ICYMI: Should Pit Bulls Be Banned in Montgomery County? Readers Respond

>>News Alerts: Subscribe to a free email newsletter: BETHESDA •ROCKVILLE • SILVER SPRING

MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MD–A recent attack by a pit bull of its owner in Anne Arundel County has again ignited a debate in Maryland about whether the breed is inherently dangerous.

Be sure to like Rockville Patch on Facebook!

On April 4, a pit bull was euthanized by police after it attacked a Churchton woman and would not let go. But the dog’s owner told Patch that he was ill and never aggressive.

“My dog was not an aggressive animal, he had a medical condition that caused what happened,” Mary Patton said.

She is unequivocally opposed to total bans on dog breeds.

The incident prompted comment from Tony Solesky, a Towson man whose son was mauled by a pit bull in 2007.

After Solesky’s child was attacked, a Maryland court ruled pit bulls are “inherently dangerous.” The ruling held dog owners and landlords liable for any attacks by pit bulls, prompting landlords statewide to ban the dogs from rental housing.

A 2014 Maryland law supported by the Humane Society overturned the breed-specific ruling, reports The Huffington Post.

We asked Patch Readers in Montgomery County if pit bulls deserved the title of “Most Dangerous Dog in America” and the ban that sometimes comes along with it. Here’s what they had to say:

• "Not if they are controlled by their owner. I have a small dog and am wary of big dogs, esp unleashed at parks. They are regular -not dog -parks. But if the owners is strong and can hold their leased dog back properly, it's ok."
• "No. A breed specific human ban. It is definitely not the dogs fault"
• "No. I live in the county and owned three pit bulls. It is not the breed, it is the owner. One of our pits was aggressive towards other dogs and people, we tried to socialize him but eventually had to fix him and send him to a family farm in SC where he could have the freedom and help he needed. We could have ignored it and let the bad thing happen but instead we took action. Not the breed, the owner."
• "No!! There are bad owners, not bad dogs."
• "Because that isn't prejudice"
• "No, a ban on bad owners would be better"

The ASPCA released a statement stating that they “oppose any state or local law to regulate or ban dogs based on breed.”

They explain that the data collection methods that go into forming these statistics are often unreliable. Specifically, breed-identification can be difficult, especially with mixed-breed dogs, which can lead to an inaccurate calculation of a breed’s bite rate.

The National Canine Research Council says that responsible pet ownership is the key to aggression prevention, and that it’s the duty of the owner to not allow “a pet to become a threat or a nuisance.”

While the question of “bad breeds” is still up in the air, for every bad pit bull story, there’s a good one to match.

Do you have an opinion on pitties? Share it with us in the comments below or on our Rockville Patch Facebook page.

Make sure to check out our national Patch Pets Facebook page for the latest news from the animal kingdom.

>>Photo by Getty Images via Flickr