San Bernardino Co Set to Ban Intact Pitbulls

The reasons I thought most people opposed breed specific legislation are basically that it doesn’t solve whatever problem spurred its proposal and that it unfairly singles out a particular breed (or breeds).  It’s not unusual to see comments such as this from those opposed to BSL:

With proper training and attention, pit bulls can be as gentle as any other dog, says Collette McLennan, a representative of Families Against Breed Bans.

Right.  It’s unfair to target one specific breed of dog and doing so won’t solve the community’s pet related problems anyway.

In response to 4 fatalities attributed to Pitbulls in the last 5 years, San Bernardino Co, CA is set to adopt a mandatory spay-neuter ordinance for Pitbulls (with certain exceptions).  I am opposed to MSN laws since they don’t help pets and because I strongly believe in an owner’s right to make medical decisions for his pets with veterinary counsel.  I’m especially opposed to breed specific MSN which to me is a double whammy of fail.

I guess I thought most everyone who recognizes the failure of breed specific legislation is in fact, opposed to breed specific legislation.  So I was surprised to read this, about the same woman quoted above:

McLennan supports the proposed ordinance, which is somewhat controversial among her peers. “It’s a good ban, better than banning all pit bull types,” she says. The ordinance could help the pit bull population and help minimize abuse of people who breed the dogs for fighting, she says.

If your group is called Families Against Breed Bans, you might not want someone who tells the local media “It’s a good ban” representing you.  Or maybe change the group’s name to something like Families Not So Much Against Breed Bans.  Just a thought.

5 thoughts on “San Bernardino Co Set to Ban Intact Pitbulls

  1. I never cease to be amazed at the people who insist on promoting MSN laws, even though they are not effective and even though even all of the animal welfare groups (ASPCA, AHA, Best Friends, No Kill Advocacy Center & the AVMA) in the country have now come out with documentation saying that it doesn’t work. And in spite of that, people still support it why?

    Also, I love the “it’s better than a ban so I support it.” Never mind that it’s still supporting bad legislation and San Bernardino cannot pass a ban under state law, so “compromise” here is unnecessary.

  2. I wish these people passing MSN for “pit bulls” would explain how they are going to enforce it on the people who have caused the problem in the first place. Those who let dogs run loose and bite/attack/annoy neighbors are already breaking laws. They aren’t going to worry about some silly new law requiring them to neuter their dogs.

  3. “Better than banning all pit bull types”…
    Imo, the only reason the proposed law is a MSN instead of a ban is because by California state law, MSN is the only type of breed specific legislation that is permissible.

Leave a Reply