Friday, October 24, 2008
Pit Bulls Ruled "Unpredictable"Toronto, CA - Pit bulls are dangerous and unpredictable dogs that have the potential to attack without warning, the Ontario Court of Appeal said today in a decision upholding the province's ban on the animals. The Ontario government enacted the Dog Owners' Liability Act in 2005 to ban the breeding, sale and ownership of pit bulls after several incidents in which the dogs attacked people.
The ruling confirms that the ban is constitutional.The pit bull law survived a constitutional challenge in March 2007, though some changes were ordered. Superior Court Justice Thea Herman said a ban on "pit bull terriers" was unconstitutionally vague because it didn't refer to a specific type or breed of dog. The Appeal Court not only disagreed with Herman's ruling, they fully restored the law to the form in which it was enacted.
"The total ban on pit bulls is not 'arbitrary' or 'grossly disproportionate' in light of the evidence that pit bulls have a tendency to be unpredictable and that even apparently docile pit bulls may attack without warning or provocation."The lawsuit was initiated by Catherine Cochrane, who hired lawyer Clayton Ruby to try and strike down the law. Ruby had argued that the "breed-specific legislation" passed by then-Attorney General Michael Bryant wasn't clear on what constituted one of the dogs and was too confusing to be enforceable. The two are now considering an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.
"This evidence of unpredictability provided the legislature with a sufficient basis to conclude that the protection of public safety required no less drastic measures than a total ban on pit bulls." (view full ruling)
03/02/08: Ontario Pit Bull Ban Greatly Reduces Bite Count
02/26/08: U.S. Supreme Court Leaves Intact Ohio Supreme Court’s Ruling...
Please donate to support our work
DogsBite.org is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt public charity organization. Learn more »
| 10/24/2008 4:21 PM |
Dog fighters and breeders have been pouring money in to this challenge, and Clayton Ruby should be forced to disclose where his money is coming from!
It's like money laundering, in a way.
The dog fighters are aching over the loss of their organized-crime type revenue!
In the March 2007 ruling, Thea Herman gave a good example of the weak and manipulated "judge" (or authority figure) that the dog fighters use as a puppet.
Her ridiculous "ruling" was straight from dog fighters' propaganda, nearly word for word!
They prey on the minds of emotional, misguided judges with silly myths about "persecution" and the naive like Thea Herman fall for it.
It is frightening to think of anyone that easily misled in the position of judge.
| 10/24/2008 4:25 PM |
What these judges now have said is exactly the truth.
Despite all this garbage about "it's not the dog, it's the owner," countless pit bulls that have mauled or killed have never been abused or mistreated a day in their lives!
They have been raised from puppies in loving homes, properly trained- but then they do just snap, even turning on their loving owners!
Pit bulls ARE different from other breeds!!!
| 10/28/2008 4:59 PM |
It's been proven time after time in a court of law that Pit Bulls have dangerous phenotypical characteristics. It's not the dogs fault..it the dogmen who killed and culled them to produce the Ultimate Canine Gladiator. Breeding them in their current form is utterly irresponsible.