Get unlimited digital access to baltimoresun.com. $0.99 for 4 weeks.
News Opinion

Pit bull compromise deserved to fail

Lawmakers didn't act on pit bull legislation this year because the bill under consideration didn't offer any solutions to the problem of dog attacks ("Pit bull compromise fails, trial lawyers win," April 10). Bravo for them.

Here is a simple solution. Have the state or counties license and train dog owners who keep potentially dangerous breeds. Most attacks that end with death or injury to people or other animals could have been avoided if the owners understood their dogs.

I am a lifelong animal lover, with dogs being my favorites. I am also a recent victim of a pit bull attack. In my case, that dog's owner treated her pit bull as if it were a poodle.

If she had training on pit bulls' tendencies and temperament, the attack on me would not have happened. How many other attacks could have been prevented by having the owner properly trained?

What determines a dangerous breed can be as simple as the size and weight of a given breed. Requiring owners to be trained to handle certain breeds would give insurance companies a way to reduce liability and dog owners the freedom to keep the pets they want.

It would also allow animal control first responders to make educated decisions about how to approach and handle animals when they encounter them, while giving victims of dog attacks a clear path to recover damages and establish negligence.

Tom Paxton, Columbia

  • Text NEWS to 70701 to get Baltimore Sun local news text alerts
  • Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
    Related Content
    • Another diatribe against pit bulls
      Another diatribe against pit bulls

      As a woman of a certain age and a pit bull adopter, I was dismayed to read another attack on pit bulls by columnist Dan Rodricks that this time seemed to question whether senior citizens are appropriate companions for such dogs ("In Frederick, a tragic reminder of pit bull ruling," Jan. 20).

    • Violence against pets must be taken seriously
      Violence against pets must be taken seriously

      In response to the editorial "Man's best friend" (Oct. 13), I am disappointed that The Baltimore Sun turned people's reactions to reported abuse into a competition as to which victims of violent crimes are more worthy of sympathy or outrage. Violence is violence, and none of it is good for...

    • Tougher minimum sentences needed for animal cruelty [Letter]
      Tougher minimum sentences needed for animal cruelty [Letter]

      Animal cruelty is a violent crime that is often an indicator crime and a predictor crime as well. Animals, however, are property under the law, and while we have seen an increase in the number of prosecutions, most judges continue to treat these crimes as minor property crimes ("Man's best...

    • People who abuse animals are likely to abuse humans, too [Letter]
      People who abuse animals are likely to abuse humans, too [Letter]

      Is it too much to ask for The Sun's editorial board to consider both animal abuse and violence against humans as deserving of stiff sentencing ("Man's best friend," Oct. 12)?

    • Pit bulls still dangerous [Letter]
      Pit bulls still dangerous [Letter]

      I want to thank journalist Dan Rodricks for his informative column about pit bulls ("Two years after Maryland court ruling, pit bulls on attack," April 26). It helps me understand more about the pit bull lover uproar and their jargon about it being "the owner, not the breed." However, nothing...

    • Rodricks feeds into pit bull hysteria [Letter]
      Rodricks feeds into pit bull hysteria [Letter]

      I was disturbed on multiple levels after reading Dan Rodricks' recent article, "Two years after Maryland court ruling, pit bulls on attack" (April 26). Not only does Mr. Rodricks feed into anti-pit bull hysteria for the sake of sensationalizing a hot-button issue, but his piece can hardly be...

    Comments
    Loading