GROSSE POINTE SHORES (WWJ) - City Council members in Grosse Pointe Shores heard comments from the public on Tuesday weighing in on if they should adopt a proposal to ban pit bull-type dogs.
Residents were split on the matter, which comes over a month after a couple and their small dog were attacked by an off-leash dog, identified as a pit bull-type.
While the city will take more time to come up with a decision, the proposal had incensed those on either side of the issue.
The meeting heard from residents Dana and Mike Owens, who recounted the terrifying three and a half minutes they struggled to save their 14-year-old Cocker Spaniel and poodle mix, Maddie, from the jaws of an aggressive dog on June 4.
"I was punching it in the face," Dana said of the incident. "A runner or somebody nearby was like, ‘How can we help?’ And we were just like, ‘Just kick it. Do something…' And it wouldn't release [Maddie]."
Dana said her small dog has three scars where her leg was amputated.
She went on to say how the attacking dog's owner was not reprimanded over the encounter and the couple -- along with other residents -- now fear to walk their dogs in the area.
Related
According to the city, the owner of the pit bull-type dog was new to town and was able to provide medical records and a current rabies vaccination for the animal. The dog was quarantined at the home instead of removed.
City Councilmember Danielle Gehlert agreed that the incident was not managed in a "very forceful" way.
According to the Grosse Pointe Shores Code of Ordnances, "no person owning, keeping, possessing or harboring any dog or cat shall permit such dog or cat to be on a public street or highway, in a public park, public building or any other public place at any time" unless it is on a leash of no more than ten feet or in a vehicle.
Furthermore, the ordnance states that residents are not allowed to own, keep, harbor or possess "vicious dogs" that are outlined as "one that bites or attacks a person, or a dog that bites or attacks and causes serious injury or death to another dog while the other dog is on the property or under the control of its owner."
The Owens said they were pushing for an amendment to the ordnance to include a breed-ban.
“A Pit Bull when they bite, they tend to lock their jaws and you can’t get them to release. So that's kind of why we are pushing for that breed," Owens added.
One issue with that logic, opposers say, is that pit-bull type dogs don't have locking jaws or even a stronger biting power from any other dog breed of comparable size, as outlined by Dr. I. Lehr Brisbin from the University of Georgia.
Another issue raised is how the city would be able to determine what kinds of dogs are "pit bulls" -- as no such breed actually exists, per the American Kennel Club.
The word "Pit Bull" is an overall term to describe a group of different dog breeds that share similar physical characteristics, the organization outlined. They typically include the American Bully, the American Pit Bull Terrier, the American Staffordshire Terrier, the Staffordshire Bull Terrier and the American Bulldog.
The ban also faces further complications if it chooses to include any dogs that are mixed.
According to the World Animal Foundation, there are 18 million Pit Bull-type dogs and their mixes in the U.S, most of which are used for service or guarding work.
There are also unanswered questions about what would happen to dogs that fall under the ban that already lives within the city.
All those who spoke at Tueday's City Council meeting spoke out against the ban, including dog owner Ken Welch, who argued that it isn't the kind of dog that's the issue -- its the owners.
"Let’s focus on tightening up some of the laws and regulations about owning a dog to protect the public if that’s the intent and act on logic rather than emotion," Welch commented.
While many areas in the U.S. currently have breed-specific bans, they are highly discouraged by legal experts with the American Bar Association and two of the country's leading canine organizations, the American Kennel Club and the Humane Society.
City Councilmember John Dakmak thanked everyone who came out to speak on Tuesday night, stating while they were unsure of where the discussion would go, the council cannot "ignore facts of stated history of injury."
The council is expected to discuss the matter again at their next meeting.
More on today's top stories:
Related
