Pit Bull & Dangerous Dog Information
After the City of Denver enacted its pit bull ban in 1989, the city has yet to experience another serious pit bull mauling.
Supporters of the ban, including Charlie Brown, Denver City Councilman for District 6, cite the fact that there have been no serious pit bull maulings in Denver since the ban.
“Pit bulls are bred differently than other animals,” he said. “They can turn on a dime.”
He said it’s not realistic to try to identify the pit bulls that won’t attack from the ones that might.
http://denver.yourhub.com/Denver/Stories/News/Government/Story~645681.aspx
In the Dangerous Dog Laws section below you will see why Texas state law is so ineffective and ill conceived as well as examples of other municipal laws that have held up to numerous challenges up to and including by the Supreme Court of the United States. I believe that due to the large dog breeding industry in east Texas and the large Pit Bull Population — that continues to grow in our area — that taking action prior to new tragedy has become an absolute necessity.
Data and Statistics:
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention examined U.S. dog-attack fatalities from 1979 to 1998. During that period, dogs killed more than 300 Americans, and pit bulls, either purebred or crossbred, accounted for 76 of the deaths, the most of any breed. Purebred or crossbred Rottweiler’s were responsible for 44 deaths, the second highest. The CDC concluded that Rottweiler’s and pit bulls were responsible for 67 percent of fatal attacks during this period.
In the same report it states that Children are the most vulnerable of victims 42 percent of dog-bite injuries were inflicted on kids younger than age 14.
About 4.7 million people are bitten every year by dogs, according to federal statistics. Between 500,000 and 800,000 dog bites require medical treatment annually.
Pit Bulls are ranked as the most dangerous breed.
In the 3-year period from 2006 to 2008, pit bull type dogs killed 52 Americans and accounted for 59% of all fatal attacks. Combined, Pit Bulls and Rottweiler’s accounted for 73% of these deaths, as reported on dogsbite.org. Dogsbite.org includes statistics on 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 & 2009 attacks and fatalities as well as much more information.
Dangerous Dog Laws [Regulation Options]:
Denver, Colorado
The most controversial pit bull ban in the U.S.was enacted by the City and County of Denver in 1989. Over the course of 21 years, it has withstood numerous battles in state and federal courts. On each occasion, the City and County of Denver has prevailed. The litigious history of the ban, and Denver’s victories, has helped many cities adopt similar measures. The Denver ban is undoubtedly the beacon that illustrates the legal viability of breed-specific laws.
Download IMLA Model Pit Bull Ban Ordinance (PDF)
Council Bluffs, Iowa
Pit bulls are not only problematic in large cities; they threaten mid-sized and rural communities as well. Located in the heartland, Council Bluffs, Iowa has approximately 60,000 citizens. After a series of devastating attacks, they joined over 500 cities nationwide and enacted a pit bull ban. The results of the ban — which took effectJanuary 1, 2005– demonstrate the positive effects such legislation can have on public safety in just a few years time:
| Year |
Pit Bull Bites |
| 2004 |
23% |
| 2005 |
10% (year ban enacted) |
| 2006 |
5% |
| 2007 |
2% |
| 2008 |
0% |
| 2009 |
0% |
| 2010 |
0% (statistics through March) |
|
The State of Ohio
Some communities adopt pit bull ordinances that declare the breed “potentially dangerous” or “dangerous,” which triggers special rules for pit bull owners. In the instance of Ohio, the whole state adopted such a policy. The State of Ohio declared pit bulls as “vicious” and requires owners to carry $100,000 in liability insurance, securely constrain the dog when on-property and to use a chain-link leash when off-property.
Various cities within Ohio increased these restrictions. The most publicized one to do so is Toledo, which added the limitation of one pit bull per household and muzzling when off-property. Toledo’s pit bull ordinance was heavily litigated over a period of years. As recently as February 2008, the United States Supreme Court halted the legal wrangling. Not only is Toledo’s breed-specific ordinance constitutional, it cannot be appealed further.
San Francisco, California
A trend that began in California now has communities across the country considering a similar option: mandatory pit bull sterilization. Cities troubled with high pit bull bite counts and shelter occupancy rates are hoping to combat both problems at once with spay/neuter laws targeted at pit bulls. In January 2006, San Francisco enacted such a measure. After 18 months of passing: pit bull impoundments declined by 21%; shelter occupancy rates fell from three-quarters to one-quarter and pit bull euthanizing rates dropped 24%.
By 2010, biting incidents had significantly decreased as well. Sgt. Bill Herndon, of the San Francisco Police Department’s vicious dog unit, said the numbers and severity of pit bull attacks are down since the ordinance was enacted. The same article reports that pit bull euthanizing of these dogs has dropped to 30%. Rebecca Katz of the San Francisco’s animal control department said, “We’ve seen it as very effective from an animal welfare perspective.”
Texas State
Other entities opt for generic dangerous dog laws instead of breed-specific laws. Such laws hold dog owners criminally negligent after a serious attack. The key word in this instance is “after,” which is why we call them “hindsight” laws. Policy makers’ hope that after enough people are sent to jail, there will be a deterrent to dog owners, whereby forcing them to be more responsible. The downside is that many new victims are attacked in the process.
Texas recently passed such legislation. Under Lillian’s Law, owners of loose dogs face 10 years in jail if the attack results in serious injury to a person and 20 years if the attack ends in death. Lillian’s Law, however, does NOT abolish the Texas “one bite free” rule. Conviction is impossible unless there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the dog owner knew or should have known that his dog was going to cause death or severe bodily injury.
The last two facts render the Texas law virtually useless as a deterrent or preventative measure.
Please review a legal discussion on dog bite attorney Kenneth Phillip’s website.
Related materials:
Victim realities:
Nationwide, the rate of dog bite injuries is on the rise. The cost of treating these injuries is rising even faster. In 2003, the average dog bite claim was $19,162. In 2009, the cost rose to $24,840. According to the Insurance Information Institute, dog bites account for over one-third of all homeowner’s insurance liability claims, costing $412 million in 2009, up 6.4 percent from 2008. The number of claims increased during the same period, up 4.8 percent from 2008. As a whole, the cost of dog bite claims is up nearly 30 percent since 2003.
Who pays the medical costs?
1 of every 6 dog bite injuries requires medical care; 1 of every 14 requires emergency care. Victims that need such treatment often pay the cost themselves. Several important factors weigh into the question of “Who pays?” Some states have a “one-bite-rule” that shields dog owners from liability if the incident was the dog’s first bite. Other states disallow civil recourse if the attack occurs on the owner’s property even though over 50% of all dog bites occur on the owner’s property.
In November 2007, 21-year old Jennifer Lowe was visiting a friend who owned two pit bulls that had been declared “dangerous” by county animal control. The owner, Charles Smallwood, left the house to run an errand. When he returned, Jennifer was near death after being mauled by the two dogs. She died on route to the hospital. Because the attack occurred on owner-property, Jennifer’s family had no civil or criminal recourse against the dog owner. This is a gross miscarriage of justice.
Off-property attacks tend to have more teeth. An off-property attack assumes the dog was not constrained and therefore the owner is responsible. The usual method of getting medical reimbursement is through the dog owner’s homeowner’s insurance policy. If the dog owner is a renter and uninsured, the victim may be out of luck. Owners of breeds that inflict the most damage, Pit Bulls and Rottweiler’s, are commonly judgment proof because many insurance companies do not insure these breeds. I believe the number of breeds is now 5 that are uninsurable by some companies.
When the dog owner is insured, the victim can expect several years before payment. Dog bite injuries take time to heal. Settlement negotiations with an insurance company usually start after full healing occurs. In the meanwhile, the victim incurs many costs. If hospitalization was required after the attack, the victim can expect to stay 3.6 days in emergency care. If surgery was required — as it often is for attacks that involve facial and bone injuries – the stay can last much longer and the costs rise much higher.
A victim’s first night in care can easily reach 20 thousand dollars or more. This does not include Life Flight transportation. After Shaylee Crosson of Bonham, Texas was scalped by a pit bull; her care-flight to aDallas hospital was $18,000.
Related articles:
Types of wounds inflicted by dogs
Wounds inflicted by dogs can be overwhelming, especially to children. The small height of a child almost always results in facial wounds. Repairing these wounds usually requires reconstructive surgery. Techniques such as grafting and microsurgical repair need multiple operations over time. Scar diminishment treatments, such as, dermabrasion (sanding of the skin) and pressure scar modification, also require multiple procedures.
Please understand that scar treatments are not reconstructive but “cosmetic” and are not covered by Medicaid or most insurance carriers.
According to the CDC, most dog bites consist of puncture (40%), laceration (25%) and contusion (6%) wounds. Fractures, amputations and infections also result. Repairing bone damage of crushing and fracture injury often requires multiple operations and physical therapy. Nerve damage may also be a factor. When nerve damage occurs, the victim may suffer permanent loss of feeling in parts of a limb and in worst-case scenarios, complete loss of use of a limb.
Psychological damage
Nearly all dog bite victims suffer psychological damage, including Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Even with treatment, fear of another attack may never fade. Each time a victim walks down a sidewalk, strolls through a park or visits a dog owner’s home, the trauma returns. Man’s best friend — to the irony and horror of a dog bite victim — is fully integrated into our society. Stories abound, particularity about senior citizens, who simply never leave their home again after a dog attack.
In a story published by The Mercury News, Angela Silva talks about her life after a dog attack. In September 2007, a neighbor’s pit bull charged into Angela’s garage in Fremont California, where she stood holding her 4-month old child. The dog lunged at the child while it was in her embrace. She placed her son into a garbage can and vainly tried to swat the dog away. The pit bull shredded through her two forearms before help arrived.
Four months after the attack, she has yet to take a walk outside. She gets “fresh air” by sitting on her porch behind a new wooden fence that her boyfriend built. In an effort to distance herself from the dog’s owner, who lived across the street, she moved to a new location. But even in her new home, she continues to have dreams filled with mad, vicious dogs.
Human relationship damage
Nearly all dog bites are a complex mixture of elements involving human bonds. A dog bite victim frequently knows the owner of the dog, who may be a neighbor, relative or friend. Many dog owners deny the seriousness of injury inflicted or blame the victim for the attack. While blaming the victim is a universal phenomenon, it is nearly always the case in dog attacks. This may be true because dogs are a metaphorical “extension” of their owner.
Many states do not automatically euthanize after a first, second and sometimes third human bite. This sets up an adversarial and fear-based relationship when the dog owner is a neighbor. Too often, once the dog is returned, the owner continues to defy proper constraint rules. Victims in these instances become imprisoned in their home. Even if authorities can witness and cite the dog owner for these violations, it’s usually just a small monetary fine.
Some dog owners go as far as engaging in harassment, this is particularly true with pit bull owners. Last year in Stratford, Connecticut, 5-year old Payton Stern was severely mauled by her neighbor’s pit bull. She had been at the neighbor’s house playing with the owner’s daughter when the attack occurred. Payton was badly bitten on her arms and legs and bleeding profusely when the ambulance arrived.
The dog was impounded after the attack and spent the next four months at animal control. During this time, Rogers never once asked about Payton; all he wanted was to bring his dog home. When officials finally ordered the dog euthanized, Rogers hung signs near the Stern’s home calling them “murderers.” The Stern family filed a harassment complaint with the police and moved to a new home.
When the attack stems from a dog owned by a family member or friend, even more disturbing results occur. After decades of a solid bond, such relationships are often left in shambles, and for the primary reason that the dog can’t be blamed, yet neither can the owner. In the end, a dog bite victim is left with little means of recourse, physical and psychological scars and broken human relationships.
Related articles:
When enacting dangerous dog laws, communities also need to enact laws to prevent or punish retaliation by the dog owners whether through harassment or more serious forms of assault or attacks.
Pit Bull Dangers Community