Elgin Considering Pit Bull Law

Elgin is considering implementing a "Pit Bull law". They would not be banned but owners would have to follow regulations that other dog owners would not have to follow.

But Elgin City Attorney William Cogley said pit bulls "can present a danger distinct from other breeds" and that for every story about a loving, gentle pit bull, he could "recite an anecdote of a sudden attack on a child resulting in horrific results."

There are at least five million Pit Bulls in this country. Probably more. They are one of the three most popular types of dogs to have. By City Attorney Cogley's logic, let's say there are 4.5 million gentle, loving Pit Bulls, then really, there should be 4.5 million anecdotes of Pit Bulls attacking. They should be sudden. Inflicted only on children. And result in horrific results. If this were true and there was a 1:1 ratio between "gentle, loving pit bulls" and "suddenly mauling children Pit Bulls", I would have to concur there is a problem with the breed.

This is not true, of course. Most dogs don't bite. Pit Bulls are dogs. Most of them don't bite.It is untrue that for every story about a "loving, gentle Pit Bull", you could recite a graphic story involving a "sudden attack on a child resulting in horrific" injuries. You would have to recite a lot of graphic stories. Your bag of attacks would diminish rapidly.

"This is a safety issue to me," he said. "When there are citizens who are afraid, their government can't be."

I agree with this council member. But I do not believe there is a safety issue with dogs, in general, or Pit Bulls specifically.

Breed specific legislation is expensive. It kills dogs who may or may not be Pit Bull type dogs. It marginalizes a city's citizens (apparently the council member and city attorney do not believe Pit Bull owners are worthy of being a part of the community).

It does not improve public safety.

But Elgin, please do not let that stop you.