Laws in other States Focus on Pit Bull Dog Attacks

In Akron, Ohio, the City Council in 1989 passed an ordinance naming specific breeds of dogs which dog owners must comply with stricter requirements in order to keep their pet. The breeds restricted were pit bulls. This happened, in spite of growing opposition, which argues that dog attacks are not a breed-specific problem, but a human-specific problem.  What do you think about that?  Do you believe it is a human-specific problem, or a combinations of both? The problem I believe that comes from all of these ordinances being passed is that these dogs are mixed-breed dogs. Question:  what do you do if you have a pit bull which is in violation of the ordinance but it may not be 100% pure pit bull?   The Akron, Ohio ordinance includes American Pit Bull Terriers, Staffordshire Bull Terriers, American Staffordshire Terriers, or a mix of any of these dogs.  It includes them all.  A local court has ruled Akron's pit bull ordinance as Constitutional. In 2007, a similar Toledo, Ohio, law was upheld too.

It is important to notate that Ohio is the only state in the U.S. that targets or singles out Pit Bull mixed breeds as vicious dogs. In other countries, like Canada for instance, this same legislation is active in Ontario Province. A different viewpoint to the Akron law is the Canadian city of Calgary (located in Alberta, Canada). There they have a breed/ mutual animal control law, which stresses, education, tougher licensing, and stronger enforcement. As a result, the reports of attacks by aggressive dogs are at their lowest level in 25 years! They say in Calgary that if the owners are licensed and compliant, the city is able to keep better track of aggressive breeds, and, as a result, roaming animals are at a minimum and dog bites are at their all time low.  This may help to suggest that dog bites are contributed to a human specific problem.  I know that I have represented many people over the years as victims of dog bites, and time and time again, the dog owner usually does something to contribute to the dog bite; either not having the dog on a leash, or not training the dog properly.  Only rarely is the dog bite victim doing something to aggravate the circumstances before a bite occurs.