Breed Discrimination
By Tamerin
@Tamerin (20)
United States
June 12, 2008 5:14pm CST
Dis-crim-i-na-tion - Treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partially or prejudice: Racial Discrimination, Discrimination against anything 'different'
----------------------
The state of Ohio, and some of the cities within such as Lakewood, are attempting to pass a law that would mandate the removal and/or execution of all canine breeds determined to be a Pit Bull. This is of course in the name of public safety. But to any rational person this smells of dog poop.
Dogs, like humans, are a product of their upbringings and surroundings. Dogs, unlike humans, don't have certain personality 'flaws' such as revenge, or embarrassment. This means that any dog, be it a Pit Bull or a tea cup, will have a personality reflected by its upbringing and surroundings.
If that dog was constantly abused and harmed whenever a human or another animal came near then they would obviously be more liable to attack un provoked. If you were to take a human and put them in the same scenario of being abused and harmed every time someone came around they would be quick to strike first and/or take things the wrong way.
On that same token, if the same dog and human were both raised with love and compassion they would reflect the same in their personalities and actions. This isn't rocket science. It's common sense.
Discuss.
2 people like this
8 responses
@rantingqueen (495)
• United States
12 Jun 08
You have said it all, and if I have to guess, Animal Rights groups will not allow this to happen. It is no different than saying that the human race should be led to different parts of the world, those who are in jail for any crime should be executed and our cities should be cleaned up of the smut that gives humans a bad name.
Pitbulls are not bred to be mean as many think they are. They are not naturally mean. As you stated, they are a product of their environment, much like children growing into adults.
I give you kudos for bringing to light this situation. Hopefully enough will care to bring the wrath of doom down on the heads that have come up with this new idea.
@rantingqueen (495)
• United States
12 Jun 08
As a follow up, you can read this bill at:
http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=127_HB_568
After reading it, I was sickened more so than the original post made me feel. When is enough enough?
@fifileigh (3615)
• United States
14 Jun 08
i know. i dont think it is the dogs' fault, whatever breed they are, but rather the sick f***** up human like michael vick that makes the poor dog that way...sick mental humans mess with animal and little kids to make them grow up to be sick as well...that is why we need a special protections clause of all kids and animals to protect them from scumbags in society...why do u think all prisons are so full with mentally ill people...they all have been f***** with by some sick person in society to make them criminal. now that same sick people are messing with animals to make them to stuff to other people...
@suspenseful (40193)
• Canada
13 Jun 08
A pit bull when it bites a child arm, or even that of a bad guy trying to rob you, will lock its teeth around and unless you hit with a baseball bat or you and the husky guy down the street can pry it apart, will keep his jaws around so that eventually the person will either lose his arm (in the case of a child) or get infected and need stitches in the case of an adult.
There is a guy in our neighborhood who owns a German Shepherd and no one dares go near it because that dog is loyal, but if that dog bit someone, the owner could get his dog to release it. We also have a doberman pinscher and it is also easy for the owner to get that dog to release someone, but with a pit bull it is almost impossible. It does not matter if the owners are loving people and never abuse the dog, if someone came in the yard and the chain was not short enough, the pit bull would jaw into that person and if it was the wrong spot - like the throat, you would get sued.
Besides why would you want a pit bull anyway? If you had a junk yard or someplace valuable outside, then I would understand, but to own a pit bull to prove to others that they are loving animals and would not harm a flee or your children because you never abuse them is not a good reason.
@kangel48446 (507)
• United States
13 Jun 08
I am the proud owner of a two year old pit bull. She's the best dog that we've ever owned and she's great with our two babies! Even before I owned a pit bull, I didn't discriminate against certain breeds because I knew they were only a product of their up-bringing. I'm against the bill but it's becoming more and more popular everyday.
@blueandgreen (29)
• Philippines
13 Jun 08
I think the dog breeders who breed pits for dog fighting should be the ones who get executed, and i am not talking about humanely doing it...
@Phase8391 (2)
• United States
13 Jun 08
i dont think its right how people are saying tht pit bulls are mean and saying its in their nature to attack people i think it depends on who brings up the dog and what kind of habitat you bring it up in i dont think the dog will turn on you unless you give it a reason too. i mean you could take a shitzu and make it the meanest dog ever but its bcuz of the way you brought it up.
@Pigglies (9329)
• United States
13 Jun 08
I have seen this issue from both sides now. At first, I was all for keeping "pit bull" type breeds legal because all of them that I know are nice, friendly dogs.
But then I started working in homeowners insurance. They are prohibited in insurance not because they are all vicious horrible dogs, but because their potential for harm is greater if they do attack. And this, I do have to agree with after working at an animal hospital. Chihuahuas are probably more likely to bite, but a pit bull is more likely to do serious damage if it does. This is what insurance companies are concerned about. If your pit bull ripped someone's face off, that would cost the insurance company more than if your house burned down. If your chihuahua bit someone, it would not be as bad.
However, while I get for insurance reasons that these dogs can be too risky, I do find it absurd that a whole city would ban them. The insurance companies don't want to take the risk of having to pay out. The cities don't have that problem.
@nova1945 (1612)
• United States
13 Jun 08
This is a terrible law. I believe the city of Detroit has a similar one that has been in effect for several years now. They won't take Pit Bulls away from owners, but if one is picked up by animal control and not claimed quickly, it is not put up for adoption but rather euthanized just because of it's breed.
In some communities homeowner's insurance is impossible to get if you own a Pit Bull. There is nothing wrong with these dogs that humans have not directly caused. It's not the dog's fault if their humans are stupid.
