B.S.L.

For those that support such ignorance, this acronym stands for Breed Specific Legislation.  For those of us that know better and have been blessed with common sense, B.S.L. is easily seen as Bull S*** Laws enforced by those lacking the capacity to do anything other than wield fear and ignorant laden power in order to look the part of their elected status.  Breed specific legislation is exactly what it sounds like...regulation of your right to own or, in many cases, not own a dog based solely on the breed or “type” of dog,  not your responsibility as an owner.  Really???  What has happened to laws that govern people?  What has happened to laws that actually enforce sentencing of criminals?  Civil rights groups would be on their heads in outrage if a specific ethnicity were ever subject to discrimination laws that declare a blanket policy of eradication based solely on whom they were and not what they have or have not done!  Gee…sounds a bit like the holocaust doesn’t it?

So now that I’ve got the attention of both parties on either side of the proverbial line, let’s cut to the chase…or rather, the facts. 

First, let’s start with the American Humane Association, the Humane Society of the United States and the Center for Disease Control and take a look at their position on breed bans.

American Humane Association:

“American Humane understands that any breed of dog can bite, and as such, believes that breed-specific legislation does not effectively protect the community from dangerous animals. Legislation banning particular breeds can unnecessarily discriminate against dogs that are not dangerous, and does little to protect the community from dog bite incidents. Such legislation can often have unintended consequences, such as black market interest, indiscriminate breeding practices, and subsequent overpopulation issues. Additionally, there can be confusion when dealing with “mixed-breed” dogs, which can make legislation difficult to enforce. Therefore, American Humane supports local legislation to protect communities from dangerous animals, but does not advocate laws that target specific breeds of dogs.”

And the Humane Society of the United States for a thousand, Alex….

“The HSUS opposes legislation aimed at eradicating or strictly regulating dogs based solely on their breed for a number of reasons. Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) is a common first approach that many communities take. Thankfully, once research is conducted most community leaders correctly realize that BSL won’t solve the problems they face with dangerous dogs.”

And just for added measure…A romp through the Center for Disease Control website reveals that even they support the position that irresponsible owners, not breed, are the chief cause of dog bites. Based on studies that THEY have done, it is clear that the most “dangerous breed” of dog changes with popularity and reputation.

Hmmm… perhaps our judicial systems time could be better spent  actually enforcing and UPHOLDING criminal punishment of those that perpetuate community destructive activities like dog fighting… instead of re-signing their NFL contracts??? 

For those of you shaking your head in disagreement and swallowing the sand you’ve got your head buried in, let’s take a look at some cold hard facts on the effectiveness of breed banning in one of America’s most popular cities…Denver.

For the past twenty years, Denver has been looked at as the model city for those that support breed specific legislation.  In spite of numerous attempts by the community and dog advocating agencies to have the ban removed, Denver has held on to its ineffective legislation like an ill tempered child refusing to listen to reason.

For example, Denver, has a population of approximately 588,000 people.  Its neighboring city, Boulder, however, has a population of roughly half the size coming in at 288,000 in comparison.  Boulder does NOT enforce a breed ban.  From 1995 to 2006 (the ban was introduced in 1989), Denver had 273 hospitalizations as a result of dog bites.   Boulder, however, whom again, DOES NOT HAVE ANY BREED BANS, reported only 46 hospitalizations from dog bites.  Oh, and the number one perpetrator of these bites…the loveable Labrador.  Since 2005 alone, Denver has killed more than 1,600 pit bull types …most of them beloved family pets pulled from their homes with no history of violence whatsoever.   Yep, I said Pit Bull TYPES… for those of you that think this is all about the pure bred Pit Bull, think again.  States that enforce BSL don’t simply target Petey.  Nope.  Denver and other cities that think this sort of “community safety program” actually works have set their scopes on ANY breed that fits the Pit Bull type description and some that don’t even come close.   Even if you don’t own a “Pit Bull”, if your dog fits even the slightest description based on someone’s opinion, you may be saying good bye to your beloved family member!  Just ask some of the unsuspecting victims in Denver who have either had to move out of the city or agree to have their dog euthanized…and their dog wasn’t even a Pit. 

In fairness to Denver, I’ll let the city’s Director of Animal Control, Doug Kelly answer a simple question to support the city’s position on keeping the ban…

“So are the citizens of Denver any safer because of this breed ban?”

“It’s a hard question to answer,” said Kelly. “We have not had a severe mauling or fatality involving a pit bull since it has gone into effect. But then again, we continue to get more pit bulls every year...it depends on how you define success. The ban has lessened the number of attacks by pit bulls, certainly, but we have no evidence that the ban has decreased the total number of dog bites or attacks in the city. The ban gives people “a false sense of security.”

Oh and my all time favorite is from Denver’s assistant city attorney Korey Nelson who claims that all of this anti-BSL business is clearly a hidden agenda fueled by the greed of non-profits for donations….

“Such groups rely on donations for their efforts, especially when the economy is down.  It’s politically incorrect for them to admit the truth of this, which is that pit bulls are more dangerous.  Donations could come from anywhere, even including leaders of dog-fighting rings.”

I’d like to have a moment of silence to recover from the massive amount of lunacy I’ve just shared with you…

<blink***blink>

So, since Mr. Nelson seems to believe that dog fighting rings are among those sending in donations to support anti-BSL and anti-animal cruelty agencies such as HSUS and American Humane,  ….perhaps we should consider the conspiracy theory that undoubtedly has allowed him to keep his position as assistant attorney???

People, is it really that hard to understand that no matter how many innocent pit-bulls are euthanized each year, the problem of aggressive dog attacks will not go away?!

Enforce dangerous dog legislation in your community and punish irresponsible pet owners!  Start demanding legislation that will outlaw backyard breeding!  Stand up against dog fighting!! Demand justice for these animals by eliminating the problem…ignorant, irresponsible owners. 

Fight Breed Specific Legislation!

Banning pit bulls or any other specific breed is NOT the answer!

As a human race, we should never give the authority to the powers that be to enforce blanket discrimination of any species.  Fight the perpetuation of ignorance, for Pete’s sake. 

Punish the deed, not the breed. 

“Legislation is due, laws are in order, and the situation is out of hand. Let’s be sure of our focus. Laws are for humans, not for animals who have no say about the captive environment they must endure.” -Rod Jones

To learn more about Breed Specific Legislation, please visit these websites