Patch Readers Sound Off on Pit Bull Debate
Pasadena Patch readers gave their opinions on the Maryland Court of Appeals ruling that pit bulls were “inherently dangerous.”
On Tuesday, Pasadena Patch posted a poll asking readers what they thought of the Maryland Count of Appeals Ruling that said pit bulls were “inherently dangerous.”
Lawmakers formed a group challenging that opinion and met for the first time on Tuesday. They will continue to meet and discuss the ruling, but Patch readers have sounded off.
As of Thursday night 87 people participated in Patch’s poll, and 67 percent of those who voted said no, pit bulls were not inherently dangerous.
Readers also left 16 comments and counting on the article giving their various and passionate opinions.
Tom Sharp got the conversation started by writing: “If pit bulls are so sweet and cuddly, then why are owners afraid of putting their money where their mouths have been for so long? This isn't a ban; it just makes you responsible for the actions of a pit bull the moment you buy it, rather than only after it has mauled its second child.”
Other readers, like Jane Graham, talked about the experiences they have with their own pit bulls.
Graham wrote: “Our pit bull is the most loving dog I have had in my life...including a black lab! Our [pit bull], Jessie, is family… My hubby didn't want a pit bull...now he falls asleep snuggling her.”
Readers were impassioned about the issue that is gaining increasing popularity. The task force is scheduled to meet again on July 3 in Annapolis. They are hearing from 25 witnesses including dog owners, attorneys, animal advocates, insurers and landlords, WBAL reported.
Thank you to the Pasadena Patch readers who have shared their opinions throughout the week.