If so, it's way past time for that.

Whitehall, Ohio looked at a 'pit bull' ban and rejected the idea.  The Councillor behind the scheme was Jacquelyn Thompson, an individual who seems to have some issues and I'm not talking about 'pit bulls'.

Some of her wild and crazy statements are redolent of Nelson, Bryant and of course, the animal haters at Peta.  Here's a sample from the story at KC Dog Blog:

"Meanwhile, the woman who proposed the ban, Jacquelyn Thompson, seems like quite a trip and has seemed to have lost her grip on reality a bit as she ranted about pit bulls as the "new order" of evil in society and "tools of terror'. "

Fortunately, Ms Thompson, a new Councillor, has been left out in the cold as the proposal was rejected by saner heads at a recent meeting.

"That's the way I wrote it, the way I intended it, and the way I'm leaving it," [Councillor] Bailey said.

Ohio Revised Code stipulates all pit bulls are vicious dogs. The words "pit bull" appear nowhere in Bailey's breed-neutral ordinance, but rather refers to Ohio law. Bailey maintains his reference in the local law to the state law effectively addresses pit bulls.

However, Thompson and LaCorte said they think otherwise.

"You made sure the words 'pit bull' were not in here. ,,, I do not think it would be a bad thing to say 'pit bull,' " LaCorte said.

Thompson said inclusion of the words would "spell it out" for all the city's residents.

Thompson's failed measure grandfathered only one pit bull per household and prevented any new pit bulls, or other vicious dogs, from entering the city. Bailey's ordinance does not address the number of dogs, rather it simply allows the existing law -- of no more than three dogs of any breed per property -- to prevail.
<snip>

I'm liking Mr Bailey very much:

"Bailey said the goal of his ordinance is to educate people about the proper treatment of animals as much as it is to protect the public.

"This ordinance is a tool, not a weapon," Bailey said."

So put that in your pipe and smoke it, Thompson - or maybe that's the problem.  The full report is available here.

In other news, the Ohio statewide ban proposed by Tyrone Yates, which is now being pulled, engendered some interesting discussion.

One thing that mystifies me is why they ask dog wardens their opinion about particular shapes of dogs.  To say they usually see dogs in unusual circumstances is a bit of an understatement, so their view will be skewed, much like the outlook of those involved in rescue, who think there is an epidemic of abuse, neglect and pet overpopulation.

I call it Snapshot Vision. 

Here's a sample of what I mean, although this dog warden seems to have a head on her shoulders, unlike some others in Ohio I could name - if I wanted to give them vanity search satisfaction:

Vinton County Dog Warden Sheila Brooks estimated that about 30 percent of the county's dogs are pit bulls or pit bull mixes.

While not fully aware of the bill's ramifications, Brooks attested to what she's found to be the prickly nature of some pit bulls or pit bull mixes.

"I'm not very trusting of them because you never know what's going to set them off," Brooks said. "Dog wardens everywhere have difficulties with these dogs."

But when questioned about the supposed viciousness of the dogs, Brooks wasn't ready to point at any one factor to explain their behavior. The issue of whether the dogs' alleged aggressiveness is a product of breeding or environment is one not easily settled, according to Brooks. "Any dog has the potential to be mean," the dog warden said.

"But, when they have the reputation behind them, you learn to be a lot more leary."