.

Bill Would Ban Dog Breed-Specific Legislation

Rep. Diana Urban has proposed a bill that is up for a public hearing today that would prohibit municipalities from enacting legislation banning specific dog breeds.

Two years ago, when a pit bull attacked and seriously injured a dog in a Hamden neighborhood, many came out to urge town officials to enact a ban against owning the breed.

But a bill in the state legislature that has a public hearing today would ban Hamden, and every other city or town, from taking such steps.

State Rep. Diana Urban (D-43rd), introduced a bill to to prohibit municipalities from adopting breed-specific dangerous dog ordinances. Today the legislature's Planning and Development Committee will hold a public hearing on the bill, she said.

"The whole idea behind it is vilifying, it is uneducated and unnecessary," she said. Some states like Ohio and Florida will try to take a family pet away because they are a certain breed such as Staffordshire Terrier, German Shepherd or Rottweiler, she said.

"You hear it so often but bears repeating: it's not the dog, it's the owner," she said. Some people will breed the dog to be aggressive, she said, but even those dogs when removed and put into a family environment will thrive.

In her own home, her pit bull, which she rescued from Ohio, is regularly around children and has never shown any aggression.

"In Ohio she is labeled a dangerous dog because she is a pitbull mix — it boggles the mine," she said. "It's like saying because I am blond, I'm stupid.

"I'm not saying a dog can't be labeled as dangerous," Urban said, "but that its breed can't be the criteria."

Angel Capone Pitbull Rescue Director Racquel Trapp has worked with more than 800 pitbulls in the past 2 years and says there are many myths about pit bulls.

"I have yet to meet an aggressive one," she said. "I have been attacked by an Akita, a chihuahua, and a yorkie, but have yet to be attacked by a pitbull."

To ban certain breed of dogs would only take them away from good, responsible owners, she said, and produce a system of underground breeders selling dogs bred that would be unsuitable as pets.

She points to the American Temperament Society's breed aggression statistics, where the American Pitbull Terrier and the Staffordshire Terrier rated as having a better temperament than most other breeds. 

In addition, she said, the National Canine Research Council conducted a study in 2010 that found that in order to prevent a single hospitalization resulting from a dog bite, a city or town would have to ban more than 100,000 dogs of a targeted breed and to prevent a second hospitalization, that number would have to be doubled.

"Dog-bite related fatalities are so extremely rare that not even a state could ban enough dogs to insure that they had prevented even one," she said. "Both history, scientific study and common sense will tell you such a law is ineffective, unjust, and will likely backfire."

A Connecticut Hale February 20, 2013 at 06:06 PM
Oh for Pete's sake. Could our legislators PLEASE spend their time on something important and stop with all this nonesensical crap? Let the towns handle this issue. This is not something for the state legislature.
JK124 February 20, 2013 at 07:04 PM
So, constituents of the 43rd House District, Rep. Urban wants no part in banning a particular breed of dog, but should you be bitten and otherwise fall into cardiac arrest, she'd like any licensed driver to pop out and provide CPR once they've pulled the dog off you. With all of these proposals, unemployment must be low, spending under control, budgeting well in line with reality, and the state must be on great economic footing. Otherwise, why on earth would she be bothering with proposals like this?
Rebecca Smith February 21, 2013 at 01:27 PM
I say good for her! It's a shame for a perfectly sweet "pit bull" (that is not really a breed, but a type) to come into a "shelter" & not even be given the CHANCE of adoption because they're a pittie. The people running shelters sometimes misidentify them also. They are just the scapegoat of the moment; in the past they were trusted to watch over children & other breeds--e.g. St. Bernards--were the targets.
Rebecca Smith February 21, 2013 at 01:45 PM
I will say, tho, PATCH: it would've been nice if this hadn't been in my Feb. 21 email! The day AFTER the hearing!
tina bourke February 21, 2013 at 01:57 PM
This gives me faith in republicans.....
A Connecticut Hale February 21, 2013 at 03:34 PM
Diana Urban clearly needs to get her priorities straight. There is another article in the news that she is "supporting a bill that would allow court advocates to act on behalf of animals involved in criminal or civil cases." Who elected this person? Is she really as loopy as she sounds?
Kathryn February 21, 2013 at 05:54 PM
What a world. Any nut can own an assault weapon, but dogs are being banned.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »