Introducing Michael Bryant Attorney General of Ontario. He is to Canada what Boign is to Colorado.
Today I found a wonderful letter written to Michael Bryant
by Marjorie Darby, Director, GoodPooch.com
. Of course I wanted to share the links with everyone quote some of the great things said. It reminds me of the letter to PETA that I posted on last month. Enjoy."There is a saying that has been taken from the words of Chief Dan George. It goes like this: What we don't know, we fear. What we fear, we hate. What we hate, we destroy.I can't think of anyone who embodies that sentiment more than you, Mr. Bryant, in relation to your view of 'pit bulls'.You say they're "inherently vicious beasts" yet, using the city of Toronto's own records so far this year, 97% of licensed 'pit bulls' and significantly more than 99% of the estimated overall 'pit bull' population has harmed neither man nor beast. Can any group be considered "inherently vicious" when fewer than 1% of its members are dangerous?You've said that, for every person who tells you his/her 'pit bull' is a "pussycat" (to use your words), there's someone who's emailed you about being attacked by a 'pit bull'. In fact, the statistics above show the ratio is at least 99 - 1. For every person who tells you they were attacked by a 'pit bull' there are more than 99 completely innocent 'pit bulls' who never have and never will attack anyone or anything.You've told the public that thousands of "'pit bull' attacks" have gone unreported. But why do you think a 'serious dog attack', especially those attributed to already much maligned 'pit bulls', would go unreported by victims? Could it be those incidents were not as serious as these people are now leading you to believe? Could they even by lying to you? How serious could a bite be, if even the victim doesn't deem it necessary to contact authorities?""You suggest that 'pit bulls' bite more often than other breeds. Yet in a study that ranked dog breeds from one to one hundred, in order of how likely they were to bite, the 'pit bull' ranked fourth...from the bottom.""Kitchener-Waterloo banned 'pit bulls' after 18 bites reported the previous year. During that same period, there were 85 bites attributed to German Shepherds.""All the 'pit bull' ban did was cause the deaths of countless innocent dogs who never had and never would have harmed anyone; not to mention the emotional and financial suffering that 'pit bull' owners must have endured. Since banning 'pit bulls' does nothing to directly reduce the number of bites by Labradors and German Shepherds, it is clear that any reduction in bites by other breeds is the result of other measures...i.e. We can reduce dog bite numbers without banning any one dog breed.""You say large dogs are a danger. Yet 'pit bulls' are typically only 30-60 lbs. You say large dogs are capable of greater damage. But the facts clearly show that the very largest dog breeds are rarely involved in serious biting incidents, and the very smallest dog breeds have actually killed people."
Too much good information to quote. What a great letter.