Pit bull dogs have a reputation of being dangerous. In many cities, like San Francisco, pit bull owners are required to have a permit for these dogs and in other cities, these dogs are banned altogether. In fact, this dog breed isn’t even allowed on airplanes as a support animal. But are these bans and restrictions justified? Are pit bull dogs more dangerous than other breeds? It depends on who you ask.
The Case for Banning Pit Bulls
Proponents for banning pit bulls and other dog breeds that are considered dangerous believe that certain breeds are genetically predispositioned to attack humans and other animals, inflicting severe injuries that can be life-threatening or even fatal. Their argument is that of the number of deaths from dog bites as tracked by DogBites.org, the overwhelming majority are from pit bulls.
For example, between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2017, there were 433 deaths attributed to dog bites and 284 of them were from pit bull bites. The next closest number, 45, came from rottweilers. This means that pit bulls caused 66% of dog bite deaths over the 12-year period.
Another argument from those who support pit bull bans is that these dogs are often raised for illegal dog fighting due to strong bite force of pit bull. Banning them from cities discourages people from breeding pit bulls and raising them as fighting dogs. When they are raised to fight, their propensity for biting humans and other animals increases significantly.
The Case Against Banning Pit Bulls
On the other side of the controversy is the idea that banning pit bulls unfairly punished dogs when it should be owners who are punished for how they raise and treat those dogs. Instead of incentivising owners to raise their dogs properly, citywide bans encourage only breeding for nefarious purposes because criminals don’t follow the law anyway. Plus, if they can’t breed and raise pit bulls for fighting, they’ll just choose another breed instead.
Furthermore, the data doesn’t always pan out in favor of banning laws. For instance, in some cities that have taken the steps to ban pit bulls, their cases of pit bull dog bites haven’t decreased much, if any. Additionally, it’s expensive to implement and enforce a breed-specific ban. One estimate puts the cost of implementing breed-specific bans across the U.S. at $476 million per year. Given the average of 4.5 million dog bites annually, with 40 of them fatal, the cost to taxpayers for this relatively minor law is astronomical.
Those who are against pit bull bans believe owners make these dogs dangerous by buying into their savage reputation and raising them to be vicious. Their mantra is “there’s no bad dogs, only bad owners.”
Conclusion
Whether or not pit bull bans and restrictions are justified depends on how dangerous you think these dogs are. Is this dog breed innately dangerous or do their owners make them dangerous by how they’re raised? There’s proof for either case, but if your city has already implemented a ban or restriction on pit bulls, be sure you understand how it impacts your decisions about which dog breed you adopt.
