Pit Bull Bill Moves Forward, Passes Senate Committee
A bill that would overturn the state's Court of Appeals decision declaring pit bulls "inherently dangerous" overcame its first hurdle Thursday by passing a Senate committee hearing 6-3.
Photos
Maryland's Senate Judicial Services Committee voted 6-3 in favor of a bill that would overturn the state's Court of Appeals decision declaring pit bulls "inherently dangerous."
Senators Norman Stone (D-District 6), Joseph Getty (R-District 5) and Nancy Jacobs (R- District 34) made up the minority.
Despite more than two hours of testimony before the committee, Senate Bill 2 passed without amendment.
The legislation would overturn the breed distinction created by April's Tracey v. Solesky ruling, which stated that "when an attack involves pit bulls, it is no longer necessary to prove that the particular pit bull or pit bulls are dangerous."
Instead, the bill's language tightens down regulations on all dog owners by making them legally responsible for a first bite even if a pet has never been violent. But Senate Bill 2 loosens the requirements for landlords by removing the strict liability they have faced since the court's decision.
Sen. Robert Zirkin (D-District 11) tried to offer an amendment that would make landlords liable for bites that happen on their properties if they did not require renters to purchase insurance for their animals, but he ended up being the only vote in support of it.
Several members supported Zirkin's amendment in theory, but said it was too late in the game and there was too little time during special session to debate the pros and cons of requiring dog owners to purchase insurance.
"This has got to go to the House," Sen. Victor Ramirez (D-District 47) said. "We've all dealt with the House for years, it's a nightmare to get anything done."
The House Judicary Committee will take up the bill Friday at 1:30 p.m.
This story will be updated later on. Check back with Patch later for a more complete analysis of today's vote.
Susan
11:49 pm on Thursday, August 9, 2012
2011 statistics2
31 U.S. fatal dog attacks occurred in 2011. Despite being regulated in Military Housing areas and over 650 U.S. cities, pit bulls led these attacks accounting for 71% (22). Pit bulls make up less than 5% of the total U.S. dog population.3
Notably in 2011, adult victims of fatal pit bull attacks more than doubled the number of child victims. Of the 22 total pit bull victims, 68% (15) fell between the ages of 32 to 76, and 32% (7) were ages 5 years and younger.
The year 2011 also marks an increase in pet pit bulls killing their owners. Of the 8 total instances this year in which a family dog inflicted fatal injury to its primary caretaker, the dog's owner, 88% (7) involved pet pit bulls.
Together, pit bulls (22) and rottweilers (4), the number two lethal dog breed, accounted for 84% of all fatal attacks in 2011. In the 7-year period from 2005 to 2011, this same combination accounted for 74% (157) of the total recorded deaths (213).
The breakdown between pit bulls and rottweilers is substantial over this 7-year period. From 2005 to 2011, pit bulls killed 128 Americans, about one citizen every 20 days, versus rottweilers, which killed 29; about one citizen every 88 days.
Lisa
10:11 am on Friday, August 10, 2012
We'll continue on with facts. You bring up a lot of pit bull statistics but can you define a pit bull? It's not a pure breed of dog, pit bull does not show up on canine DNA tests, so how exactly are you, or the group reporting these facts, certain it was a pit bull? Also, let's consider media bias-
COVERED IN ONE NEWSPAPER:
August 18, 2007 – Labrador mix, 70-year-old man in critical condition
TWO NEWSPAPERS:
August 19, 2007 – Mixed breed, 16-month-old child, FATAL
230 MEDIA HITS: FOX NEWS, MSNBC, CNN:
August 21, 2007 – Two pit bulls and a Jack Russell terrier enter the home of a 59-year-old woman, severe bites to the woman's arms and hands from trying to break up the fight instigated by the Jack Russel terrier.
How sad as a society and for our media that the value of a child losing their life accounts for only two media articles, yet "pit bull" appears in an article about bite marks and that warrants 230 media hits!
Dr Julia Gilchrist, who also preformed an unbiased study on dog bites estimates that dogs were misidentified as pit bulls in up to 80% of cases. That would reflect back to the statistics you provided and pretty much make them useless...
Lisa
10:22 am on Friday, August 10, 2012
Lastly, let's look at how well banning one breed of dog has worked in the past-
Findings of the Spanish Dangerous Animals Act that banned pit bulls, dobermans, mastiffs, and Akita's:
2.4 bites before breed- discriminatory law
3.5 bites after
“Results suggest that BSL was fundamentally flawed … and not effective.”
Denver banned pit bulls while Boulder chose not to- In a 12-year period, Denver experienced *273 dog-related hospitalizations, while Boulder had only 46.
The U.K. banned pit bulls in 1991. A study completed on an analysis of dog bites before the ban and after the ban revealed that *their Dangerous Dogs Act had no effect whatsoever.
These bans come back to one thing, what is a pit bull? Aside from the easy media scapegoat. Can you identify the pit bulls here? http://blog.mysanantonio.com/animals/2011/01/lets-play-a-game-can-you-find-the-pit-bull-terrier//
I'm willing to bet you can't. I work at an animal shelter that takes in, and is forced to euthanize, over a thousand dogs labeled as pit bulls every single year. Their lives are lost because of ignorant people that refuse to actually meet a pit bull, spend time with a pit bull, and judge each and every dog as an individual, just as we do for people. I would welcome you to open your mind and come to the shelter for one hour and see these child loving, snuggling, animal friendly dogs that deserve to be saved just like any other shelter animal, they don't deserve to be unfairly judged.
NorthSymington
9:25 am on Friday, August 10, 2012
Susan.... Please explain to me why if I am walking my dog (happens to be a pit mix) and another dog (was of the small yappy type) gets off its owners leash and charges at me and my dog, why is this the fault of the pit bull owner? There was absolutely nothing that my dog did wrong, yet this law makes my dog have to get put down because it was involved in something out of its control. Why is that ok? All dog owners should be responsible for their dogs. If your dog bites someone (regardless of the dog breed) the owner should be at fault. I own a 7 year lab and a year and a half old boxer pit mix and the pit is no more likely to bite anyone then the lab, regardless of what all the statistics above say. Its sad that the pit bull has been owned by thugs for the better part of 50 years and have given them such a bad name. When these dogs are in the hands of responsible owners they are as love-a-bull and sweet as any other breed.
Lisa
10:04 am on Friday, August 10, 2012
Susan, would you please share your source of facts? Hopefully it's from a non biased group such as the National Canine Research Counsel. Speaking of NCRC, let me provide you with some of their facts. Most notably- There is no documented case of a single, neutered, Companion American pit bull terrier causing a human fatality. ~Fatal Dog Attacks: The Stories Behind the Statistics by Karen Delise
Basically, the "pit bulls" you're referring to are the product of poor owners and the lack of criminal punishment put on those owners who chain, abuse, and fight their pit bulls. ANY DOG, regardless of breed, will not respond well to that type of ownership. Instead of banning pit bulls, let's rally towards more strict punishments on those owners. You do realize these generally incredibly law abiding citizens (/sarcasm) will not follow a legal ban on pit bulls and for the few that do, they will move on to another breed of dog. In the 70's it was Dobermans, in the 80's it was German Shepherds, in the 90's it was Rottweilers, clearly the cycle of poor, irresponsible ownership will continue to move from breed to breed until tougher criminal charges are imposed.
A 2006 fatal dog bite study showed the following breakdown- Reproductive status:
97% intact dogs
Reckless owners: 84%
Function of the dog: 78% resident dogs- A resident dog being defined as "Resident dogs are maintained outside the home and/or are maintained for negative functions".
Karen Delise NCRC
LeNora Clampitt
2:31 pm on Friday, August 10, 2012
"The year 2011 also marks an increase in pet pit bulls killing their owners. Of the 8 total instances this year in which a family dog inflicted fatal injury to its primary caretaker, the dog's owner, 88% (7) involved pet pit bulls."
Please prove to me that these were well taken care of family dogs attacking their caretaker and not severly abused dogs attacking their abuser.