Which is the pit bull? All of them, for all practical purposes as regards public safety.
Judge objects to definitions based on functional adaptations rather than pedigree
MONTREAL, Quebec––Quebec Superior Court Judge Louis Gouin on October 3, 2016 suspended enforcement of the newly passed Montreal ban on pit bulls, on the morning it was scheduled to come into effect.
Gouin indicated that he will rule as to whether the suspension should be extended by the end of the day Wednesday, but reporters in the courtroom differed in understanding whether he meant Wednesday, October 5, or Wednesday, October 19.
Judge Louis Gouin
Gouin could allow enforcement of the Montreal pit bull ban to proceed while appeals against it on constitutional grounds move through the courts over the next several years, could suspend enforcement of specific parts of it, or could suspend the entire ordinance until all legal issues are resolved, as La Presse reporter Christiane Desjardins opined would be most likely.
Judge objected to ordinance before hearing arguments
Before even hearing the legal arguments against the ban, presented by the Montreal SPCA, and in favor of it, presented by Montreal city attorney René Cadieux, Gouin at the outset of the proceedings outlined his own objections to the bylaw adopted on September 28, 2016 by a city council vote of 37-23.
In so doing, Gouin indicated that he misunderstood the fundamental purpose of the Montreal ordinance: to prohibit possession and sale of a category of dogs who are physically and mentally adapted to the purposes of fighting and baiting, collectively known as pit bulls, not to target a specific genetic line.
Grandfathering
“How does an owner know whether or not they have a pit bull-type dog, asked Gouin. “If the dog’s great-grandfather was 50% pit bull, does that mean it is a pit bull type under the law? Dogs that have the same look as a pit bull are also under the ban. Does that mean you have to take a picture of it?”
Gouin’s soliloquy also indicated that he had not attentively read the ordinance.
A muzzled pit bull. (Flickr photo)
Muzzles
“The law says a dog must be muzzled at all times,” Gouin inaccurately summarized. “Does this mean it has to eat with a muzzle? Common sense indicates that of course a dog can take off its muzzle to eat, but you can’t base a law on common sense,” Gouin said.
In truth, the Montreal ordinance requires pit bulls to be muzzled only when out in public. Pit bulls need not be muzzled in homes, in yards, in kennels, and anywhere else that dogs are normally fed.
Animal control officer Fred Flintstone rushes to impound a pet rock.
Warrants
“The law says city workers could enter a building to take a person’s dog,” Gouin continued, overlooking that the same warrant requirements would apply as apply to any other search and seizure conducted according to Quebec jurisprudence.
“If I have all these questions, then the owners of pit bull-type dogs must have them as well. These questions must be clarified,” said Gouin.
“The SPCA’s lawyers, Marie-Claude St. Amant and Sibel Ataogul, smiled and nodded as the judge pointed out the need for clarification in the bylaw,” wrote CBC reporter Jaela Bernstien.
Impounded pit bulls.
Authority to impound
The Montreal SPCA contends not only that the city pit bull ban is inadequately defined, but that the city has no authority to impound dogs who are neither “stray” nor “dangerous” in the sense of having already attacked someone.
Gouin all but ordered the Montreal city council to narrow the scope of the pit bull ban, “perhaps limiting the definition of pit bulls to breed to be extended by crossing,” according to the Journal de Montreal account. By this, Gouin apparently meant that the definition of “pit bull” in the ordinance should be limited to dogs who are of a specific percentage “pit bull” in lineage identifiable by pedigree or DNA testing.
Precedents
Cadieux pointed out legal precedents that favor the Montreal ordinance, including a 2009 decision by the Supreme Court of Canada to reject hearing an appeal of a verdict upholding the 2005 Ontario ban on pit bulls.
Cadieux explained that the Ontario Court of Appeal found that logic and common sense are sufficient to identify dogs of pit bull type.
“If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck,” Cadieux said.
Foreground: Montreal mayor Denis Coderre. Background: anti-pit bull ban demonstrators.
Function vs. form
The Montreal bylaw, as written and passed by the mayor Denis Coderre’s Equipé Denis Coderre party, but opposed unanimously by the minority Project Montreal Party, recognized that pit bulls are bred and cross-bred to function, to have the physical and psychological attributes needed for fighting and baiting, not to form, such as the “breed standards” applied to show dogs of breeds recognized by kennel clubs.
A pit bull, in short, is a member of a class, as are “retrievers,” “sight hounds,” “scent hounds,” “herding dogs,” etc., and may be any “breed” or mix of “breeds” within that class, along with out-crosses meant to enhance the attributes of a fighting dog.
Dogfighter & pit bull breeder Earl Tudor.
Pit bull attributes
Attributes common to the pit bull class include extra-large jaws; a predisposition to grip and shake a bite victim, rather than biting and retreating; a squat body stance to keep other dogs from attacking their bellies; relatively short ears & tail; metabolism oriented toward quick explosive bursts of activity, as opposed to the pacing and endurance particularly obvious in huskies; indifference to pain while focused on attack (quite unlike wild predators, who will let prey escape rather than risk disabling injury in an attack); very high reactivity to stimulus; lack of inhibition about attacking other animals regardless of size and social cues; and a prey drive unmoderated by the calculation of energy expenditure vs. food gain that is characteristic of all successful wild predators.
ANIMALS 24-7 data superimposed on ASPCA image, covering up only a black void.
Maladaptive traits
Many of these traits are significantly maladaptive for dogs other than fighting dogs, for example dogs kept as pets, street dogs, or members of wild hunting packs, among whom the abilities to respond accurately to social cues and exercise restraint in conflict, rather than risk injury to self or pack mates, are of paramount importance.
Since the combination of traits that define a pit bull may come from a variety of mixes of molosser and terrier ancestry, DNA testing is not able to accurately to identify pit bulls, as Mars Inc., the major manufacturer of dog DNA testing kits, admits; but courts in both the U.S. and Canada have repeatedly ruled that pit bulls are clearly, accurately, and easily visually identified by their recognizable adaptations for fighting.
Please help us continue speaking truth to power:
http://www.animals24-7.org/donate/
Related Posts
Montreal appeal of stay on pit bull ban is authorized to proceed
Montreal carriage horse trade ends, after 354 years
How the Pit Bull Federation of South Africa views Galunker
Quebec Court of Appeals allows Montreal pit bull ban to take effect
Enforcement of Montreal pit bull ban indefinitely delayed
Montreal bans pit bulls
I’m furious about this. For me, how people come down on this issue has become something of a litmus test, of their ability to honestly engage with evidence and arrive at a conclusion that’s consistent with it, and of whether they’re capable of recognizing that some rights are much more basic and important than others. Your right to keep a particular kind of dog vs. other peoples’ right to walk down the street, sit in their yard or use a public park without being maimed or killed by your pet? Not even close.
I have read none of the articles regarding this judge’s decision. I know already what sort of “logic” he will use…none, and I am angry just reading the headlines so I can only imagine how angry I will become reading the articles. So glad you covered this, Merritt, so that at least now I understand what an idiot this judge is. Yes, idiot.
You obviously have no clue about the American Pit Bull Terrior!!!! When Terrorist ,!!! Come breaking in your Door To Rape & Kill,, your Poodle want save you,,!!!!!! Research) your head is more than a hat Rack
There is, as yet, no record of a human terrorist anywhere pushing through a doggie door to wreak havoc. However, thus far in 2016, at least 16 pit bulls have broken into people’s homes by pushing through doors, digging under fences, or jumping over them, disfiguring five humans and killing at least 16 other dogs.
Fortunately no home-invading pit bulls have killed anyone this year, but this has occurred, e.g. the August 2011 death of Ayen Chol, 4, of St. Albans, Australia, killed in her own living room by a pit bull who injured three children and their mother in a single unprovoked rampage after running into their home. Owner Lazor Josevski, of Melbourne, testified that the pit bull had been in his family from puppyhood, “regularly played with children aged between two and 10 who had come to visit his home, had never shown any aggression, was walked every day and was always calm when around other people or animals,” according to the Melbourne Herald Sun.
I was listening to a CBC radio show on Wisconsin NPR tonight. Rather than interview victim families–which they NEVER do–they interviewed a hysterical vet crying about all the poor, dear nanny dogs that were going to be massacred in a bloodbath, and how she and her vet friends are bravely going to refuse to euthanize! (When the only dogs that could be euthanized under the law are unwanted pit bulls at shelters, not people’s pets with private vets).
All the usual complete nonsense–I was ticking them off on a list. She claims to have been bitten by numerous toy breeds and is afraid of them, but has never ever met a mean pit bull. Check. Anyway, there’s no breed called a pit bull. Check. The pro-BSL people just “misunderstand” about pit bulls. They are “nanny dogs” and were never bred to fight.. Check. Plus, until a DNA test is done on every single dog who has ever bitten anybody, we can’t assume that a single one of those biters was a pit bull. They were probably all beagles and boxers, even if the owner himself says the dog is a pit bull.
She also claimed that people get attacked by random “large dogs”, but then report to the police that they were attacked by a pit bull because they were “traumatized” by seeing the “large breed” coming at them and swayed by media reports so that they subconsciously believe that all dogs who attack must be pit bulls..
When, oh when will these idiotic reporters call Merritt or Colleen for stats, instead of listening to pit advocates like this idiotic vet and her emotional outpouring of deliberate misinformation? When will any reporter anywhere confront these pit advocates with actual FACTS?
How about that vet in Vancouver beginning a “pit in tutu” protest, being pictured in the news item wearing a hot pink tutu himself while “treating” a tutu-wearing pit bull. I am simply speechless and that hardly every happens. I am also sick to my stomach.
As a US Supreme Court justice once said, “I may not be able to define pornography, but I know it when I see it.” This ruling is pure obscenity. It’s a slap in the face to the law-abiding, security seeking citizens.
The name of the radio show I mentioned is As It Happens. It’s one of my favorite shows on NPR in Wisconsin, though it’s actually from Canada. I just went to the show’s website and wrote the following:
“I love As It Happens and listen to every episode I can. I was horrified tonight, however, to hear you interviewing a pit bull advocate & veterinarian spreading deliberate misinformation about the ban and the pit bull breed.
I’m a former dog behavior consultant who was a well-known aggression expert. I retired from that career, but have spent the past 5 years studying serious and fatal maulings, reading peer-reviewed research and corresponding with pit bull attack victims. I am strongly in favor of Montreal’s pit bull ban, and want to suggest that you talk to some experts in favor of the ban.
In EVERY case involving pit bulls, from a pit bull ban, to a pit bull killing a child–the media goes straight out to interview one of the pit bull advocates. Why not interview an expert on how aggressive pit bulls are, and how they kill twice as many people as all other 300 breeds COMBINED, and have every decade since the 1830s? Or how they kill 24,000 pet dogs a year in the U.S. alone?
If there was a school shooting, wouldn’t you interview victim families? You wouldn’t call up the gun lobby and have them appear on A.I.H. saying how wonderful guns are, right? Why should the pit bull topic be any different? What a slap in the face to the tens of thousands of people each year who lose a loved one (pet, friend or family member) to a pit bull attack.
Please give equal time to people who know the facts and are not just giving an emotional reaction filled with nothing but personal conspiracy theories and opinions like “toy breeds do much more damage than pit bulls!” I have a collection of photos of people mauled to death by pit bulls, and I’ll take a bite from a toy poodle any day, thank you.
I highly recommend you contact and give equal time to Merritt Clifton (www.animals24-7.org), who has collected stats on ALL serious and fatal maulings by ALL breeds for decades. And Colleen Lynn (www.dogsbite.org) who maintains an extremely well-researched and daily-updated website that also has info on every dog-related human fatality going back to the 1800’s. (Hint: if you talk to them and learn FACTS rather than unfounded opinions, you will wonder why every city in the country has not banned pit bulls yet.)
Sincerely,
Sharon Yildiz, M.S.
Founding member of http://www.daxtonsfriends.org (in memory of a toddler killed by two pit bulls)
Excellent, Sharon. Thank you.
Tough shit dog haters.. go fuck yourself, Merritt
Dog haters, from a rational perspective, are those who persist in breeding, selling, rehoming, promoting, & defending pit bulls, who kill more than 24,000 other dogs per year in the U.S. alone, constitute more than a third of dog admissions to animal shelters, and last less than 25% as long in a home, on average, as the typical dog.
Concerning the tone and mentality exhibited in the message above, the likes of which we have seen practically daily for decades, please see Pit bulls, “bullying & backlash,” & who is really threatening whom and Don’t bully my breed, but we will bully the victims, by Beth Clifton.
How in the world would you ever know how long pit bulls last in a home……or how many other dogs are killed by pits…I guess you interviewed everyone that owned a pit and 25% got rid of them…Detroit has many pits roaming the streets…why? because people breed them as “macho” dogs, leave them untrained with little care, and if they’re through with them, turn them loose in the streets.
To coin a phrase, educate yourself. If “only” 25% of all pit bulls flunked out of homes in a given year, that would be a significant improvement over the realities of the past 20 years. Currently there are about 3.6 million pit bulls in U.S. homes, the largest number ever after two years of record acquisitions and one year of leveling off (see 2016 survey: List of top 5 U.S. dog breed types ousts pit bulls for the past several years’ worth of data), but nearly one million pit bulls per year are owner-surrendered to animal shelters and another several hundred thousand are impounded for dangerous behavior or for running at large. The latter category includes the pit bulls who are abandoned at large by pit bull owners who are too irresponsible even to take them to a shelter. For all other dog types combined, the annual rate of shelter entry is less than 5% per year. (See also Record low shelter killing raises both hopes & questions.)
Concerning the numbers of other dogs killed by pit bulls, see Pit bulls killed 24,000 other dogs & 13,000 cats in 2015.
How articulate.
The dog lovers are those who own dogs other than pitbulls. We do not want our dogs killed or maimed and do not want pitbulls euthanized by the hundreds of thousands. I do not understand how people can pretend to love animals and are more concerned about being able to own the breed of their choice.
Certainly and unequivocally agree with the previous three posters; sharing to social media, of course, and praying that this judge will see reason and rule in favor of the vast majority who deserve to live safe from these very dangerous animals and their equally, if not more, dangerous proponents.
Less furious today, because it occurred to me even if the ban fails in court, all is not lost. From the province’s perspective, Montréal is effectively stress-testing a particular configuration of BSL. You do stress-tests to learn where your weaknesses are. The process will clarify the legal principles at play, and studying the specific structural failures of Montréal’s ordinance should help the province in drafting their own (bulletproof) legislation. They are working on legislation, after all.
Thought-provoking comment. Thank you very much.