Wag the Dog

I wonder sometimes why people aren't in an uproar about the Ontario Court of Appeal's decision to uphold Ontario's Dog Owners' Liability Act.  I guess it's because people can't get past the word “Pitbull”.  Since they can't get past that word and all of the preconceived notions they have about “pitbulls” people just don't seem to care.  What is consistently being missed by the general public is the fact that if this decision stands, replace the word “pitbull” with anything. 

Anything can now be banned with no real evidence that it is in the best interest of public safety.  I find it absolutely astounding that people can't see that this is a huge erosion of rights in Canada. 

Forget the word “pitbull”.  Not only because it isn't even a breed, or because people's perception of the breeds often referred to by this generic term are unfortunately biased due to a lack of accurate information about the breeds, but because if you can't get past that word, you can't see the larger issue at hand.  The larger issue has huge implications for Canadians, and Canadians should be angry about this law and this ruling.  To get an idea what I mean, try this exercise:

Replace “pitbull” with red cars. If there were several stories in the media covering accidents involving red cars would that mean that there were in fact more accidents involving red cars?  Would it be expected that the government, before banning them, would be required to demonstrate with numerical data, not just the media reports, that red cars were more often involved in accidents?  Would the argument, well, even if we can prevent one injury or death from a red car by banning them make sense?  Is burgundy red?  How about plum?  Is it right for the government to choose which car colours you can have?

Replace “pitbull” with bicycle.  If there were several stories about bicycle accidents in the media, would that be enough evidence to ban them?  Would one automatically assume that cycling is too dangerous and should be banned?  What if it was only a certain type of bicycle, like a mountain bike. Should mountain bikes be banned because there were some news reports of accidents involving them, without any other evidence showing that mountain bikes are dangerous?

I could go on forever, but you can fit in your own replacement words now, hopefully you get the point.  With this precedent, anything from amplifiers to zippers can be banned.  So why the hell aren't we Canadians more concerned about it.  Think about your favourite item, animal, tool or whatever.  If it were banned without appropriate evidence to show “reasoned apprehension of harm” how would you feel?  Would you want others to help you stand up for your rights?  Help dog owners stand up for theirs. 

We need money.  Lawyers don't work for free.  Help us to stand up for our rights AND yours.  Click the Donate button on the left of your screen.  If a lot of people donate a little tiny bit – hey, I know it's tough financially right now, but these are your rights we're talking about – we can keep the challenge going.  If not, we can't.  It's that simple.