What is BSL? Breed Specific Legislation
Lexie Cermak
Breed Specific Legislation in the United States
Introduction:
In 2001, a woman named Diane Whipple was mauled and killed by her neighbors' two dogs just steps away from the front door of her home. (Hussain S. 2847) With a combined weight of 233 pounds, the dogs overpowered their owner, escaped from their owner's control and proceeded to attack Whipple for five minutes before their owner was able to pull them off and bring them into her neighboring apartment. (Hussain S. 2847) The severity of the incident was discovered by law enforcement on the scene of the attack, police and paramedics found Whipple lying mostly naked in a pool of blood, with bloody handprints covering the walls and bits of her clothing and the dogs’ leashes littering the floor where Whipple was found. (Hussain S. 2847) Whipple, unfortunately, died after seventy minutes as the surgeons worked meticulously to repair the severely torn arteries and lacerations of up to one and one-half inches deep in her throat, however, the surgeons were unsuccessful in repairing the damage caused. (Hussain S. 2847) The horrifying attack and death of the woman made headlines across the country causing public attention to the threat posed by dangerous dogs. (Hussain S. 2847) While all breeds of dog can and do inflict life-threatening damage and sometimes death during an attack, extensive media coverage of “Pit Bull” attacks has resulted in a public fear of these dogs, in particular, making the public go into hysteria over the presence of “Pit Bull” dogs in their towns. (Hussain S. 2847) Unfortunately for Diane Whipple, legislation targeting ownership of dogs falling under the “Pit Bull” definition would not have protected her. She was killed by Presa Canarios, a breed which does not fall within the statutory definition of a “Pit Bull” terrier. (Hussain 2848) This story is an example of why Breed-Specific Legislation does not do an adequate job protecting the citizens because it does not protect them from all dangerous dogs because it is ineffective, it is discriminatory and it is unconstitutional.
Context:
Breed-Specific Legislation has been around for fifty years. (Jones A.) In the early 80's there began to be hysteria over "Pit Bull" breeds of dog due to extensive media reports claiming that America's previously known "nanny dog" and "beloved family pet" was now a violent, dangerous killing machine. (Sacks et al.1489-1492; Hussain S. 2854) The widespread fear of “Pit Bull” dogs has been ongoing because of the fear-mongering of the media. The fear is irrational because any and all dogs can inflict serious damage to a victim of a dog attack, not just one specific type of dog. (Miller et al. 4-10; Medlin J. 1289; Jones A.) There are many states in America that have active Breed-Specific Legislation; about 26 states have a Breed-Specific Legislation targeting “Pit Bull” dogs. (BSL Census) However, there are many states that have outlawed any legislation that is Breed-Specific as well; Arizona was the 20th state to outlaw Breed-Specific Legislation last year in 2016, and Delaware became the 21st state to outlaw Breed-Specific Legislation as of Friday, June 2nd in 2017. (Greenwood A.; BSL Census) There were many people in history who are well known in today’s society who owned “Pit Bulls” in their lifetimes. (Medlin J. 1288) Hellen Keller owned a “Pit Bull” dog, and while the “Pit Bull” makes a fantastic service animal, Hellen Keller considered her pit, Stubby, to be purely her companion and did not use her for guidance, as is often the practice with the sight-impaired. (Medlin J. 1288) President Theodore Roosevelt also owned a “Pit Bull” while he was in office, and in the movie The Little Rascals, the young boys always had their loyal Bully Breed companion named Pete. (Medlin J. 1288-1289)
Counter-Arguments:
There are people who argue that Breed-Specific Legislation is the most effective means of keeping a community safe from violent dogs. (Lynn C.) During my research on this topic, the journals that are advocating for the usage of Breed-Specific Legislation as a protective measure in the United States use the statistics off this website for their evidence to prove Breed-Specific Legislation as an effective law. One of the most commonly used sources for statistics for dog bites, how a certain breed's temperament is, how certain dogs are dangerous, and other statistical information is the website DogsBite.org, and those who are adamant about the effectiveness of Breed-Specific Legislation use this website to proposition that “Pit Bull” dogs are the most dangerous dogs and that Breed-Specific Legislation is an efficient, fair and workable way to deal with the dog bite "epidemic.” (Lynn C.)
There have been many authors and researchers who have looked into this website that those who believe in Breed-Specific Legislation use as evidence to support their claims, these researchers took their time in order to determine whether dogsbite.org is an objective, reliable resource for researchers to use in their journals. (Toellner B.2008; Toellner B. 2010; Cooper D.) DogsBite.org is a website blog run by Coleen Lynn, a past victim of a dog attack from a “Pit Bull” breed of dog, web designer, and former yoga instructor. (Toellner B.2010; Cooper D.) Brent Toellner did a piece back in March of 2008 on KC Dog Blog. Quoting liberally from Brent's article; "Dogsbite.org is simply a website run almost entirely by an individual person who has an expertise in web design, access to Google, and a desire to seek revenge on an attack that happened to her several years ago. Those are the qualifications behind the website. Dogsbite.org is a website run by Colleen Lynn. In June of 2007, Lynn was an unfortunate victim of a dog bite while she was out jogging. Because of the dog bite, by a dog that is said to be a “Pit Bull”, Lynn decided to create the website dogsbite.org. According to the original "about us" section of the website, the intent of the website was to: Distinguish which breeds of dogs are dangerous to have in neighborhoods and help enact laws to regulate the ownership of these breeds.” (Toellner B. 2008)
Those against citizens owning “Pit Bull” dogs believe that these kinds of dogs have a “Lock-jaw mechanism” which means that once the jaw clamps down on its target, it cannot be opened up without putting the animal under anesthesia to knock the dog out. (Lynn C.) However, that is completely false and bordering the line of a blatant lie because the only animals on earth that have a true Lock-jaw mechanism are Crocodiles, Alligators and Snapping Turtles, which are of reptilian species, a canine is biologically incapable of having a Lock-jaw mechanism. (“Break Stick Information”; O’Hare R.) The few studies that have been conducted on the structure of the skulls, mandibles, and teeth of “Pit Bulls” show that, in proportion to their size, their jaw structure and thus its inferred functional morphology is no different than that of any breed of dog. (Glynn, A.) There is absolutely no evidence for the existence of any kind of ‘locking mechanism’ unique to the structure of the jaw or teeth of the American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier or any mix of these breeds. (Glynn, A.)
A “Pit Bull” dog does not have “Lock-jaw” however, the dog might have a strong clamp on its target, but the jaw can easily be opened by a tool called a “Break-Stick” sold in many pet stores and is only used for “Pit Bull” dogs. (“Break Stick Information”) Other dog breeds are very unpredictable when fighting, the majority of breeds that are not Terriers will snap erratically at their opponent, biting and releasing repeatedly. As Terriers, "Pit Bulls" will usually bite and hold. Contrary to popular myth, this is not some kind of special "Pit Bull" behavior; it is merely the behavior of all forms of Terrier breeds, from large to small types. (“Break Stick Information”) For this reason, Break-Sticks are an item that is fantastic for “Pit Bulls” as Terriers are far less likely to bite a person who is inserting a Break-Stick as opposed to another breed of dog who could seriously injure a person attempting to break up a fight with a break-stick, by suddenly releasing and lunging at the arm of the human interfering in the fight. (“Break Stick Information”)
Evidence:
A “Pit Bull” is not an official, classifiable breed of dog; in fact the term encompasses a very large variety of dog, most commonly the American Pit Bull Terrier, the American Staffordshire terrier, and the Staffordshire bull terrier, all three very different breeds. (Hussain S. 2851-2852; Olson et al. 199; Grey K. 439) However it does not end at just those three breeds, the “Pit Bull” is an umbrella term for all mixes of those three, and also includes other breeds of small dogs considered to be a part of “Pit Bull” lineage such as English Bulldogs and Bull Terriers. (Hussain S. 2851-2852; Olson et al. 199; Grey K. 439) It’s simply impossible to correctly identify a dog as belonging to a breed, when that breed does not adequately describe what it takes for a dog to be a “Pit Bull.” (Hussain S. 2851-2852; Olson et al. 199; Grey K. 439) There are many characteristics that legislators use to identify “Pit Bull” dogs, such as a boxy face, large muscles and a stocky body, however American Pit Bull Terriers do not have those characteristics and are a much skinnier, leaner breed of dogs without a square face. (Hussain S. 2851-2852; Olson et al. 199; Grey K. 439)
Temperament testing conducted on various dog breeds shows no signs pointing to the belief that “Pit Bull” dogs are inherently more dangerous or violent than other dogs. (Miller et al. 4-10; Medlin J. 1289) Many health professionals, such as veterinarians, animal shelter physicians and animal behaviorists claim that the genetics of a dog is only one small aspect of many different factors that make a dog’s personality. (Medlin J. 1286) In fact, most of these professionals say that the majority of an animal’s behavior stems from the human who owns the dog taking proper care of the animal. (Medlin J. 1286) These factors of human interaction that influence a dog’s behavior include proper training, socializing of the dog, and good quality supervision of the dog, meaning one should never leave the dog unattended unless it is in a safe, secure environment. (Medlin J. 1286)
Although there is strong support for human factors being the leading cause of a dog’s violent or aggressive behavior, other professionals claim that a dog can be rehabilitated with hard work, patience, and persistence. (Olson et al. 200-202; Miller K. 9-11) If a dog is trained irresponsibly to be an attack dog or fighting dog, it is not the end for that dog; the dog can be put into a rehabilitation program within a local shelter and be turned into a valuable, hardworking, irreplaceable unit to a team of firefighters, police officers or other professions that can use the help of a canine. (Olson et al. 200-202; Miller K. 9-11) Because “Pit Bulls” are of Terrier decent, this makes them very hardworking dogs, they will never give up when they have a job or task to complete, and their stubborn willpower makes them excellent work dogs. (Olson et al.. 200-202; Miller K. 9-11) While this can make them dangerous in the wrong hands, this can also make these dogs’ true lifesavers in the right hands. (Olson et al. 200-202; Miller K. 9-11)
A common misconception of many people is that “Pit Bulls” were intentionally bred to be violent, vicious attack dogs based on their history of bull baiting back in Britain before they were immigrated into the United States of America when bull baiting was made illegal due to it being inhumane and animal abuse. (Medlin J. 1288) In a bull-baiting match, the humans would tie up a bull in heavy duty restraints, and allow a singular dog or multiple dogs to maul and rip apart the bull. During these matches, the bulls would attempt to break free, thus severely injuring the dog, while the bull was badly harmed as well. (Medlin J. 1288) These matches always ended in the fatality of either the dog(s) or the bull involved. (Medlin J. 1288) The “Pit Bull” breeds were a descendant of the nineteenth-century Bulldog breed, or originally named the Leavitt Bulldog; these dogs were originally used as a farm hand, hunting dog, and sometimes they were used as service dogs. (Ritvo H. 227-253) The Leavitt Bulldog has a very stable, friendly and loving temperament towards both people and animals unless one poses a threat to their family. (Ritvo H. 227-253) They are easy to train and they are used for various sports, this breed is extremely strong, which means that they make very reliable work dogs. (Ritvo H. 227-253) Their disposition should be confident, courageous and alert without being overly protective. (Ritvo H. 227-253) They enjoy not just physical activities, but also activities that require the use of their intellect, such as tracking scents. Shortly after the banning of bull baiting, the Britain people concocted another vile act of what they called entertainment that is called dog fighting, which is the cause of the 20th-century dog fighting epidemic sweeping America and impacting our homes and communities. (Medlin J. 1288) The accusation that all “Pit Bull” dogs were bred to be dangerous, violent killing machines is not the case, they were bred from the original Bulldog whose entire purpose was a loving friendly farm hand and trained to be tough, loyal, hard-headed work dogs for the fields in Britain. (Medlin J. 1288) These strong qualities that make a dog determined to complete its job at all cost to appease the owner is what caused the introduction of bull baiting as a sport that humans who viewed brutality, death, and bloodshed saw as quality entertainment. (Medlin J. 1288)
The American Kennel Club, one of the most prominent canine organizations in the world, recently issued a position statement on breed-specific laws. (Weiss L.) The American Kennel Club strongly supports dangerous dog control. (Weiss L.) Dog control legislation must be reasonable, non-discriminatory and enforceable as detailed in the American Kennel Club Position Statement. (Weiss L.) To provide communities with the most effective dangerous dog control possible, laws must not be breed specific. (Weiss L.) Instead of holding all dog owners accountable for their behavior, breed specific laws place restrictions only on the owners of certain breeds of dogs. (Weiss L.) If specific breeds are banned, owners of these breeds intent on using their dogs for malicious purposes, such as dog fighting or criminal activities, will simply change to another breed of dog and continue to jeopardize public safety. (Weiss L.) Strongly enforced dog control laws such as leash laws, generic guidelines for dealing with dangerous dogs and increased public education efforts to promote responsible dog ownership are all positive ways to protect communities from dangerous dogs. (Weiss L.) Increasing public education efforts is significant because it helps address the root cause of the problem - irresponsible dog owners. (Weiss L.) The American Kennel Club and the purebred dog fancy have worked together to promote non-breed specific dangerous dog control legislation throughout the country. (Weiss L.) Concerned dog lovers are encouraged to serve on or start animal control advisory boards to monitor problems and help develop reasonable solutions to dangerous dog issues. (Weiss L.) The American Kennel Club can help by providing model legislation that can be tailored to the needs of individual communities. (Weiss L.)
Breed-Specific legislation affects the owners of the dogs just as much as it affects the dogs. Many homeowners in America are targeted by insurance companies because they have a dog that is considered “blacklisted” as aggressive and a liability. (Fecso et al. 2-4) Before looking at companies every dog owner must read into their state’s insurance board or commission because every state differs. (Fecso et al. 1) Companies that do not discriminate against breeds are Farm Bureau, State Farm, Nationwide Insurance, Einhorn Insurance agency, and Allstate insurance. (Fecso et al 5) Depending on the state, take into account Michigan and Pennsylvania, it is prohibited in those states for any insurance company to discriminate against breeds of dog. (Fecso et al. 5) A few companies, such as Einhorn Insurance Agency, requires every homeowner answer a survey that contains questions inquiring if you have a dog, the breed type, behavior, and many other questions. (Fecso et al. 5) The company wants to know if the dog has bitten anyone in the past or if it has been trained for attacking or other violent purposes. (Fecso et al. 5) A prior dog bite report will show up on an applicant's claims history, which insurers check before they may begin issuing a policy for the customer. (Fecso et al. 5) Nationwide has a policy that they will cover “dangerous” breeds if they pass in their “Good Canine Citizens” program. If the dog bites someone, it is not always an automatic denial of coverage; State Farm considers the circumstances, and any corrective actions you made before making decisions. Once a dog has bitten someone, the insurance company can charge a higher premium or exclude the dog from coverage. (Fecso et al. 5) Companies can even make customers sign a liability waiver for dog bites in case the occurrence of an attack on the property. (Fecso et al. 5)
Not only is Breed-Specific Legislation impacting both dog owners and dogs in a very negative way, the media is actively perpetuating this fear-mongering of “Pit Bull” dogs by spreading news stories only on dog bites or attacks from a Bully breed dog, whilst totally ignoring every other dog bite, attack or fatality from other breeds of dog. (Grey K. 442; Burstein, D. 324-326) These media outlets provide an extreme amount of bias, and most of them actively make the stories sound worse than what they actually are, spreading fake news and propaganda throughout the country. (Grey K. 442; Burstein, D. 324-326) While these media sources work hard to air any time a “Pit Bull” dog attacks or kills a human, there are never any stories in the news of a “Pit Bull” doing a good deed, such as the many canine firefighters and police dogs. (Grey K. 442; Burstein, D. 324-326) On December 12th 2017 in the city of Springfield Missouri, there was a neighborhood “Pit Bull” that saved an entire family from a house fire by alerting it’s owners and the neighbors in the fire, the dog began barking loudly and frantically, saving two young girls and an elderly woman’s lives, however the news was incredibly reluctant to air the story which can only be found at KSPR in one very short article. (Pettit M.) Stacey Hainey says his neighbor's pit bull started barking loudly around two this morning, allowing everyone in the house to escape and not get hurt. Hainey's two young granddaughters were inside along with his elderly mother. He says it could have been a deadly fire if it weren't for the dog. (Pettit M.) However, months before this heroic “Pit Bull” saved this family, on July 17th 2017 in the same town there was an incident with two “Pit Bull” dogs who had attacked two children age 2 and 4 who were playing outside in a kiddy pool, left unsupervised by their mother who was inside her home doing chores. (Rehwald J.) The media spun this story saying that these dogs were the worst thing to happen to the city of Springfield, claiming these dogs randomly attacked these children while running the streets. (Rehwald J.) These news articles claimed the “Pit Bulls” had viciously mauled the children and caused severe damage, however the doctors only found small lacerations from bites and some bruising, causing them to feel “stiff and sore” according to direct quote from the parents of these children, meaning that the media portrayed the attack to be far worse than it was in reality, but never once mentioned the negligence of the mother who left two young children unsupervised outside. (Rehwald J.) There were hundreds of news stories describing the attack from every news outlet in the city, they demonized “Pit Bulls” for the public so they would get a multitude of views both online and on their TV news shows and this fear-mongering of the media caused the city to impose a Breed-Specific Legislation outright banning any and all “Pit Bull” dogs from city limits. (Rehwald J.)
These reasons magnify the importance for the United States to have a dangerous dog ordinance that is safe, reliable and effective, while at the same time is non-discriminatory and upholds the United States Constitution. Unless we do something alternative to these Breed-Specific Legislations there will be countless people injured in avoidable accidents due to the city being negligent to deal with other dangerous dogs that are not a part of a Bully breed. The animals and the people in this country will not be protected under a false guise of safety and security having a Breed-Specific Legislation controlling which dogs we should be worrying about because all dogs can be dangerous, not just one specific kind, or three similar kinds.
Works Cited
“Break Stick Information.” Pit Bull Rescue Central, https://www.pbrc.net/breaksticks.html. Accessed 12 Dec 2017
BSL Census. BSL Census/Pit Bull Advocates of the United States, 2017. https://bslcensus.com/. Accessed 12 Dec 2017.
Burstein, Devin. "Breed Specific Legislation: Unfair Practices and Ineffective Policy." Animal Law Review at Lewis & Clark Law School, vol. 10, 2004, pp 313-361.
Cooper, Douglas A. “The Academic Impostor Behind the Pit Bull Hysteria.” HuffPost, 2014, https://www.huffingtonpost.com/douglas-anthony-cooper/merritt-clifton-pit-bulls_b_5866176.html. Accessed 12 Dec 2017.
Fecso, Emily, et al. Dog Breed Discrimination by Insurance Companies. Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 2013, pp. 1-16. doi: 10.7282/T3WM1BV3
Glynn, Amelia. “Pet Myths: Do certain dog breeds have “locking jaws?”. SFGate, Hearst Communications, Inc., 2010, https://blog.sfgate.com/pets/2010/09/10/pet-myths-do-certain-dog-breeds-have-locking-jaws/. Accessed 12 Dec 2017
Greenwood, Arin. “Another State Just Banned Discrimination Against Pit Bulls.” the dodo, 2017, https://www.thedodo.com/close-to-home/delaware-pit-bull-law-bsl. Accessed 12 Dec 2017.
Grey, Karyn. "Breed Specific Legislation Revisited: Canine Racism or the Answer to Florida’s Dog Control Problems?." Nova Law Review, vol. 23, 2003, pp. 35-38.
Available at: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/nlr/vol27/iss3/2
Hussain, Safia G. "Attacking the Dog Bite Epidemic: Why Breed Specific Legislation Won't Solve the Dangerous Dog Dilemma." Fordham Law Review, vol. 74, no. 5, 2006, pp. 43-48.
Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol74/iss5/7
Jones, Anna. “Brief Summary of Breed Specific Legislation (BSL).” Animal Legal & Historical Center, Michigan State University College of Law, 2017, https://www.animallaw.info/intro/breed-specific-legislation-bsl. Accessed 12 Dec 2017.
Lynn, Colleen. DogsBite.org, Lynn Publishing Media. www.dogsbite.org/. Accessed 12 Dec 2017.
Medlin, Jamey. “Pit Bull Bans and the Human Factors Affecting Canine Behavior.” DePaul Law Review, vol. 56, no. 4, 2007, pp. 1285-1319
Available at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/law-review/vol56/iss4/8
Miller, Katherine K., et al. “Relationship Between Scarring and Dog Aggression in Pit Bull-Type Dogs Involved in Organized Dogfighting” Animals, vol. 6, no. 11, 2016, pp. 1-15. doi: 10.3390/ani6110072
O’Hare, Ryan. “How the crocodile got its bite: Fearsome reptiles have a second joint in their jaws that helps them to clamp down hard.” DailyMail.com, 2016, https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3524391/How-crocodile-got-bite-Fearsome-reptiles-second-joint-jaws-helps-clamp-hard.html. Accessed 12 Dec 2017
Olson, K.R., et al. “Inconsistent identification of pit bull-type dogs by shelter staff.” The Veterinary Journal, vol. 206 no.2, 2015, pp. 197-202. doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2015.07.019
Pettit, Melody. “Springfield family credits pit bull, garage detector for saving lives in a fire.” KSPR, 12 Dec 2017, https://www.kspr.com/content/news/Springfield-family-credits-pit-bull-garage-detector-for-saving-lives-in-a-fire-463758223.html.
Rehwald, Jackie. “Family of toddlers mauled by pit bull mixes expresses relief, frustration after ban.” Springfield News-Leader, 8 Oct 2017, https://www.news-leader.com/story/news/local/2017/10/08/family-toddlers-mauled-pit-mixes-expresses-relief-frustration-after-ban/739778001/.
Ritvo, Harriet. “Pride and Pedigree: The Evolution of the Victorian Dog Fancy.” Victorian Studies, vol. 29, no. 2, Indiana University Press, 1986, pp. 227-253.
Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3826951
Sacks, Jeffrey J., et al. “Dog Bite-Related Fatalities From 1979 to 1988.” The Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 262, no. 11, 15 Sep 1989, pp. 1489-1492, doi: 10.1001/jama.1989.03430110079032
Toellner, Brent. “The Truth Behind Dogsbite.org.” KC Dog Blog, 2010, https://btoellner.typepad.com/kcdogblog/2010/03/the-truth-behind-dogsbiteorg.html. Accessed 12 Dec 2017
Toellner, Brent. “Dogsbite.org - -when a quest for vengeance becomes dangerous.” KC Dog Blog, 2008, https://btoellner.typepad.com/kcdogblog/2008/09/dogsbiteorg----when-a-quest-for-vengeance-becomes-dangerous.html. Accessed 12 Dec 2017
Weiss, Linda. “Breed-Specific Legislation in the United States.” Animal Legal & Historical Center, Michigan State University College of Law, 2001, https://www.animallaw.info/article/breed-specific-legislation-united-states. Accessed 12 Dec 2017.