As promised, animal control person Tug Gettling has delivered his second column on 'pit bulls'.  This week he will explain why owning a 'pit bull' is like owning a gun.

Pit bull - Ticking time bomb or trusted friend: Part 2     

Daily Herald    

Tug Gettling

 

DIRECTOR, NORTH UTAH VALLEY  ANIMAL SERVICES

 

The topic of pit bulls has been a controversial one since the early eighties. If pit bulls were just like any other breed of dog there would be no controversy; however, they are not. Pit bulls are exceptional dogs. At a root level the controversy stems from the debate between two schools of thought. On one side of the coin are those people who have read and re-read story after story in the media regarding pit bulls attacks, some with fatal consequences. In general they feel that for the benefit of all mankind pit bulls should become extinct. On the other side of the coin are the pit bull owners and supporters who have found that pit bulls are stable, friendly companions. They believe firmly in their right to own a pit bull, or any breed of dog for that matter. This is where the analogy to gun ownership comes into play.

 

Gun ownership is also a hotly contested topic. On one hand are those who believe that guns have been the cause of so much death and heartache that guns should be completely banned. On the other hand you will find those who support gun ownership and firmly believe it is their right to keep and bear arms. The analogy is evident.

 

Well, Tug, it's only evident if you've rationalized to reach this conclusion.  I mean, the same could be said about whisky, couldn't it?

The reason your analogy is specious is that you are comparing a living creature, the domestic dog - and yes, they are just like other dogs with some superficial differences, much like those found between human races  - to a piece of hardware designed, manufactured and sold for just one purpose - to kill using action at a distance.

There's absolutely no basis for comparison there.

I'm giving Tug the benefit of the doubt and assuming he refers to the American Pit Bull terrier when he says 'pit bull' - not the 3 - 5 breeds in the cluster, over 24 lookalike breeds and unknown number of unrelated mutts which people mistake for 'pit bulls'.

As for what people have read in media stories, who cares?  Most of those reports are just campfire tales for the weak of mind.

There is one point of agreement among those on both sides of the pit bull debate, and that is that lack of owner responsibility and/or ignorance has been the primary source of the debate. If, throughout history, every pit bull owner was educated and informed and acted responsibly there would be no need for a debate -- the pit bull dilemma would not exist.

 

There is no 'pit bull' dilemma, Tug, and there's really no debate. 

Either you buy into the radical animal rights agenda of ending domestic animal ownership, or you don't. 

Either you agree with unequal treatment under the law for citizens or you don't. 

Either you think that owning a dog should put one at risk for restrictions on mobility, search and seizure without due process, presumption of guilt in the absence of wrongdoing, or you don't.   

'Pit bulls' aren't even on the agenda, buddy - that is not what it's about.  They are just a very generalized shape which can be applied to a vast number of domestic dogs.  It's a red herring and it's deliberate - just like those scary stories in the mainstream media.

If you had just used the word 'dog' in your paragraph, I'd agree with you - the common factors in all incidents are owner and victim behaviour.  The dog is a bit of a dope - he really can't be blamed for human error.

 

It stands without dispute that the American Pit bull Terrier has been the means of death for people across the country. However, we must keep in mind that the pit bull in these instances was the gun and not the finger that pulled the trigger. Handguns in and of themselves are harmless. It is the action or inaction of those in possession of the handgun that cause the harm, and so it is with the pit bull. The owner bears the full accountability.

 

'The means of death' is a rather quaint construction.  I'd certainly dispute your statement - unless you mean that dogs people thought looked like that breed were involved in fatalities and of course, fatalities caused by other shapes vastly outnumber those caused by so-called 'pit bulls'.  That's what the facts say.

Another undisputed fact is the physical ability of the pit bull as a breed. They have been rated by many as pound-for-pound the strongest dog on the planet. Additionally, as with most terriers, they are a very tenacious breed. Those two attributes alone call for a higher level of owner responsibility. The marriage of an extremely physically capable and tenacious dog to an ignorant and irresponsible owner is what leads to tragic and traumatic events.

 

Who has rated the APBT as the strongest dog on the planet?  I'd like to see your sources for that, chum.  I guarantee you that pound for pound, my Wiener dog is extremly powerful and is likely more powerful than most of the APBTs I know.

Now you know I'm doing to say this:  the existence of an irresponsible owner is what leads to all tragic and traumatic events - not just those involving 'pit bulls'.

 

In conclusion, I want to be clear that I have no agenda for or against the American Pit bull Terrier. I am not a part of a cause to assure that pit bulls are only viewed in the best possible light, nor am I on a crusade to eliminate them from the face of the Earth. However, I believe that it would be foolish of me to promote the ideology that owning a pit bull simply requires the same level of responsibility as owning any other dog. Their physical abilities coupled with their tenacity require extra precaution.

 

So, Tug, would you say that owning a Malinois requires the same level of responsibility as owning an Alabai?  How about a Bullmastiff compared with a Bloodhound?  A Kuvasz compared with a Poodle?  A Weimaraner compared with a Pekingese?

Each size, shape and haircoat requires a different type of owner.  This is an attempt to single out 'pit bulls' or you would have made your comments more general.

Again, there's no disagreement that owning a dog requires commitment and a responsible attitude.  Some dogs are better for more experienced owners - like most terriers, Wiener dogs, some herding and working dogs, a few of the nonsporting group - 'pit bulls' are not at all unique in that respect. 

I have owned and worked with pit bulls on a professional level for many years. They possess characteristics and qualities that I will always admire. Nevertheless, I will continuously promote education and information that has a protective value for our families and communities. So is the pit bull a ticking time bomb or a trusted friend? It all depends on who the owner is.

 

 

 

• Tug Gettling is the director of North Utah Valley Animal Services

 

Nuff said.