If you ever needed evidence of the bias of the media in Australia against pit bulls, then this is it.
While the ‘Studio Ten’ introductory piece on the details of dog attacks in Australia seemed to have been well-researched, unfortunately from there, the show began to circle the drain.
The show’s panel was outrageous in their unshakable position the ‘pit bull’ ‘breed’ was the problem. Even as the guests gave their expert opinions (which, after all, is why you get experts in!) on how we could be working to make the community safer, the show’s panel regurgitated disproven clichés and fear-based superstition.
All the while, two dogs who had found themselves caught up in these ridiculous laws lay quietly on the floor, posing absolutely no threat to anyone.
The fact the two case studies used the show used as a demonstration for ‘pit bulls’ being dangerous, were actually attributed to other dog ‘breeds’, seemed to be entirely and tragically ironic. Meanwhile the RSPCA-generated hysteria lives on, with ol’Hugh’s venom being spewed and no RSPCA rep appearing to dispute it.
That five people who have five lifetimes worth of knowledge on dog behaviour, were dismissed completely by four people who talk on television for a living, is really at the crux of why we get such bad, ineffective and dangerous laws in Australia.
Once again, we need to educate and publicise the case of BIAS AGAINST DOGS, in particular that which is against DOMESTIC DOGS, such as the Pit Bull and the other dogs which are also discriminated against in Australia.
It has been SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN that there is NO SUCH THING as a dangerous breed of domestic dog. Read the statements on the IADCRO website. We are going nowhere with just dumping our problems and bias in dogs, or cats, or for that matter, any animal which is trying to exist here in Australia.
Also, it should be obvious that if we hassle the owners of dogs, they won’t register or socialise their dogs, and THAT can mean that the dogs could become unhappy and be a risk to other people.