By Sloane Quealy-Miner
Judged, Killed, Banned due to the bad acts of a few
The Daily Republic this morning wrote “OUR VIEW: Another pit bull attack, and another day without an ordinance. We suppose it would sound sadistic if we said it’s unfortunate that a Mitchell police officer’s aim was off when shooting at a charging pit bull earlier this month.” They then go on to say “we are thoroughly weary of hearing of dangerous dogs within the city’s borders and wish dangerous breeds—especially pit bulls —would simply be outlawed in Mitchell.”
Clearly many people at The Daily Republic in Mitchell, South Dakota do not realize that aggression is a dog issue, not a breed issue and any dog can be trained to behave aggressively. The problem of dangerous dogs is not remedied by the quick fix of breed-discriminatory laws. All dogs can bite.
Any dog that is found to be “dangerous” should be required to be:
1. Spayed or Neutered. Studies have shown that more than 70% of bite cases come from animals that are not neutered. If a dog is found to be “dangerous,” it should be mandated that it be spayed or neutered.
2. Micro chipped. If a dog is found to be “dangerous,” it should be required to be micro chipped so there is a permanent identification of the dog. Dogs of some breeds are easy to confuse, especially if the owner has multiple dogs of the same breed.
3. Muzzled. All “dangerous dogs” should be required to be muzzled when in a public place, and walked by a person at least 18 years of age.
Breed-specific legislation is an ineffective solution to animal control problems because it fails to address the heart of the issue—irresponsible ownership.
The article also talks about the banning of pit bulls in Denver, Colorado but it conveniently forgets to mention that while Denver, Colorado banned pit bulls in 1989, in the years following the ban, the city continues to suffer a higher rate of hospitalization for severe dog bite injury than the breed neutral jurisdictions in the state. The Denver incidents ALL involved dogs identified as other than pit bulls.
Call to Action: Contact the individuals below IMMEDIATELY and tell them you do NOT support any breed ban or any piece of breed specific legislation! Urge them to adopt “dangerous dog” laws that rightly target irresponsible owners and not an entire breed of dog. See our Talking Points on BSL and educate these people on why BSL does not work.
Contact the City Council ,The Daily Republic , The Sheriffs Office and Mayor Lou Sebert
EMAIL BLOCK: mel.olson@k12.sd.us; ktracy47@hotmail.com; travis.carpenter@k12.sd.us; llallen5@hotmail.com; mmbarington@mit.midco.net; phil4mitchell@yahoo.com; greg@gregmccurry.com; jsmith@cortrustbank.com; dailynews@mitchellrepublic.com;sheriffmiles@davisoncounty.org;lsebert@cityofmitchell.org
The Daily Republic
120 South Lawler
Mitchell, SD. 57301
Company Phone: (605) 996-5514 Fax: (605) 996-5020
Mitchell, South Dakota Sheriff’s Office sheriffmiles@davisoncounty.org
Correction, trying to delete first post: Town, not time:
Maybe it’s time your town and MANY others take a closer look at the people RAISING these dogs. They do NOT learn to be viscous from birth, they are TRAINED or ABUSED or FOUGHT to be such. Doesn’t it EVER occur to you and many what KIND of person is behind the dog? Do you NOT hold the owners responsible, for the damage as well as the behavior of the dog?
Sincerely,Lauri Price /Project SANAA, Florida.
My letter to the editor will be published in The Daily Republic
I am disgusted that the Daily record is propmoting and condoning the
shooting of dogs. The Daily Republic this morning wrote
“Another pit bull attack, and another day without an ordinance. We suppose it would
sound sadistic if we said it’s unfortunate that a Mitchell police
officer’s aim was off when shooting at a charging pit bull earlier this
month.” They then go on to say “we are thoroughly weary of hearing of
dangerous dogs within the city’s borders and wish dangerous
breeds-especially pit bulls -would simply be outlawed in Mitchell.”
Clearly many people at The Daily Republic in Mitchell, South Dakota do
not realize that aggression is a dog issue, not a breed issue and any
dog can be trained to behave aggressively. The problem of dangerous dogs
is not remedied by the quick fix of breed-discriminatory laws. All dogs
can bite.
“Rather than breed-discriminatory restrictions, animal control laws
should be enforced and if need be enhanced. For example Mitchell, SD
should restricting tethering. 25% of all fatal dog attacks involve
tethered dogs. And prevent reckless owners from owning dogs. Minnesota
prohibits repeat reckless owners of dogs deemed dangerous from owning
dogs in their state. Illinois prevents convicted felons from owning
unsterilized dogs.
Any dog that is found to be “dangerous” should be required to be:
1. Spayed or Neutered. Studies have shown that more than 70% of bite
cases come from animals that are not neutered. If a dog is found to be
“dangerous,” it should be mandated that it be spayed or neutered.
2. Micro chipped. If a dog is found to be “dangerous,” it should be
required to be micro chipped so there is a permanent identification of
the dog. Dogs of some breeds are easy to confuse, especially if the
owner has multiple dogs of the same breed.
3. Muzzled. All “dangerous dogs” should be required to be muzzled when
in a public place, and walked by a person at least 18 years of age.
Breed-specific legislation is an ineffective solution to animal control
problems because it fails to address the heart of the
issue-irresponsible ownership.
The article also talks about the banning of pit bulls in Denver,
Colorado but it conveniently forgets to mention that while Denver,
Colorado banned pit bulls in 1989, in the years following the ban, the
city continues to suffer a higher rate of hospitalization for severe dog
bite injury than the breed neutral jurisdictions in the state. The
Denver incidents ALL involved dogs identified as other than pit bulls.
Sloane Quealy-Miner
http://www.bslnews.org