Hold dog owners responsible instead of banning breeds

Morning News
Published: February 25, 2009

It’s a common belief among dog lovers that there’s no such thing as a bad dog, just bad owners.

That belief seems to have a lot of support, and not just among pet owners.

And while any dog can display aggressive behavior, it’s generally agreed that some dog breeds such as pit bulls, Rottweilers, Dobermans, German shepherds and Dalmatians can be much more dangerous than others. The very traits that make them such excellent assistants to humans in the realms of law enforcement and public safety are the ones that can make owning them so risky.

But does that mean they should be banned as pets? Absolutely not.

Among the top responsibilities people have to their canine companions, aside from providing food, shelter and love, is training. Best Friends Animal Society officials maintain that understanding the characteristics of each breed and why they were bred in the first place goes a long way toward making training easier.

A standout characteristic of Rottweilers, for example, is their loyalty. It is up to their owners, however, to teach them to recognize to whom they should be loyal.

Simply attempting to keep a dog confined is lazy and shortsighted, as purebreds and mutts alike can escape and cause harm to themselves and others. Besides, what’s the point of having a dog as a pet if you don’t plan on interacting with it daily? Even guard dogs have to be socialized.
Otherwise, they can’t be expected to perform their duties.

The importance of training can’t be emphasized enough, as criminal and civil cases have shown that pet owners are always responsible for the actions of his or her animals. Just last month, Bentley Collins of Dillon, who was charged in connection with the death of a 10-year-old boy who was mauled by his dogs, was sentenced to five years in prison after a jury found him guilty of involuntary manslaughter and three counts of keeping unconfined dangerous animals. It’s worth noting Collins’ dogs were mixed-breed.

Still, steoreotypes against certain dog breeds — especially pit bulls — persist.

Last May, Dillon City Council approved an ordinance that defined a pit bull as a dangerous animal and requires stricter guidelines for pit bull owners.
It’s not a ban, but it qualifies as breed-specific legislation.

Now, at least one Scranton resident is asking town leaders to consider a ban on pit bulls after several complaints about her neighbor’s dogs, which are kept in a fenced-in area. Those who support her request also point to a case this year in Lake City where one person was injured in a pit bull attack.

They must remember any animal, even one as small as a Chihuahua, will act in self-defense when threatened. If neglected, they will rely on instinct to survive. In facts, reports of dogs attacking without provocation are hard to find.

Under state law, an unconfined dangerous animal is defined as a dog or cat the owner knows is likely to attack. The animal must attack a person outside the space where it is confined.

If owners know their pets are likely to attack, they must do everything they can to change that behavior.

Their failure to do so is what should be punished — not the animals.