With the many problems facing Ontario’s Progressive Conservative government, it is difficult to understand why Rick Nicholls, our local MPP, is investing time and effort to end Ontario’s pit bull ban.

A Chatham Daily News article dated Nov. 22 stated that: “a private member’s bill by Chatham-Kent––Leamington MPP Rick Nicholls, to repeal Ontario’s pit bull ban, has passed second reading, but there’s still a long way to go before it becomes law”. His “bill targets the Dog Owner’s Liability Act brought in by the Liberal government in March 2005 after a number of high-profile attacks by pit bulls”.

The article includes arguments explaining why Mr. Nicholls believes pit bulls should not be discriminated against. He argues there were only 13 pit bull attacks in Ontario last year. However, it could be interpreted there were so few attacks because there are so few pit bulls due to the ban. In other words, the pit bull ban appears to be working.

While I wholly agree that other breeds are as likely to attack as pit bulls, there is little doubt that pit bulls inflict the most catastrophic injuries. While maiming adult victims, they have been known to kill children and other dogs. There seems to be a common refrain following a pit bull attack: “they were responsible pet owners” and “the dog never showed any signs of aggression”.

Moreover, pit bulls are sometimes trained to protect the owner’s home and property. Imagine the dread that postal workers and charity canvassers would face if the pit bull ban is ended. Personally, as the owner of a small dog, overturning this ban would significantly diminish my sense of safety.

The article indicates that under new legislation there would be harsh penalties for owners of dogs who attack, including fines and imprisonment. However, a fine or prison sentence for an owner whose pit bull viciously brutalizes its victim pales in comparison to the lifetime of physical and emotional trauma that the victim is left with. I would put forward that a single life terribly and permanently altered by a pit bull attack is sufficient to uphold the ban.

Hundreds of cities and towns across Canada have restrictions as well as bans. Has Mr. Nicholls considered placing restrictions, such as muzzles, on pit bulls?

In addition, I should note that these bans and restrictions are specific to cities and towns. Perhaps Mayor Darrin Canniff could weigh in on this issue as it applies to Chatham-Kent specifically, even if the provincial ban is ended.

Finally, my message to Mr. Nicholls is clear: In repealing this ban, many of your constituents will feel less safe in the their own communities in the riding you represent.

Brian Sullivan

Chatham