So here’s a trend I’ve been seeing of late.   Cities blaming “pit bulls” for supposedly being vicious because low-life animal abusers train them to fight.   These cities, for some reason, believe that by passing breed-specific laws (BSL) that dog fighting will somehow just magically stop.  

But what kind of logic is that?   Dog fighting is already a felony in most places, so dog fighters are already breaking the law by fighting their dogs.   Do these cities really think that if they pass BSL, the dog fighters will just suddenly stop fighting their dogs?   Really?   Is this intelligent, deductive reasoning?

Today we saw that the Columbia, South Carolina City Council is looking at a law to regulate “pit bulls” because a councilman saw a 10-year old walking a so-called “pit bull” with a logging chain, which the councilman assumed meant that the dog was a fighting dog.   So, if the councilman was correct and Columbia has a dog fighting problem, how is passing an ordinance requiring the dogs’ registration going to stop dog fighting?  

Does the Columbia, South Carolina City Council really think that dog fighters, who, again, are committing a felony by fighting their dogs, will really start paying some exorbitant fee to acquire a permit for their “pit bull”?   Does the Council maybe think its being a little gullible?

Likewise, Albany, Georgia appears to have been preyed upon by the slicksters at Dogsbite.org, who almost certainly lobbied hard for their “model” dog law — which again codifies animal abuse by requiring so-called “pit bulls” to be constantly enclosed, confined, and muzzled — after children were mauled by so-called “pit bulls” last year.   By the way, Albany passed a first reading of this heinous and cruel “model” dog law.

Yet some residents spoke up and pointed to the real problem in Albany: Dog fighting.   So how in the world is further abusing — by forced confinement and muzzling — an already abused dog going to help?   This provision also assumes that dog fighters will suddenly start muzzling their dogs in public, which I doubt.

Still, if anyone gives credence to the doggy-killers at Dogsbite.org, well, you’re probably not firing on all cylinders anyway.   Nor have you done your homework.

Regardless, I think the people deserve better than this for “representatives.”   And, at this point, with the Internet, does anyone really have any excuse for not knowing that breed-specific legislation doesn’t work?  

If elected officials really care about the safety of their communities and aren’t just offering lip service and Band-Aid legislation, then they’ll pass a law — like a dangerous dog (owner) law — that applies equally to all dog owners across the board.