Editor’s note: Despite what one resident said, a database full of “pit bull” owners’ names and addresses will only encourage vigilante-style retribution on responsible dog owners since the irresponsible “pit bull” owners — who are in the minority despite what the media would have you believe — will continue to disregard the law. It’s also a huge violation of “pit bull” owners’ privacy rights and likens them unto sexual predators though they may be “guilty” only of owning “pit bulls.” And despite the misinformation given in the following article, a dog mauling from any medium- or large-sized breed is no more or less horrific depending on breed, and any grouping of dogs from any breed can form a dangerous pack if left free-roaming. Also, since indeed it sounds as if Dearborn Heights has a free-roaming dog problem, not a “pit bull” problem, they should instead consider amping up existing Animal Control personnel.
In addition, please contact the Dearborn Heights Mayor and City Council and politely inform them that “pit bull” is not a breed and that breed-specific legislation is ineffective, unenforceable, and unconstitutional.
From the Press & Guide:
…Mayor Dan Paletko said even though he may offend some residents by saying so, he thinks the city should ban pit bulls…
Councilman Tom Berry said the city needs to look at the pit bull ordinance again.
Its likely the ordinance will be tightened after the recent attacks, Baron said. Council may also discuss other vicious animals, he said.
City Clerk Judy Dudzinski said there are many residents who have pit bulls. She said she spoke to a resident the previous day who said they would move out of the city if there was a ban.
People that have them love them, Dudzinski said.
Miotke said in the event of a ban there is the possibility of grandfathering in currently owned pit bulls.
Pit bulls wont just bite, Paletko said, they maul people.
The real danger is when there are two or more pit bulls together, Berry said.
You cant control them, theyre a pack, he said.