We must protect people from dangerous dogs

Christopher Dixon | News-Leader

Once again the “pit bull” or BSL issue is facing Springfield residents head on as we head to the polls next month and consider whether we should leave the vicious dog ordinance in place in the city of Springfield.

The ordinance needs to stand firm, for a variety of reasons.

To give a bit of a back story on this issue is a bit complicated, due to the politics surrounding ownership of so-called “vicious” dogs.

One reason behind that is that the very definition of what constitutes a dangerous dog is itself up for some debate. Many owners of pit bulls, Rottweilers and other dogs that can and do kill with their bites will argue that their pet is loving, kind and gentle.

And that may be the case. In fact, the likelihood of a given pet, regardless of the breed, attacking and seriously injuring someone is statistically fairly small.

The problem is when they do (attack). Politics aside, when a pit bull or similar breed attacks someone — versus say a Maltese — the injuries are often horrific and life-threatening. In fact, there are examples year after year of children and/or the elderly being killed when one of these pets suddenly attacks.

When these deadly attacks occur, those defending the animals will say that it was the owners who must have mistreated them, or the attack would never have occurred. But even here in the Ozarks, children have been playing in their own yard and been attacked at random, causing life-threatening and permanent injuries, from so-called “good” pets.

The other point dangerous dog defenders take issue with is singling out single breeds, such as pit bulls. Calling it “breed-specific language,” or BSL, is unfair to certain breeds of dogs, certain groups will say, likening it to some sort of discrimination.

That is a ridiculous analogy at best.

Even our veterinarian’s office (we are dog owners, for the record) where we respect the professionals immensely, when I point out that those breeds are, in fact, responsible for more deaths than the other smaller breeds combined, doesn’t have an effective answer.

Time and time again across the US, certain breeds are responsible for attacking and often killing joggers, park goers, the elderly and little children, and many times those attacks are unprovoked.

By closely guarding what breeds can and cannot be in the city, we are keeping attacks to a minimum. Kids like the Atwells, who were randomly attacked by “pet” pit bulls last year, will be kept out of harm’s way.

The stories in the Ozarks of attacks from vicious dogs should serve as a grim reminder to us all that we need to keep these dangerous dogs in check within our city limits. Regardless of what certain advocate groups want to argue, some breeds of dogs are dangerous and/or deadly when they attack.

It’s up to us as Springfield voters to protect our citizens and make sure these vicious attacks don’t continue to happen here in the city limits.

Christopher Dixon is Chief Operating Officer of eLectio Publishing (electiopublishing.com) and lives in Springfield with his family.