After a recent pit bull attack left one teenager injured, Boston Mayor Thomas Menino began lobbying to keep an ordinance requiring pit bulls in Boston to be muzzled in before it is replaced by a new state animal law banning breed-specific legislation.
“The mayor believes this is a community rights issue,” said John Guilfoil, a spokesman for Menino. “The state went forward with its action to ban breed-specific legislation without first consulting with or seeking input from the cities and towns that would be affected by this.”
The mayor believes this is an issue that directly affects the citizens of Boston, Guilfoil said.
On Oct. 5, two pit bulls escaped from their owner, attacking and biting a teenager and killing a cat. One dog was shot but not killed and both are in the custody of Boston Animal Control. The fates of the dogs will soon be determined.
In response to the attack, Menino vowed to work to help keep the people of Boston safe from canine attacks, Guilfoil said.
“We’re not trying to say that a specific breed of dog is all bad per say,” Guilfoil said. “I know that all breeds of dogs and all manners of animals can attack, but if you look at the numbers and look at the incidents in the city and a number of cities around the country, this particular breed has been responsible for a lot of them.”
Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick signed an amended Animal Control Act in August, which redefined the term “dangerous dog.” The Animal Control Act states that no dog can be deemed dangerous solely due to its breed, making breed-specific legislation unenforceable.
“When we came with this bill we wanted to make it breed neutral,” said Reginald Zimmerman, a spokesperson for Patrick. “That’s why we support it. It’s not breed specific.”
The Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals agrees with breed neutrality in legislation, said MSPCA spokesman Rob Halpin.
“It’s our view that those laws do not make pit bulls safer or other dogs safer or people safer,” Halpin said. “We should be looking at people and the behavior of dog owners and ensuring that we have dogs in the hands of responsible dog owners.”
An argument against pit bulls is that they are responsible for many attacks within the city.
Halpin said these statistics leave out the point that there are many more pit bulls in the densest areas of Massachusetts than there are other breeds of dogs. Consequently, there sometimes appear to be more instances in which pit bulls bite because there are simply more pit bulls, he said.
“We should stop blaming the particular breed of dog for attacks because it’s our position that there is no such thing as an inherently violent dog,” Halpin said.
Halpin said public prejudice toward a specific breed of dog often results from a series of attacks the media focuses on.
In the 1970s and ‘80s, German Shepherds and Doberman Pinschers were viewed as aggressive dogs and were “unfairly cast,” he said.
“What we try to do is try to shine a spotlight on the aspects of pit bulls that are great,” he said. “They’re loyal, they’re great family dogs, they have a lot of energy, they’re great for active people.”
Menino can potentially still institute muzzle laws, Zimmerman said.
He said the city could apply for a Home Rule Petition, which allows a specific area to be held exempt from a particular piece of legislation.
If a Home Rule Petition is granted, Menino can further his work towards requiring the muzzling of pit bulls in public.
“As a city we have to make sure that people are safe, and we believe that the law we have on the books helps keep people safe,” he said. “We will work aggressively to try to maintain some of our rights as a community to deal with this public safety issue.”