Skip to content

Animal Person’s Solution to the Pit Bull Dilemma

Apparently the people in Massachusetts don’t have access to the Internets and haven’t heard about what has occurred in the UK as a result of their Dangerous Dogs Act of 1991, or even right here in municipalities of Denver, where the 2-year old ban on pit bulls (which is a term covering the American Pit Bull Terrier, the American Staffordshire Terrier, and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier) is estimated to be responsible for the killing of 2,000 of the dogs. Note that Aurora County’s dangerous dog legislation covers nearly 20 breeds in addition to any dog displaying the majority of physical traits of those breeds!

Hundreds of people attended a hearing regarding H.B. 1948, a proposed dangerous dog law that is not breed specific, as there was talk that the committee would also add a ban of certain dogs to the bill. (Here
is the text. Also pending is S. B. 512, which would, among other things, ban the breeding and sale of dangerous dogs). H.B. 1948, if passed, would require restrictions for people who own dangerous dogs, but wouldn’t ban them. (Take the Breed Ban IQ Test to evaluate your logic and knowledge regarding this issue, no matter where you stand).

The funny part of the story is that pit bull characteristics have been bred into the Boston Terrier, which is the Massachusetts state dog. The not so funny part is, well, the rest.

Let’s deconstruct:

I have a solution to the pit bull dilemma that’s a sure thing. Stop breeding dogs. Not just pit bulls–all dogs. When millions of dogs are "euthanized" each year simply because they don’t have homes, I am completely baffled as to why we allow the breeding of one more. To me, it’s morally repugnant, and certainly profoundly hypocritical, to claim to love dogs or want the best for them, and then to breed them.

Furthermore, I’ve experienced more annoyance from my neighbors’ tiny yippy dogs than I ever have from a pit bull, but I realize the dogs are such a nuisance because they are allowed to be. They don’t get enough and/or appropriate stimulation or exercise, and no one has bothered to teach them that jumping up at an 80-pound dog’s face–teeth first–might not be okay. I don’t blame the dogs–I blame the people.

Let’s put the responsibility where it belongs: squarely on our own shoulders, for creating this situation and allowing it to continue by breeding like we’re repopulating after The Flood, and by not taking the time to love, train, and exercise our dogs according to their needs (not ours).

8 Comments Post a comment
  1. jan #

    you bet.. lets ban all breeding… not dogs .. people.. let's "weed out " those who breed people with "aggression".. like anyone who has a speeding ticket…those speeders MUST be kept from reproducing.. as long as we have little old ladies and men driving at 50 MPH why do we need speeders????? Ban them from breeding..

    oh and while we are at it.. lets' strip the rights of property owners everywhere.. after all who "needs" a constitution??

    Oh and let's ban ALL males who are not neutered….or would castrated be a better and more medically correct term?


    May 17, 2007
  2. I'm all for people not breeding. I think we've got enough people to take care of on the planet right now. And I personally don't think having more than one biological child is responsible (I don't have any).

    Interesting rant, though. You might want to meditate or work out or do whatever it is you do to relax.

    May 18, 2007
  3. "He is a heavy eater of beef. Me thinks it doth harm to his wit". William Shakespeare (Twelfth Night).

    May 18, 2007
  4. anonymous #

    I agree with Jan. Let's start with a ban on the breeding of vegans. The turnabout would be in fair play really as they seem to support the infringement of everyone elses rights these days. And animals Are mine to eat, wear, own and care for because as a carnivore at the top of the food chain, my species has that right. If a rat is a pig is a dog is a boy, then it's all "fair game" isn't it? Literally!
    After all Ms. Ph.D, eating meat is what made Australopithecus afarensis evolve, when Australopithecus africanus the vegetarian died out. So, perhaps vegans are de-evolving and should take themselves out of the gene pool to make room for the breeding people. We won't miss you. One generation and out!

    May 18, 2007
  5. Of course you do.

    "He is a heavy eater of beef. Me thinks it doth harm to his wit". William Shakespeare (Twelfth Night).

    May 18, 2007
  6. The word "Anonymous" speaks volumes. This blog isn't the forum for your piffle. Go elsewhere if you are going to react in such a vile manner.

    May 18, 2007
  7. Mike Grieco #

    A dilemma created by humans,and must be fixed by humans!

    Great solution Mary,thanks again.

    PS…some people are obviously in the Neanderthal frame of mind!(react without much thought).

    May 19, 2007
  8. Cláudio Godoy #

    It seems we have a couple of nice visitors here. The first one said: “(…) Lets' strip the rights of property owners everywhere… after all who "needs" a constitution??’ A slave owner couldn’t have agreed more. As for the second one and his we-would-not-have evolved-without-meat-eating argument, I would say that a boy who exists just because his mother was raped is not necessarily condemned to be a rapist. By the way, the Australopithecus afarensis was the direct ancestor of Australopithecus africanus, who, in his turn, was the direct ancestor of all the Homo species. If the Australopithecus africanus weren’t vegetarians, we probably wouldn’t have the pleasure to read the comments of this couple…

    May 19, 2007

Leave a Reply

You may use basic HTML in your comments. Your email address will not be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS