Troubled Owners, Troubled Dogs?
This article was in the Windsor Star. This post is as rediculas as my last one. Who thinks up these theories???
Troubled owners, troubled dogs?
Crime, choice of pet linked Dalson Chen and Sonja Puzic, with files from Shannon Proudfoot, CanWest News Service Windsor Star; with files from CanWest News Service
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
People who own "high-risk" dogs such as pit bulls are more likely to have past criminal convictions than other dog owners, says a new study.
But Natalie Kemeny, a local pit bull owner and advocate, was shocked bythe suggestion.
"Where we live, and the people that I know, that information is truly false."I'm not a criminal," said the 36-year-old."I've never even gone through a red light. And I own a pit bull-typedog."
In a study published in the current issue of the Journal of Interpersonal Violence, researchers from the University of Cincinnatiexamined a sample of 355 dogs and their owners.The authors categorized as "high-risk" all pit-bull-type dogs, as well as dogs of breeds that had killed or seriously injured a person without provocation, or killed another dog.
Of the sample group, 164 dogs including pit bulls, Rottweilers, Akitasand chows fell into the "high-risk" category.
Every one of their owners was found to have at least one criminal conviction or traffic citationon record.Only 27 per cent of those with "low-risk" dogs such as beagles, spaniels and collies were found to have past legal troubles.
The study also suggests that owners of "high-risk" canines are almost seven times more likely than other dog owners to have been convicted of aggressive crimes, eight times more likely to have drug convictions, and five times more likely to have alcohol-related convictions.
"For some persons, owning a dog that has a reputation for aggression is considered a highly desirable feature," the study notes.
But Kemeny said she'd like to know how the researchers collected their sample group.
"Where did they go to do this survey, the local prison?"
Co-founder of the Windsor-based pit bull rescue coalition Advocates forthe Underdog, Kemeny said she doesn't know any owners of pit bull-typedogs that have ever been convicted of a crime.
"I, myself, am a professional. My rescue partner works for RE/MAXrealty," she said. "We have over 850 people on our mailing list, and we know them all.... They all have full-time professional jobs."
Although pit bull ownership is restricted by Ontario legislation,Windsor city council preceded the province by introducing a city-wideban on pit bulls in September 2004.
The city's licensing commissioner, Diane Sibley, said the new study was the first she had heard of a correlation between "high-risk" dog breeds and their owners' criminal records.
"There was nothing like this when we (introduced the pit bull ban)," she said. "In fact, that was one of the criticisms we received -- that there wasn't enough information to impose the ban."
Sibley said she was "definitely interested" in learning more about the study and said she would look into it.Windsor-Essex County Humane Society president Doug Jeffery also said the study sounds interesting, but warned that people should be careful about how they interpret it.
"There are pit bulls that are legal in Windsor that are not owned by criminals. I know those people," he said.
Jeffery said the bite of any large dog can be severe, and the matter comes down to the irresponsibility of owners -- "whether it be someone with a criminal background or someone who is just stupid, to put it very bluntly."
STUDY QUESTIONED
Owners of dogs like pit bulls and Rottweilers are being as badly stereotyped as their pets, says a local dog trainer.
"I know people that own pit bull terriers that are police officers,"said Mike Beckett, owner of 21st Century K9 and a professional dogtrainer for 10 years.
A past Rottweiler owner and current pit bull owner, Beckett said he feels the University of Cincinnati study is "one more thing for people to hate these dogs, and to hate the people that own these dogs."
In classes, he's never seen pit bull or Rottweiler owners to be criminal types.
Beckett said he was once walking a muzzled pit bull when they were confronted by an aggressive dachshund and its irate owner.
"Just becauseI choose a dog like this, doesn't mean I can't walk down the street too."
-- Dalson ChenRan with fact box "Study Questioned" which has been appended to the story.
7 comments:
Who makes up these theories?
Cowardly self-righteous people who need scapegoats...
I bet those people in Cincinnati went around asking people who didn't own pit bulls if they thought people who owned pit bulls were more likely to have some sort of criminal past. It's rediculous!
Isn't that the truth Sharon. I looked at a guys paper for an answer for a quiz way back in grade 8 or 9. I guess that's why I have Shasta according to this. DUH!
>.< Dang, if that's all it takes then I guess that's the reason why I want one! Gee, wonder what Alain must have done.. :P
Well, what else could we have done? I mean, I've never been in jail. Never been convicted of a crime. I was a typical teenager...but then EVERYONE would own the Pit bulls breeds if that's the case.
Have you EVER heard of anything sooo insane??? I think the insane ones are the one's doing the study.
Can you please tell me why the 2 pit bulls next door try to come over the fence and get me and my two little dogs and two little grandchildren? They bit my husband while he was fixing the fence once. It was unprovoked. He was trying to keep them from destroying our fence by ramming it--trying to get to us. We are both dog lovers. I speak to the "monsters" very nicely, trying to reassume them my little shih-tzu and mini schnauz are not their enemies. To make matters worse, our neighbor put a table right next to our fence--so now they can jump up on it and hang partially in our back yard. Their heads are enormous and the hit the fence constantly. We do NOT provoke them. Tried to get to my 6 and 11 year old grandsons when they were taking the little dogs out to potty. We are scared that we have to take our dogs out front now. My opinion is NOT good. Police said they had to do something before they could ask their owners to move the table. Perhaps when one of our grandkids or dogs is killed!
I know pit bull owners have "rights," but WHEN do they consider their neighbors also have "rights" not to be intimidated by their viciousness? They don't care for their pit bulls--often leaving them for 2-3 days alone and without food. Horrid.
To both Dusty and Sue. You're both right as both your neighbours aren't being considerate to you or your family no matter what breeds they own. That's where the problem lies with responsibility and responsibility also means consideration to others.
I would no more allow such behaviour from Shasta as I don't allow her to bark and disturb neighbours or leave dog feces in my yard for all to view or smell.
Owning a dog (of any breed) means responsibility just as you would hope parents would take with their children.
Just like children, you can't expect them to behave unless you teach them what is and is not acceptable. The same goes for pets you own.
The real complaints both of you have are with the neighbours who don't give a darn what their dogs do and don't do nything to try to stop that behaviour.
As sue said, they don't care about their dogs leaving them for 2 - 3 days at a time without food.
The horror of it all is to call ACC, it's the dogs that will be put down and the neughbours could get off with a fine and a slap on the wrists. They'd probably get more dogs and raise them the same.
That's why we want the responsibility to be on the owners heads and not on the dogs. With proper training and a good home could change those dogs whole personalities. Nothing is going to change the neighbours unless the punishment was either severe enough or they were no longer allowed to own dogs. They don't DESERVE to own dogs.
It's pretty sad when you have to live right next door and fear for yours or your families life. It only goes to show how screwed up this law really is.
Post a Comment