I find myself writing this letter in response to the one-sided
story entitled

Pit bull that attacked

found in the Friday, Aug. 12 edition.

I find myself writing this letter in response to the one-sided story entitled “Pit bull that attacked” found in the Friday, Aug. 12 edition.

The story seemed slanted in the way that creates hysteria towards one class of dogs. The title of the story itself drew attention to pit bulls “Dog that attacked” may have been a better title. Although the attack was tragic, I have a few questions:

What logical conclusion had the mother of this 6-year-old girl come to that made her believe this dog was not a threat?

Why did the mother not leave the dog in the caged pen next to the animal control shelter?

What was the scene that lead to the attack? Please note there have been fatal attacks in the U.S. by Pomeranians, more than a dozen attacks that have caused death or serious injuries were by cocker spaniels. No one cares how often Chihuahuas bite people. The biting risk of any dog involves many factors, according to the experts, including how the dog was raised and treated, and even by its health. Here a few facts one should consider:

Experts at the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention who research dog bites report there is no scientific data to support breed-bans that claim any one dog is more likely to kill.

According to the American Canine Foundation, pit bull breeds bite at a lower rate than many other breeds. Doberman pinschers bite 10 times as often as pit bulls.

On August 30, 2003 the Alabama Supreme Court affirmed American Pit Bull Terriers are not vicious and so have several other courts.

Some criminals use pit bulls to protect their activity and if they cannot use pit bulls because of legislation they will use another breed. For 35 years, breed bans and restrictions have been tried. Nowhere has breed-specific legislation reduced criminal activity or protected the public from dangerous dogs. Thirteen states now prohibit breed discrimination laws.

Unfortunately, the media created pit bull hysteria in Boulder, Colo. that lead the way to a court decision which upheld Denver’s search-and-destroy pit bull ordinance. Currently, the city animal control officers have rounded up more than 380 dogs and have destroyed at least 260 family pets that may have the appearance of a pit bull. Assuming for the sake of argument there is a difference between right and wrong, killing family pets that do not have a violent history is unconditionally wrong.

More reasonable animal-control ordinances should come down hard on people who abuse their pets and should target individual dogs that demonstrate dangerous aggression. Don’t assume you know my dog because of its appearance.

If an ordinance is created, as Robert Scattini alluded to, I hope we would not see abuses of its discretionary use as we have seen in other cases in this county.

Bob Brill, Hollister

Previous articlePlanning Hollister’s economic future
Next articleDe La Cruz rethinks sex offender committee
A staff member wrote, edited or posted this article, which may include information provided by one or more third parties.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here