Barbara Kay is a public affairs columnist for The National Post, of Toronto, Canada.
News analysis by Barbara Kay
The news cycle of the last two weeks has turned up two remarkable pit bull-related stories in North America, both worthy of editorial mastication, so to speak. There is a third story, also noteworthy and included below, which didn’t make the mainstream news, but should have.
The first story, out of Littlerock, California, informs us that 31-year old Alex Jackson has been convicted of second-degree murder in the death of 63-year old Pamela Devitt, and has been condemned to a sentence of 15 years to life. Jackson’s four pit bulls leaped over their fence and attacked Ms Devitt while she was out for a morning stroll, biting her 200 times and dismembering her arm. She died of blood loss. The severe sentence reflected Jackson’s history of indifference to warnings following at least seven other episodes involving his violent dogs.
Jogger Pamela Devitt, 63, was killed by four of Alex Jackson’s pit bulls.
The sentence is well deserved. Ms Devitt’s horrific mauling was entirely preventable. The dogs were dangerous weaponry – grenades Jackson knew could explode at any time. He is more culpable than the dogs, because they cannot tell right from wrong. Justice in this case will not be of much solace to Ms Devitt’s loved ones for their tragic, entirely preventable loss. The precedent now set does, however, provide hope to public safety activists in this area that in future, the punishments meted out to other irresponsible owners of dangerous dogs– up to now risibly light – and on the first, not the seventh, occasion, will begin to serve as a deterrent to ownership, or at least to more scrupulous attention to adequate enclosures, which in itself will prevent many human and animal tragedies.[1]
Ontario ban succeeding
The second story, from Toronto, Ontario, is a report, and its editorial aftermath, in the Toronto Star regarding the success of Ontario’s 2005 province-wide pit bull ban, the first large-scale anti-pit-bull law of its type on this continent––although, as the Star pointed out, “It’s a misnomer to call it a ban. Hundreds of pit bulls remain in Toronto. The legislation forbids their breeding and importation; it requires them to be neutered, and they must be leashed and muzzled when appearing in public.”
The numbers are in, and they are very damning for pit bulls.[2] As noted in their follow-up editorial, “In 2004, the last full year before the ban, there were 984 licensed pit bulls in the city and 168 reported bites. Last year there were 501 pit bulls registered in Toronto, and just 13 bites. That’s right — the number of reported bites went from 168 to 13.”[3] The Comment editor of Canada’s National Post newspaper, Jonathan Kay, applauded the Star’s findings and firmly criticized diehard activists in favor of repealing the ban.[4] He critiqued them for their false beliefs “as defenders of what they naïvely regard as the doggie world’s misunderstood but adorable bad boys.” And he scolded them for the absurdity of their identification of breed bans with racism, “an argument that is both incorrect and insulting to the victims of real racism.”
The bigger-picture takeaway here is that in spite of their volubility, “awareness” days, blogger obsessives and endless online galleries of infant-kissing, tutu-clad pit bulls, activists are not influencing the rational elites of mainstream society. Responsible observers of different political persuasions in two out of Canada’s three national newspapers (editorially, the Toronto Star is left-wing, the National Post right of centre) still look to objective evidence in making up their minds. When the evidence points irrefutably in one direction, they are not deflected by emotive kitsch. (And, as an aside, when it is left up to ordinary people to decide, common sense usually favors bans.[5])
Contested space
Now for the story that didn’t make national news (it did make local news). It concerns an art exhibit whose meaning transcended art, certain attendees whose motivation had nothing to do with art, and the fine line between freedom of speech and public-institution integrity.
Pit bull advocates protest in front of Joan Kowal’s memorial to dog attack victims. [©facebook.com]
This year a three-dimensional entry called “Out of the Blue,” 15 feet wide by 150 feet long, by Joan Marie Kowal, features thirty individual crosses decorated with flowers in the nation’s first physical memorial for victim of dog bite-related fatalities (the installation’s name epitomizes the nature of the attacks). Many involve pit bulls. Visitors are encouraged to express empathy for the victims by leaving flowers and other tokens in a designated memorial space. Information is provided at the site on bite prevention and responsible dog ownership.
Predictably, given the ferocious tensions between pit bull owners and anti- pit bull crusaders, many of whom attack survivors themselves or loved ones of victims, the memorial became what is known in academic jargon as a “contested site.” While victims and their supporters came to mourn and comfort each other, some pit bull advocates could not resist the temptation to violate the solemnity of the occasion. They congregated, wearing t-shirts identifying them as activists, with their pit bulls, alongside the memorial, a visual challenge and a willful disruption of the healing atmosphere the memorial was meant to encourage. As Ms Kowal, the artist, stated in emails to MLive and the Grand Rapids Press, “visitors can’t even see the art and many have told me the bully breed owners, sitting on the ledges blocking the view of the victims’ biographies and refusing to move, makes them unable to enjoy the piece.”[6]
Although unseemly and cruel, their presence was not illegal.
ArtPrize & the ACO
[©facebook.com]
Given their role as tax-funded first responders in dog-related crises, it is reasonable to assume that animal control officers should be politically neutral in breed-related debates. Or at least appear to be. Because if it is known that an ACO is biased in favour of a particular breed, one might justifiably be concerned about her faithful reportage around attacks.
Responding to my media query around the propriety of Ms Jensen’s presence at ArtPrize with her pit bull, the Kent County Health Dept Communications manager, Lisa Laplante, addressed only the legal aspects of the matter, noting that Ms Jensen (she did not name her; I am naming her) was “on her own personal time” and there had been “no violation of employee policy.” Stonewalling, in short.
I wonder if we would see the same reaction if, say, a police officer “on his own personal time” were to attend a memorial for the Sandy Hook massacre of children, and have himself photographed there, grinning triumphantly while holding his hobby assault rifle aloft, inviting congratulatory comments on his pro-active support for the right to bear arms, within view of victims’ parents and friends. I think in such a case, the public outcry would be instantaneous and virulent. I daresay that if no employee policy existed before the incident, one would be hastily implemented, forbidding all law enforcement personnel from publicizing their support for the NRA on occasions dedicated to gun victims.
However legal Ms Jensen’s behavior was, it was also psychological abuse of her own, so to speak, clients. I therefore deplore in the strongest possible terms the evasive bureaucratise employed to deflect attention from this irreducible fact. Ms Jensen is not just another member of the public. She represents a government department supported on public monies. Her job requires her to maintain scrupulous objectivity in canine-related crises. Realistically it is common knowledge that pit bull advocates gravitate to jobs in the control and shelter industry, and they see no ethical bright line between their official job and their passion for pit bull advocacy. There is nothing we can do about that. At the very least, though, there should be limits placed by wiser heads on their freedom to advertise their bias, in particular when their activism causes psychological harm to members of the public.
I hope that this incident will lead to self-interrogation on the part of authority figures in the Kent County Health Department, leading to new protocols for employees designed to protect its badly-stained image. I hope such an initiative will encourage other such departments around the nation to follow suit – in their own interest and as a symbol of respect for those survivors of pit bull attacks who wanted to visit “Out of the Blue,” but whose traumatized psyches could not bear the thought of sharing space with clones of the dogs who ruined their lives.
Notes:
[1] http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-owner-pit-bulls-mauled-woman-sentencing-20141003-story.html [2] http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/10/03/pit_bulls_were_torontos_biggest_biters_before_the_ban.html [3] http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/2014/10/06/ontarios_pit_bull_ban_is_working_and_mustnt_be_repealed_editorial.html [4] http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/10/06/jonathan-kay-vindication-for-ontarios-pit-bull-ban/ [5] http://www.kfyrtv.com/story/26720213/burlington-upholds-pit-bull-ban-ordinance?config=H264 [6] http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2014/10/animal_control_officer_who_pro.html
Please donate to support our work: http://www.animals24-7.org/donate/
Related Posts
How the Pit Bull Federation of South Africa views Galunker
Pit bulls, Ann Landers, & Dr. Laura
Anti-Vaxxers and the pit bull advocacy movement
Breed-specific legislation: the view from Montreal
Dog attack deaths bring sentences ranging from 0 to life
Montreal pit bull ban likely to fall after upset mayoral defeat
Excellent journalism, as always. Applause!!!
I’m curious what effect Ontario’s law has had on pit bull euthanasia rates and overall shelter euthanasia rates.
Aurora, Colorado voters will soon be deciding whether or not to keep the city’s pit bull regulations. Per the city’s own data[1], euthanasia of pit bulls dropped by 93 percent since the law went into effect. Pit bull attacks are down 73 percent. Complaints about pit bulls have been cut in half.
It’s a similar story in Denver, where pit bulls have been regulated since 1989. A 2014 study[2] published in the Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science found that Denver’s dog euthanasia rates fell by 77 percent after the city enacted its pit bull law. Instead of drowning in a flood of unwanted pit bulls, Denver shelters are able to save almost every homeless dog that comes through the door.
[1] http://www.aurorasentinel.com/news/city-lawmakers-uphold-auroras-ban-pit-bulls/
[2] http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10888705.2014.856250?journalCode=haaw20&#.UyeYrs7HiA
Kent County Michigan commissioners: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
The thing about ArtPrize…that exhibit was a memorial for EVERYONE who’s been killed by dogs in 2014. A few other breeds have been involved. And it was only pit bull people who showed up to protest. No one parading their Rottweilers around; no one shoving their Presa Canario in someone’s face and saying, “Presa Canarios can’t be identified. Look at this photo of mine lying next to my baby.”
Thanks to Nevada for those stats on Denver, which I pray will be emulated by other cities in the near future.
And as before on this subject, I couldn’t agree more, Merritt. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Kay, for speaking so eloquently regarding this subject matter, which, in the USA, I consider to be a true public emergency. I always look forward to your editorials because I know that you are a person of intelligence and just plain old common sense. We appreciate your diligence in keeping your finger on the pulse of this truly horrific subject.
I second what Mary Ann said!!
Kent County Animal Control: Fire This Officer!
Kent County must immediately fire — not defend — the animal control officer who showed support for pro-pit bull demonstrators who protested an art exhibit that memorialized people killed by dogs. His or her actions showed bias against dog bite victims. The fact that the police did not arrest any of the demonstrators does not excuse the officer’s conduct. To promote confidence in law enforcement, officers must avoid even the appearance of impropriety whenever possible.
As reported by Beth Clifton in her article entitled “Don’t Bully My Breed, But We Will Bully the Victims,” these demonstrators displayed “thoughtless solidarity, poor social judgment, and some of the cruelest behavior by fellow humans I have seen short of actual physical violence.” The animal control officer stood with them in this. That was just plain wrong, a monumental error in judgment, an insult to the community that the officer is sworn to protect.
In law, there is a saying: “the appearance of justice is as important as justice itself.” (Offutt v. United States (1954) 348 U.S. 11, 14 (U.S. Supreme Court).) This officer has damaged the appearance of justice by showing his or her bias. The results will damage Kent County in the future: the officer’s word will not be trusted in court and other legal proceedings, and significant numbers of residents will feel less safe as long as he or she remains on the job.
Kent County: fire this officer!
These “protesters” have an air of Westboro Baptist Church about them don’t they? Sick minded.
Yes they should never have been there. The girl with the ACO had a post on FB about people commenting nasty things about her nephew that died . She asked people to stop saying ugly things. How does it feel Emily? You went to a place that pretty much degraded the dead and their families that were killed by the animal you took there to taunt. You had no business doing that. You and your buddy Rachel should be ashamed of yourselves. Way out of line. Rachel Jensen needs to be fired because she’s putting innocent children and pets and people at risk. She is biased and I can see her not doing her job when she has to pick up a pit because of an attack.
Kenneth not sure what the people an do as kent county has not budged. Could you imagine living in this town and having to call on a loose pitbull? Crazy.
As always well said.
Wow! Excellent article. The silent majority is restless. We wont stand for this behavior any longer.
I hope the people of Kent County will see this total ambush of their trust as offensive as I do. Not the first time that the public’s trust has been betrayed. I hope this wont be overlooked. Save face. Its time to clean house!
I can see that the bias majority has taken over this article. That AC officer was there on her own time and she has every right to be there like anyone else.
Public officials, including law enforcement officers, judges, teachers, and code enforcement personnel, are expected to exercise a fair and impartial demeanor both on and off the job, and accept this obligation as a condition of fulfilling their civic responsibilities.
Legally no one will dispute that this AC officer had a right to be there. However, did you read the article? Did you see the comparison to a police officer going to a Sandy Hook Memorial with his long gun and proudly showing it to everyone at the memorial? Do you really think it’s relevant and appropriate behavior? If you do, then there probably isn’t much anyone can do or say to you because you are one of those people who can’t think about anything or anyone in life but yourself.
Another excellent article. You always make very good points. I enjoy all your pit bull related articles. Keep up the great work.
Rachel Jensen and her friend Emily were vandalizing the exhibit, stealing the exhibitor’s information, and replacing it with their propaganda? They committed a crime
Jensen is a danger to everyone in the county.
The bigger danger are the government leaders who took some calls from some pit bull advocacy people and their political connections and are protecting her and the thugs she is involved with.
I found this in an interview “Rachel Jensen, a Grand Valley State University grad, has worked at KCAS for two years. In her short time as an ACO, she has seen disheartening moments and uplifting ones. Beyond her job, Jensen attends conferences and lectures to further her animal-advocacy skills and speaks at local events to share her firsthand knowledge.”
Is Rachel attending conferences and lectures run by pit bull breeder advocacy groups?
Rachel Jensen’s job is for the health department. It is a public safety and law enforcement job. Her job is not to be an advocate for animal breeders who call themselves advocates instead of what they really are.
It is dangerous to have someone like this in a public safety job because that isn’t the job they are actually doing. They aren’t working for the county. They are working for pit bull breeders and dog fighters.
As soon as someone in Kent County gets hurt through Rachel Jensen’s behavior or lack of action, the county will be the responsible party.
Someone may have been hurt already. Who knows.
What I found strange about this entire thing was that the art exhibit was about people killed by dogs.
It wasn’t about pit bulls. It only gave information about the dogs that killed those people, which is public record. The focus was on the victims.
By staging this pseudo protest stunt and turning this exhibit into a staged attack and a pit bull issue, and trying to shut down the exhibit, the pit bull lobby just made a public proclamation that pit bulls are a problem and that pit bulls are killing people, and that the pit bull racketeers demand that this be tolerated and accepted..
This wasn’t any kind of protest. It was an admission of guilt, and a thug attack to try to shut down the truth.
A person named Michelle Spranger has been harassing people with nuisance fake cease and desist messages on behalf of Rachel Jensen, threatening people who discuss Rachel’s activities.and expose Rachel’s activities harassing the artist and victims.
Michelle Spranger is in Detroit, a hotbed of dog fighting and pit bull breeding that just keeps getting worse. A man is dying in a hospital in Detroit now after an attack by a household of pit bulls from a Detroit pit bull breeder that had many complaints in the past about his dogs, but the police did nothing, and now refuse to charge the pit bull breeder.
She is a freelance writer and party consultant. She works for a pit bull advocacy business and no kill pit bull rescue called Detroit Bully Corps doing community relations and maintains their facebook page. Detroit Bully Corps is involved with the Animal Farm Foundation and Karen Delise of NCRC. The propaganda that Spranger is sending out comes from them and also from pit bull breeders. It’s old, familiar lies that have been getting handed around for years by pit bull breeder groups..
Detroit Bully Corps got a thousand dollars from ASPCA last fall to get “equipment to aid in their mission to end dog fighting in the metro Detroit area.” According to them, the Detroit police call in this bunch of amateur pit bull promoters who are involved with others who deceive the public about pit bulls and spread lies, to get dogs from dog fighting busts. So just imagine if you will a group of these people, some of whom now have been found to actually harass victims and victim advocates, buying bulletproof vests and catch poles with money from ASPCA and monkeying around at a crime scene to pick up pit bulls to sell or rehome as the alternative term.
If the Detroit police are involved with private promotion and propaganda businesses like this in their criminal investigations, no wonder there are problems in Detroit. This is not ethical for police to be allowing these people anywhere near a crime scene or making any decisions about dog fighting operations and criminal evidence.
These people have nothing at all to do with law enforcement, but they appear to be posing as law enforcement or claiming they are working on dog fighting busts and getting grants for it?
Where are these dangerous dogs going? How many people have been attacked by one of these dog fighting bust dogs? Why are Detroit police involved with a pit bull marketing and promotion business? Are pit bull breeders dictating policy to the Detroit police department?
Detroit Bully Corps also claims it has held a series of rallies in dog fighting hotspots. Since their propaganda is the same that is produced by pit bull breeders and dog fighters, what exactly are they doing in these rallies? What does a rally with dog fighters mean?
There is also a veterinarian involved with this who needs to answer some questions about what is going on in that organization. I hope the artist and victims who have been harassed will ask those questions, especially to ask Detroit city government why they are in business with these people as a man lies dying because of a pit bull attack.
So Rachel Jensen is now directly linked to a pit bull promotion business. There needs to be a lot more research into who police departments and governments are involved with on dog issues.
This is the Detroit Bully Corps.
Board of Directors
William J. Bellottie, President
Missi Bellottie, Treasurer
Kimberly Thon, Secretary
Laurie Horn, Adoption Counselor
Michelle Spranger, Community Relations
Dr. Lindsay Ruland, Director of Animal Care
Who these people are involved with and what city governments are giving them dogs to resell. Someone in Flint needs to answer some questions. The breeders and dog fighters keep breeding., the attacks keep happening, the victims get harassed. It’s getting worse.
“Detroit Bully Corps
As the president & Co- Founder of Detroit Bully Crew, I wish to say this.
There is a big focus on Detroit and it’s canine & overall stray issues. Between strays, dog fighting & a need for private / public education…
However… There is a lot of change trying to take place in Flint , Mi as well. There is a huge stray & dog fighting epidemic as well. There are many good people in flint fighting & striving for change. We as an organization have had (6) dogs out of Flint. The epidemic is just as dire as Detroit & deserves focus & attention. GCAC has repealed the APBT ban on adoptions. It seems Flint is fighting for change & striving to provide quality care for its ” Bully Breeds” & animals overall.
My personal thanks to:
Edith Writer- true example of dynamite coming in small packages.
Randy Cronover
Phil & Bruised Not Broken
We recognize the change & the need for support in Flint & Genesee County… We Salute your Efforts.
Sincerely,
William Bellottie
Detroit Bully Crew”
I have seen the fake CEASE and desist letters too. Kent county health dept are deleting facebook comments, but people can post their comments to KENT COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT via google reviews here https://plus.google.com/106172153503425115640/about?gl=us&hl=en
Jesslyn, your comments concerning Michelle Spranger have nothing to fo with DBC. Please stay focused on the issue, the art exhibit. Your willingness to drag DBC through the mud is as distasteful as the actions Ms. Jensen stands accused of. My organization is in NO way connected to this act. So please keep focus.
The Detroit Bully Corps web site lists Michelle Spranger as community relations representative. The job description for this position, whether paid or volunteer, customarily includes representing the perspective of the organization in statements and public appearances. Also customarily, community relations representatives of organizations understand that they are not to represent perspectives, either in statements or otherwise in public, that do not represent their organizations. In short, if there is a difference in perspective between Spranger’s actions in defense of Grand Rapids animal control officer Rachel Jensen and Detroit Bully Rescue, it would appear to be incumbent on Detroit Bully Rescue to clearly define what that difference is.
Detroit Bully Corps plays no role in this incident, Mrs. Spranger acted as an individual on this particular issue. If she decides to defend a friend in this issue, she has that right as we all do. That does not indicate DBC involvement on any level. We as an organization do not have an opinion on this matter.
http://scorchedearththepoliticsofpitb.blogspot.com/2014/10/pit-bull-advocacy-is-still-trying-to.html A bloggers response to this issue is thoughtful and shows the irony in pitbull advocates holding memorials for euthanized pitbulls in Ohio.
The man selling that pit bull Momma in the last picture on the scorched earth page, who appeared with Rachel with their pit bulls to harass the artist, is a pit bull breeder. People found his advertisements selling pit bull puppies and litters online.
He has others that he is breeding.
This is is who Rachel is representing, whether she knows it or not, The Breeders, certainly not even the pit bulls. There shouldn’t be any surprise that things just get worse for the dogs when their advocates only help the Breeders do more damage.