lot of other cities in Ontario are killing dogs for no apparent reason whatsoever, just because of the name pit bull. It’s ridiculous.”

A dozen people were on hand with their pets and homemade signs, reading: “Stop the killing of our pets,” “Pitbulls have rights, too,” and “Pitbulls are family.”
The group also planned to protest at the Sarnia and District Humane Society.

Sarnia Mayor Mike Bradley said the demonstrators were barking up the wrong tree.

“It’s provincial legislation — not the city, or the humane society. They should be at the MPP’s office, he said.

“I don’t even agree with the legislation myself, but we have to enforce it.”

The 2005 Ontario Dog Owners Liability Act says any Staffordshire bull terriers, American Staffordshire terriers, American pit bull terriers and any dog that looks “substantially similar” is illegal, and only those already living in the province at the time of the ban are allowed.

Bradley said the law has been a stress on animal control workers, noting that he preferred the city’s previous ‘dangerous dog’ bylaw, which dealt with the animals on a case-by-case basis, rather than by breed.

Last year Sarnia made a pledge to consult an expert before putting any more dogs on death row. The move followed a number of confusing cases hinging on whether or not the dogs were pit bulls, or boxers, while officials admitted to euthanizing at least one dog every month, because of the ban.

“It’s very fuzzy legislation; the province passed it, but now they have no involvement in the law itself,” said Bradley. “In fact, I’d like to go join those protesters, myself.”

Article found at: http://www.theobserver.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2540872


May 29

For my argument class we had to pick a topic and write less than 275 words about it as a letter to the editor of some publication. I choose the local bias newspaper and of course, BSL alternatives. Everyone in the class seemed to like the argument and agreed that my suggestions seemed to make more sense. I hope I at least convinced a couple classmates to see a different light if no one else.

“I am writing in response to the regular position of some of your writers in support of Breed Specific Legislation. When people say that pit bulls are dangerous, they are making a generalization, just as insurance companies use generalizations when they charge young men more for car insurance. Generalizing what “pit bulls” are capable of, or any other breed, is profiling, a practice frowned upon in the human world and no fairer for canines. Contrary to these generalizations, there are a lot of pit bulls who are licensed therapy dogs and in a drill by the American Temperament Test Society to test temperament, “pit bull’s” rated 85% positive ahead of “family dogs” such as Airedales and Beagles. Also, some governments are finding out that BSL laws just don’t work. Holland and Italy have after many years of seeing no positive change, lifted their breed specific bans and instead implemented stricter owner regulations.
Many more productive solutions can be implemented domestically as well that will appease supporters and non supporters of the legislation. Programs to regulate breeding, educate the public on pet ownership, stricter screening at adoption agencies, mandatory maximum penalty for negligent pet owners and aggressive campaigning for spay/neutering are just some of the programs that could do much more than banning specific breeds. The overly simplified solution of BSL cannot replace the effects of action and education. Ultimately, finding alternatives to BSL laws would show an active interest in pleasing both pro BSL and anti-BSL supporters, both of whom deserve their rights considered in an issue so controversial.”