Rachael Ray is promoting a "pit bull" calendar for the new year.
She must be nuts.
I think the people who defend pit bulls as pets, should band together to live on Pit Bull Island or someplace where they can test out their "they are just regular ole dogs" theory on each other, it certainly doesn't sit right with the facts.
Merritt Clifton who compiled the dog bite statistics from 1982 to 2006 is an animal advocate.
According to the Clifton study,
Pit bulls, Rottweilers, Presa Canarios and their mixes are responsible for 74% of attacks that were included in the study, 68% of the attacks upon children, 82% of the attacks upon adults, 65% of the deaths, and 68% of the maimings. In more than two-thirds of the cases included in the study, the life-threatening or fatal attack was apparently the first known dangerous behavior by the animal in question.I predict the success of Rachael Ray's Pit Bull 2007 Calender Campaign will be that some number of people will see those "cute little puppies" and decide they want one. The dog will end up on a chain if we are lucky (and the dog is unlucky...no animal should be chained) or maybe one day when you least expect it - maiming or killing someone.
Clifton states:
If almost any other dog has a bad moment, someone may get bitten, but will not be maimed for life or killed, and the actuarial risk is accordingly reasonable. If a pit bull terrier or a Rottweiler has a bad moment, often someone is maimed or killed--and that has now created off-the-chart actuarial risk, for which the dogs as well as their victims are paying the price.
Pit bulls and Rottweilers are accordingly dogs who not only must be handled with special precautions, but also must be regulated with special requirements appropriate to the risk they may pose to the public and other animals, if they are to be kept at all."
I also predict that the vast majority, with some exceptions, of those who own a pit bull don't have enough assets, or insurance coverage, to make them worth suing. That's too bad for the victims.
Every pit bull owner should be required to have a "plan of care" for their dog which includes a secure area for the dog to live and play in, training, and adequate liability insurance to cover the risk their animal presents to society.
I'm all for freedom and keeping the government out of personal choice - provided what you do does not effect the health or welfare of another. If owning a pit bull meant you were the only person at risk for getting mauled or maimed - fine. In this case your decision to own a pit bull impacts anyone in the vicinity of the dog, so you lose the "right" to make that decision on your own....or would if I had anything to say about it.
There's already a population explosion of pit bulls in animal shelters, the last thing we want to do is encourage people to buy or produce more cute pit bull puppies. If I was a soft hearted celebrity sort who wanted to "rescue" another living being I might want to think about human beings before I devoted my name, time and effort, to four-footed critters.
