There was a city council meeting in my home town of Richmond, B.C. Canada on Monday January 10th 2011 this is what came out of that meeting in regards to amending the bylaw (BSL) on pit bulls.
All I can say is that the City Council;
A) Did not fully grasp what was being requested of them.
B) There is a bias against Pit bulls and their owners in Richmond.
C) They stated and I quote “The majority of Richmond residents wanted BSL, well…, listen I never even heard that they were considering BSL or that it was in effect, until Wednesday of this week and I have lived here 20+ years. Personally, I was never sent anything via email or through Canada Post asking my opinion, There was nothing visible in the local papers about it, So I question whether this is accurate.
D) Mayor Brody also stated before BSL went into effect they had a number of Pit Bull attacks in Richmond, well I know through my research that there is Zero data on which breed of dogs are seized, and or euthanized due to attacks, what that means is If I ask how many people were attacked by pit bulls last year, 10 years ago, or even three years ago they simply can’t tell me that information. Not to mention I don’t recall hearing about even one pit bull attack in Richmond much less several, I am not denying it, I simply question if they were in fact all pit bull, it just sounds very suspect to me, sorry! If I am wrong please by all means I welcome, the chance for someone to show me any results or data to corroborate that.
In closing it was not suggested that the Bylaws be cast aside, what was asked for was responsiblity enforcement, and fairness, it is clear Richmond City Council is incapable and unwilling to give that to its residents, be it animal or human!
I will also add that when I was three years old I was attacked viciously by a Malamute, I had to have 65 to 70 stitches sewn into my scalp to close the wounds, which resulted in major scaring. the dog was un-socialized, the dog was neglected, the dog has displayed signs of aggression before and after the incident. The fact remains that dog held on to me and didn’t let go, so pit bulls are not the only dog capable of retaing its grasp, and they are not where the danger to the public lies, it lies with irresponsibility. Richmond gives it citizen’s a false sense of security with this legislation.
When Council member Sue Halsey-Brandt says the cost to enforce responsibility would be much greater, I beg to differ, how is it then that other Districts, other Countries have managed to do it? I’ll tell you, because they were willing to cast aside their bias’ and fears created from the media, to really look at the problem of dog bites objectively, they were willing to talk about it, learn from it, and sit down with these groups to collectively come up with something that is fair and safe for everyone. There is a bias here in Richmond and if you watched the meeting, the fear is there, the myths were spoken, and the bias is very real! Come next election, I may have to reconsider whom will best see to the needs of all the residents of richmond, not just the dog fearing ones.
I think it may be time for the citizens of Richmond to have a public meeting and let’s just see how many of the residents here really do want BSL.
Holly Carney, AKA (A-PIT-O-ME)
Tax Payer, Dog Owner, and Pit Bull Advocate.