MiamiBSL
-
Author:
n/a -
Send To:
Miami Mayor Manuel Diaz
-
Sponsored By:
American Bull Breed Association -
More Info at:
To the Honorable Mayor Mr. Manuel A. Diaz,
We, the undersigned, are concerned citizens from throughout the United States. While recognizing the concerns of Miami-Dade residents, we are extremely concerned regarding Ordinance #89-22/Chapter 5/Article 2/ Section 5.17 which has a negative impact on responsible, law-abiding dog owners . This ordinance has an impact on not only Miami-Dade citizens, but also those who choose to visit Miami-Dade to show their dogs in legal events, to do business in the community, or to visit family and friends. Following are listed our specific concerns.
(1) The ordinance places restrictions on specific breeds referred to as pit bull type dogs and states Because of the danger posed to humans.... Available data indicates that a dog of ANY breed can bite. Studies published in JAVMA conclude that there is NO reliable data identifying biting dogs by breed.
As well, the American Temperament Test Society has available results of dogs tested by them. As of December 2000, the following results were found:
(Number of dogs tested) [Percent of dogs passed]
American Pit Bull Terrier (327) [82.3\%]
American Staffordshire Terrier (397) [81.6\%]
Golden Retriever (576) [81.9\%]
Labrador Retriever (561) [90.4\%]
Shetland Sheepdog (411) [66.9\%]
Collie (666) [78.2\%]
This can be verified with the A.T.T.S. by calling them at (314)869-6103 or on the web at www.atts.org.
(2) Cities that have tried to solve their dangerous dog problem by restricting or banning breeds have discovered that such laws do not work. Recently, Cincinnati, OH has repealed its ban on specific breeds and Baltimore, MD has removed all breed specific references from its ordinance.
(3) There is no reliable method by which to scientifically determine the breed of a dog. It is impossible to determine whether a mixed breed dog is 50\% of any particular breed. To require the owner of a mixed breed dog to prove that the dog is NOT 50\% of a targeted breed places an impossible burden on that citizen. The question of constitutionality comes into play here.
(4) The majority of the owners of targeted breeds are responsible, law-abiding citizens. The ordinance unfairly brands these people as unreliable and irresponsible, solely because they own a targeted breed. Again, there is a question regarding the rights of citizens in regard to personal property.
(5) These restrictions make it difficult, if not impossible, for owners of the targeted breeds to participate in most dog events, especially events which require off-leash exercises to be completed. Examples of these events include obedience, agility, flyball and many others. Dog clubs and dog show participants have become increasingly unwilling to sponsor and enter events in communities with breed specific ordinances.
(6) It is the consensus of knowledgeable dog experts (as reported in the JAVMA article, "A Community Solution to the Dog Bite Problem") that targeting the owners and the specific dangerous dog, not breeds of dogs, is the key to addressing the dog bite and "dangerous dog" problems.
(7) It takes a large amount of funding for these ordinance provisions requiring the training, testing, and property examination. Passing laws that cannot be enforced increases citizen cynicism regarding effective government.
(8) Finally and most compelling, Miami-Dade already has a dangerous dog ordinance that law enforcement can use to deal with dangerous dogs of any breed and their irresponsible owners.
In summary, this law is unfair, costly to taxpayers to enforce, time consuming to enforcement agents, and unnecessary. We urge you to veto Ordinance # 89-22.
We, the undersigned, are concerned citizens from throughout the United States. While recognizing the concerns of Miami-Dade residents, we are extremely concerned regarding Ordinance #89-22/Chapter 5/Article 2/ Section 5.17 which has a negative impact on responsible, law-abiding dog owners . This ordinance has an impact on not only Miami-Dade citizens, but also those who choose to visit Miami-Dade to show their dogs in legal events, to do business in the community, or to visit family and friends. Following are listed our specific concerns.
(1) The ordinance places restrictions on specific breeds referred to as pit bull type dogs and states Because of the danger posed to humans.... Available data indicates that a dog of ANY breed can bite. Studies published in JAVMA conclude that there is NO reliable data identifying biting dogs by breed.
As well, the American Temperament Test Society has available results of dogs tested by them. As of December 2000, the following results were found:
(Number of dogs tested) [Percent of dogs passed]
American Pit Bull Terrier (327) [82.3\%]
American Staffordshire Terrier (397) [81.6\%]
Golden Retriever (576) [81.9\%]
Labrador Retriever (561) [90.4\%]
Shetland Sheepdog (411) [66.9\%]
Collie (666) [78.2\%]
This can be verified with the A.T.T.S. by calling them at (314)869-6103 or on the web at www.atts.org.
(2) Cities that have tried to solve their dangerous dog problem by restricting or banning breeds have discovered that such laws do not work. Recently, Cincinnati, OH has repealed its ban on specific breeds and Baltimore, MD has removed all breed specific references from its ordinance.
(3) There is no reliable method by which to scientifically determine the breed of a dog. It is impossible to determine whether a mixed breed dog is 50\% of any particular breed. To require the owner of a mixed breed dog to prove that the dog is NOT 50\% of a targeted breed places an impossible burden on that citizen. The question of constitutionality comes into play here.
(4) The majority of the owners of targeted breeds are responsible, law-abiding citizens. The ordinance unfairly brands these people as unreliable and irresponsible, solely because they own a targeted breed. Again, there is a question regarding the rights of citizens in regard to personal property.
(5) These restrictions make it difficult, if not impossible, for owners of the targeted breeds to participate in most dog events, especially events which require off-leash exercises to be completed. Examples of these events include obedience, agility, flyball and many others. Dog clubs and dog show participants have become increasingly unwilling to sponsor and enter events in communities with breed specific ordinances.
(6) It is the consensus of knowledgeable dog experts (as reported in the JAVMA article, "A Community Solution to the Dog Bite Problem") that targeting the owners and the specific dangerous dog, not breeds of dogs, is the key to addressing the dog bite and "dangerous dog" problems.
(7) It takes a large amount of funding for these ordinance provisions requiring the training, testing, and property examination. Passing laws that cannot be enforced increases citizen cynicism regarding effective government.
(8) Finally and most compelling, Miami-Dade already has a dangerous dog ordinance that law enforcement can use to deal with dangerous dogs of any breed and their irresponsible owners.
In summary, this law is unfair, costly to taxpayers to enforce, time consuming to enforcement agents, and unnecessary. We urge you to veto Ordinance # 89-22.
11400 Signatures
-
Diane P
- Comments
- No Breed of dog is born dangerous, it takes a human to make them that way.
-
Mark C
- Comments
- You dont ban dogs you ban stupid owners
-
Val H
- Comments
- Please do not follow failed law which targets innocent dogs and owners,when man has used and manipulated canines for hundreds of years and must be held accountable for all good or bad actions of the dogs.Little children are not protected by banning or restricting a type of dog many are bitten in their homes!--we must deal with improving the quality of ownership.
-
Rowland E
- Comments
- The state should encourage responsible dog ownership not criminalize the innocent. Irresponsible and criminal behaviour will continue to occur since only the law-abiding will follow a law like this; the world will not be made a safer place.
-
Amalio Lasheras de la i
-
Tanya H
- Comments
- There are laws to prevent racial discrimination. You cannot allow breed specific legistation. It's the same thing.
-
Candis B
- Comments
- force dog owners to train thier dogs!@!!
-
Jane L
- Comments
- Our local council banned pit bulls, Amstaffs, and their crosses in 1995, following a fatal attack on a human by a Labrador x bull type dog. Since 1995, dog attacks have not diminished in this area. Please investigate banning dangerous dogs of all breeds and crosses - and once a dog has attacked, fine the owner and ban from owning another dog. BSL did not work in UK or anywhere else.
-
Julie M
- Comments
- It is the owners of the specific dog who attacks, who should be punished... not a whole breed of dog. Start making the irresponsible owners pay the price, instead of entire breeds of dogs who have committed no crime, themselves.
-
shane n
-
Nick Trikilis - President Endangered Dog Breeds Association (
- Comments
- Breed Specific bans, are ineffectual and are proven to not reduce, control or restrict the act of vicious dog attacks, as ANY dog can exhibit dangerous behaviour, the marjority, must not be persecuted for the actions of a few, legislation must be directed toward the correct addressing of each occasion, by addressig the factors involved. Removing a breed as a whole is not smart thinking in anyones language.
-
Marc & Amanda G
- Comments
- Please re-think what you have done! You are killing off a GREAT breed of dog! Smart, intelligent, ambitious, they have it all!
-
Ben & Jennifer G
- Comments
- I just bought my first APBT and I am very pleased, they are good with kids and adults. I would have never even thought about getting one if it hadn't been for going to an ADBA sanctioned show and seeing how all these dogs acted with my kids. A friend of mine raises strays and my kids(3 & 1) always jump in the pens and play with the dogs. I would trust my kids with this breed before I would any other!
-
Andrew F. Q
- Comments
- I have never been a dog person, in fact I am afraid of them. However, after living and interacting with my daughter's pit bull terriers I have to say that they are the gentlest, smartest animals that I have ever known. Loving, protective, and eager to please. That they can be made to be dangerous is the fault of the owner, not the animal.
-
Rui Nuno Moreira da S
- Comments
- Fight crime don't kill the one we love
-
Mahlon G
-
Cathy A
- Comments
- Punish the deed not the breed
-
Lawrence B
-
Rogelio V
-
Johanna O
- Comments
- Its funny, (not really) how all these laws are passed to stop Criminals, but they are breaking them to begin with! what makes the state think that new laws will work when the old laws DONT WORK! all this new law does is affect the innocent and RESPONSIBLE dog owner. I WILL NOT GIVE UP MY RIGHTS! I may go to jail, but at least I am standing up for myself and my rights.
-
Cathleen G
-
Lisa T
-
Tiffany W
-
Andrew B
-
Julie B
-
Michael E M
-
Andrea A
- Comments
- Banning specific breeds is not the answer to the problem, the answer is holding irresponsible owners liable for damage caused by their dog, NO MATTER WHAT BREED. The handful of tragic cases that hit the headlines every year are not a fair representation of the breed as a whole. Please VETO.
-
John C
-
P.Whitemin.
- Comments
- BSL, is all ways the knee jerk reaction of politicians with no knowledge of dogs, looking for an easy way out from media pressure after an event. Overlooking the major picture they forge on ahead with out thinking, this can not result in effective or sensible legislation. Hence it will fail. Protect the people Owner Specific Laws not Breed Specific. It is only sensible.
-
Heather S
- Comments
- Punish the owner not the dog!! Dogs alone are not bad; the owners are!
-
Oral K
- Comments
- Pits aren't bad they have a bad reputation due to bad owners!
-
Tara D
-
desmond c goode j
-
Shawn M
-
Henry T
- Comments
- When our ancestors came over to America, they brought with them one dog and one dog only, it was a pitbulldog. It was used to serve the purpose of catching wild game to feed the families it also protected. I don't own any pitbull dogs at this time but my children and also myself ,have grown up along side of these wonderful and faithful creatures. They now have a bad rapport due to the media . As a law enforcement officer,I feel it just isn't fair for those wonderful and faithful creatures and that they due have a right to live just like the rest of the breeds that we all share and love. It is unconstitutional and wrong by all means. I thank you and I ask you for you consideration in this matter.
-
Ofc. Henry T
- Comments
- The first and most decorated dog that served in our arm forces was a pitbulldog.. It is also our United States Marine mascot. What kind of payback is this for the ones that serve and protect our beloved counrty? As a Miami-Dade Law Enforcement Officer and former US Marine, I ask you to stop this insanity and crazy witch hunt and let us go forth with the one breed that represents best what we stand for in this country. It did for us, now lets do for them! Bull breeds are not the problem. The people that bring them up for the wrong reasons are the problem!
-
Gary A
-
Michael
- Comments
- I am a Police Officer in south Fl. I believe you sould research your information a bit further. I own 2 pitbulls and they ARE NOT aggressive.
-
Felix D
- Comments
- I am a resident of Dade County and I have a loving, caring and friendly Pit Bull. My pit is part of our family and is definitely NOT AGGRESSIVE. I feel very strongly of going after people who train their pit bulls to be aggressive and to kill, but not only pit bulls, those who train any breeds to be aggressive and fight. Remember: If you take away the pit bulls from these wrongful owners, they will easily find another breed to train to fight and to be aggressive. Please help the breed.
-
Tracey S
- Comments
- Hold owners responsible not an entire breed.
-
Erin C
-
Melinda H
-
Ann L
- Comments
- Banning a specific breed is not protecting the public, but rather misleading them into thinking that a dog of any other breed cannot be dangerous. That of course is absurd. Until you institue a law which holds the owner of "any" dog of "any" breed responsible for his/her dogs actions you will never solve the problem. Discrimination against any living entity only creates problems which have no place in a civilized country
-
Jean H
- Comments
- Its a people problem not a dog problem.
-
Yolanda W
-
Steffen S
-
alice c
-
scott a. c
-
Roseann R
- Comments
- Banning isn't going to help. Try keeping the dogs out of the wrong hands. What ever happened to living in a free country? KEEP ALL DOGS OUT OF THE WRONGS HANDS! It's the owner not the breed.
-
Jennifer C
-
11400
Signatures! - View Signatures
- Sign Petition