Ontario’s pit bull ban has been in the news again as the provincial legislature is considering whether to allow pit bulls in the province. Cheri DiNovo, a former Toronto MPP, argues the ban was always flawed, while safety advocate Mia Johnson says the breed is too dangerous not to be banned.

The bill brought in by the Liberal government banning pit bulls is flawed in numerous ways.

Firstly, it’s descriptive, describing the dogs to be banned as having strong jaws, short hair, short ears, broad shoulders, etc. Pure bred Staffordshire terriers or American pit bulls were the first to be killed so the onus soon became on owners to prove that their dogs were not “pit bulls.”

Many mixed breed dogs, more than 3,000, were killed simply because of the way they looked, not because of any aggressive action at, or any proof they were “pit bulls.”

Secondly, no reputable veterinary association (like our own Canadian Veterinary Association) supports such legislation because it is and never has been based on fact. Any large dog and many small ones can cause significant damage with dog bites and many breeds have been the subject of hysteria over the years.

There is absolutely no biologic truth to “locking jaws” for example, even though it is often reported as such. Dobermans, German Shepherds, Rottweilers have all had their turn as media fodder for fear. All of them have been bred as security and law enforcement workers at one time or another. Criminals who train and use dogs as weapons can and do easily switch breeds.

Thirdly, in no jurisdiction have breed specific bans worked to curb dog bites or to increase safety around dogs. Of course, if you kill off a breed there are less bites from that breed but bites over all don’t vary. Drill down on data that purports to say breed specific bans work and it always reflects exactly that or is simply unscientific and poorly designed.

Fourthly, Ontario has succeeded only in frightening away owners like Mark Buehrle of the Blue Jays, who was forced to leave behind his beloved family pets. It’s also been proven to be racist. Not too many “pit bulls” from wealthy communities are seized and far more from racialized and poor areas. After all, if you have to prove your dog “isn’t something” it involves DNA tests, lawyers, money and time. Studies have shown racial profiling of the owners is reflected in the same stupid profiling of their dogs.

Finally, any canine behaviourist or trainer will attest that problems in behaviour are due to, in large part, faulty training, and incompetent owners. The Calgary model that targets criminal and negligent owners with large fines and possible jail time and also teaches school-aged children how to, or how not to, approach any dog, has had far better results than Ontario’s approach. That shouldn’t be difficult to comprehend. It actually is based on science and sense.

Understandably those who have been the victims of damaging dog bites, however infrequently they occur and from whatever breed, are traumatized. One can understand their fear, but fear doesn’t form good public policy. In this case it causes many other families to be traumatized as their pets are killed unnecessarily.

The Big Debate:

It also doesn’t protect other potential victims. Science must be based on fact not fear. Science shows that almost always the problem is at the other end of the leash. If we want safer dogs, we need safer owners.

There isn’t a day that goes by my family doesn’t miss our own Vicky, our English bull terrier, who we could prove wasn’t a “pit bull.” She died just over a year ago. She met the breed specific description though.

Chances are since I was a white member of provincial parliament, I wouldn’t have been subject to her seizure. I didn’t have to prove what she was. What we did prove in our family was how loving and funny and fun she was. How she added to our lives and to our home. Like many loving and responsible dog owners, her death unavoidable as it was, was excruciating. I can’t begin to imagine, but I ask the readers to, imagine their beloved dog taken and killed for no reason at all. Simply because of the way they look.

It is long since past time, as the only jurisdiction left to include cruelty as animal law, to overturn this awful piece of policy.

Cheri DiNovo is minister at Trinity-St. Paul’s United Church and former NDP MPP for Parkdale-High Park.

The pit bull ban should not be repealed; forty-two countries have restrictions and bans on pit bulls for good reason.

In Canada, 660 cities and towns have breed-specific legislation that bans or restricts pit bull-type dogs, and defines them as dangerous, aggressive or vicious.

Special interest groups are proposing that, rather than regulate pit bulls in Ontario, their owners be “educated” and singled out only after their dogs have attacked or killed someone. Aside from the obvious detriment to victims, they fail to mention that breed-neutral laws lead to inconsistent monitoring of dangerous dogs and to municipalities hiding serious pit bull attacks in simple “bite” counts. Breed-neutral laws also increase taxpayer costs and open the gate for cross-border transportation.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

The Ontario ban is a proactive response to community safety. A bite from a spaniel may require stitches, but one “bite” from a pit bull can cause hospitalization, surgeries, and even death. Hundreds of people — most of them children and seniors — are attacked, injured, bitten, or killed by pit bull type dogs in North America every week. As a cautionary tale, two-thirds of people killed by dogs in the U.S. have been killed by pit bulls this year.

THE BIG DEBATE: For more opposing view columns from Toronto Star contributors, click here.

Medical studies and expert opinions from doctors at hospitals and institutions across North America consistently conclude that pit bulls are responsible for a disproportionate number of attacks and for a disproportionate amount of damage. Medical findings indicate:

Pit bulls are responsible for a significantly higher number of dog-bite-related injuries.

Pit bulls are responsible for significantly greater trauma and bite injuries.

Pit bulls are more than 2.5 times as likely to bite in several places than other breeds.

Almost half of all injuries caused by pit bull-type dogs require surgery.

The cost of removing breed restrictions can be counted in taxpayer dollars. Pit bulls are the most overbred and euthanized dogs in North America, with taxpayers subsidizing their euthanization.

Abandoned pit bulls are held in shelters, sometimes for years, with taxpayers subsidizing their boarding. Taxpayers fund the cost of authorities implicated in serious attacks, including emergency responders, police, ambulances, hospitals, doctors and nurses, specialized surgeons, animal control services, municipal pounds and shelters, morticians, blood banks, coroners, public health officials, physical therapists, psychiatrists, social workers, courtrooms, judges, and local and provincial legislators.

The pit bull situation in Canada today is very different than it was in 2005. It’s not simply a matter of a few more pit bull owners feeling indignant their dogs must be muzzled and neutered.

The number of pit bulls in Canada and the U.S. has increased exponentially in 15 years. In 2019, the most serious issue for Canada, aside from increased breeding, is the cross-border transportation of abandoned dogs from American shelters — a booming business for the pit bull lobby.

Repealing the ban would open 11 official Ontario border crossings to an influx of pit bulls from the overwhelmed shelters of Michigan, New York, North Carolina, Georgia, Alabama and Florida.

In September 2017, the crisis caught the attention of CBC’s Fifth Estate. The report examined the claims of pit bull marketers and lobbyists who spend millions of dollars rebranding pit bulls as safe family pets. Without laws, regulations or government monitoring, pit bulls are entering Canada with no background checks and no records of where they go. Aggressive and easily triggered dogs are promoted to family homes with no safeguards or liability.

Speaking for National Pit Bull Victim Awareness, an organization that has supported thousands of victims of pit bull attacks, I am fully aware of the incongruencies of this issue.

No other type of dog needs lawyers and million-dollar lobbies to protect them.

No other breed-specific group claims their dogs can’t be recognized or identified by people outside their group.

And no other group uses the tactics of the tobacco lobby to convince people their dogs are safe.

There are more than 300 types of dogs that won’t attack people, even if they’ve been abused or neglected. These are all red flags that should make policy-makers question the intentions of special interest groups much more closely.

Mia Johnson is a founding member and editor of National Pit Bull Victim Awareness.

Correction – Jan. 27, 2020: This article was edited from a previous version that misstated the name National Pit Bull Victim Awareness in one reference.