“For me, a house or an apartment becomes a home when you add one set of four legs, a happy tail, and that indescribable measure of love that we call a dog.” -Roger Caras
On Sept. 28, the city of Montreal announced the passing of a new, breed-specific legislation, coming into effect on Oct. 3. This new law will force shelters to euthanize all “pit bull- type dogs,” in shelters. These types of dogs include American pit bull terriers, Staffordshire bull terriers, American Staffordshire terriers or any dog that is a mix that is part any of these breeds. Current pit bull owners are also required to purchase a $115 (USD) permit by the end of 2016 in order to keep their pets. In addition, all pit bull owners are required to have their pets microchipped, sterilized and vaccinated. Pit bulls are also banned in public unless they are wearing a muzzle and are on a leash less than four feet in length.
Most dog owners would tend to agree with the statement, “a dog is a man’s best friend,” and even see their dogs as part of the family. I know that my dog, Nemo, is the love of my life. He’s a fun loving, adorable, ball of love, who just happens to be a Pitbull. Does that mean that he’s dangerous? He should be muzzled at all times in public when I know that he wouldn’t hurt a fly. If my family had not adopted him from the shelter, would he have deserved to have been put down simply because of his breed? I firmly feel that the answer to both of these questions is, “absolutely not.” Like me, many families are crying out in protest to this new law, stating that their pets are family and they should not be punished because of their dog’s breed. A petition has even begun to attempt to convince the city to retract this decision.
Although updated legislation regarding, “dangerous dogs,” was not supposed to be discussed until 2018, the law seems to have been pushed to a much higher priority as a response to the death of a Montreal citizen who was mauled to death by a pit bull approximately four months ago. However, according to CBC News Montreal, “the dog that attacked her was initially identified as a pit bull, but police now say they are still waiting for DNA test results.” According to the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, “Notably, there are no statewide laws that discriminate based on dog breed, and 18 states have taken the proactive step of expressly banning laws that single out particular breeds for disparate legal treatment.”
While it may seem extreme, this situation can be likened to racial discrimination. According to statistics released by the Bureau of Justice, in the years 1980-2008, 52.5 percent of homicide offenders were African-American. However, in 2008, the offending rate for African Americans was seven times higher than those of Caucasians. Does this mean that they are more dangerous? Should be banned? Forced to pay fines simply to exist? When someone commits a crime, we do not punish their brothers and sisters, or those of the same race, saying it’s based on genetics. Instead, we punish the offender, hence the slogan, “blame the deed, not the breed,” when in regards to pit bulls.
While this may be an extreme example, it goes to show that it is completely ridiculous to even consider attempting to ban a breed in order to create a safer environment. There is a reason that there are not any statewide laws banning breeds. The solution to animal violence will not be found through the systematic targeting of breeds but through education and compassion.
