I wonder if David Zimmer* saw this article today:

Dog Bites Boy's Lip Off
Stan Maddux
For The News-Dispatch

SPRINGFIELD TOWNSHIP - A 6-year-old Springfield Township boy might need plastic surgery after a dog bit his face, tearing his lip from his face.

"He came to the shed covered in blood and I was freaking out," said his mother, Diane Ott.

The family owns Stateline Blueberries along Indiana 39 near the Michigan state line. According to La Porte County Police, Gabriel and Margorzata Przybysz of Park Forest, Ill., had gone there with their children to pick blueberries and brought their pet Chihuahua. Most of the family members were out in the field while their son tied the dog on a leash to a picnic table, police said.

The boy told investigators he warned the victim, Owen Ott, not to pet the animal but he reached down to pet the dog and was bitten. Diane Ott said her son was actually on a bicycle.

The gasbaggery begins.

Here's the kind of poppycock you can expect in BC fairly soon, if things follow the usual pattern.  Remember, Bryant is one of your native sons, he's not from Ontario.  Maybe it's a genetic flaw that made him such a ticking time bomb. 

I was just tripping through the Hansard from 2004, reading some of the debates about the Ontario dog-killing plan.

Hon Mr Bryant: Mr Klees, on the other side, can't figure out why we're doing it, and I'm here to make the case for it. I guess the short answer is that these are dangerous dogs. They hurt people. They hurt kids. They hurt families. They hurt other pets. They're dangerous. They cause damage.

That's because Frank Klees is Spock-logical and also represents his constituents - two things that are beyond your ken, Mike.

Let's start locally. Let me take you through just the last couple of months in Ontario. This is a sampling of just media reports of pit bull attacks, so these aren't the many unreported pit bull attacks that have taken place. These are the pit bull attacks that have shown up in the media.

August 15: a man attacked by a pit bull in Thorold, Ontario. August 21: a woman's dog attacked in Toronto. This lady's dog was attacked and killed on that date. She came to a round table I held in the Legislature on this. August 28: a Toronto man attacked by two pit bulls. The police had to use over a dozen bullets to put the pit bulls down.

You forgot to mention that they smothered one dog with a mattress, according to reports.  Other important details about this strangely under-publicized story were left out but we expect no less from the tiny emperor sans des vetements.

August 30: I asked the people of Ontario what they thought about a pit bull ban. Over 5,000 e-mails later the answer was pretty clear.

Yes, the answer was clear but you defiantly forged ahead anyway.  There was a lot at stake  - your ratings in the polls and face-time on the six o'clock news, for starters.

There clearly are many, many unreported pit bull attacks that have not ended up in the media or before a humane society or otherwise....

So, there are clearly a lot of secret 'attacks' that require no medical attention (any dog bite requiring medical attention, even just cleaning, generates a public health record).  Maybe I'm a bit thick, but if they are unreported, how do you know there are any, let alone many?

There was no unanimity, but the vast majority of people who e-mailed me, in any event, certainly supported the ban.

So when can we see these emails?  We thought you'd be handing out copies in front of the legislature, or at the least, posting them on your website or getting your handmaidens in media to publicize them for you.  Other guys read the emails they receive aloud in the House but you never do and I doubt it's for reasons of etiquette or sensitivity.

That's two months of pit bulls in Ontario, and that is just the media reports; it doesn't include the unreported incidents.

Wow, just the media reports and not the unreported incidents.  Why doesn't it include the unreported incidents - woudn't including them bolster your case?

I guess they're right - you can't fight irrationality with facts and logic.

Thank you, Peter Worthington, for your great column about Ontario's revised Animal Welfare Act (2008).

It's time for those in media, who have a way of getting information out to the public, to start examining this issue in detail - as you have done in today's Toronto Sun.

Something screwy is going on in the strange world of animal welfare in Ontario.

In July, hearings were held on the McGuinty government's Animal Welfare Act (Bill 50), which got scant publicity.

A contentious issue revolved around legislation giving the Ontario SPCA control over the name "humane society," making every humane society not linked to the OSPCA illegal.

The Toronto Humane Society (THS) has led the charge against giving the OSPCA this right. Conservative MPP Dunlop Garfield and NDP MPPs Cheri DiNovo and Peter Kormos have vigorously questioned aspects of the act, and oppose giving the OSPCA exclusive control of the name "humane society."

Indications are the government will accede to the opposition on this issue.

More serious is the intent to give OSPCA animal inspectors more power than real police have.

Let's hope this ball will now get rolling.

Oh, and I'm sorry I called you Cranky Pants last year, but you know you deserved it.