Pit Bull

Maryland politics is like a badly dubbed movie where actors' mouths move out of sync with the sound. Big debates are happening in the nation about big issues, including what it means to be an American and how to pay for our way of life. President Barack Obama ignited a firestorm in the media and in homes around the country last month when he said, "you didn't build that," giving credit to government for entrepreneurs' success. Voters in San Diego and San Jose, Calif. dramatically slashed previously sacrosanct government employee pensions by overwhelming margins in June to help keep their cities solvent.

The General Assembly deadlocked Tuesday night over legislation that would have overruled a widely criticized court decision labeling pit bulls as inherently dangerous, apparently killing the bill in this summer's special session. Senate PresidentThomas V. Mike Millersaid he did not believe there would be any action on the legislation because "the difference is very stark" between House and Senate versions of the bill. Miller, a Calvert County Democrat, spoke on the Senate floor just before 9 p.m. as the chamber gathered to consider a bill on gambling expansion, the main purpose for a special session that was expected to continue long into the night.

A House committee approved a much narrower version of a bill on injuries caused by dogs than the Senate passed last week, imposing a tighter liability standard for bites only in cases where the animals are running loose. The House Judiciary Committee voted unanimously for the legislation Monday night and sent it to the House floor for possible action Tuesday. The legislation, one of only a handful of bills being taken up in the current special session on expanded gambling, is a reaction to a widely criticized Court of Appeals decision finding that pit bull are inherently dangerous and their owners should face a stricter liability standard than owners of other dogs when the animals bite.

As Maryland lawmakers reconvene in a special session in Annapolis on Thursday to grapple with whether to expand gambling, they have an opportunity to address another burning issue: a recent Maryland Court of Appeals ruling that puts dogs and families at risk. In the Tracey v. Solesky decision, the court held that owners and anyone with the power to control the presence of pit bull type dogs or pit bull mixes on the premises is strictly liable for any potential damages. The decision has created chaos for landlords and property owners who suddenly face the prospect of massive liability, and for tenants who face the choice of being evicted or giving up their beloved family pet. Animal shelters and rescue groups find themselves in a state of uncertainty as they brace for the impacts.

As a result of my representation of a 10-year-old boy who was brutally mauled by a neighbor's pit bull, I have recently been thrust into a heated and, at times, toxic public debate concerning the dangerousness of certain breeds of dogs. This debate has been particularly frustrating because the two sides do not actually disagree about the important parts. If we as a society are interested in preventing serious injuries or death and adequately compensating victims, the dialogue has to change.

After animal advocates protested a ruling by the state's highest court deeming all pit bulls inherently dangerous, state lawmakers now will consider a bill to overturn the decision during the special session this week. On Monday, Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee Chairman Brian Frosh said a circulated draft bill would make owners of any breed legally responsible for bites. In its April ruling, the Maryland Court of Appeals distinguished pit bull and pit bull mixes from other breeds, giving greater liability to dog owners and landlords who permit tenants to have them, in response to a 2007 attack on a Towson boy. The decision outraged pet owners and animal-rights groups, who say the court's decision unfairly targets dogs based on breed when such laws should be based on the dog's behavior.

A controversial court ruling in April that pit bulls are "inherently dangerous" is not yet in effect and must survive an appeal before it can be applied as Maryland law, according to an opinion released this week by the state attorney general's office. The opinion, written by Assistant Attorney General Kathryn Rowe in response to a request from Montgomery County Del. Heather Mizeur for advice on how to understand the ruling, says a motion for reconsideration of the ruling now before the Maryland Court of Appeals "delays the effect of the decision.

The Maryland Court of Appeals recently issued an opinion in the case Tracey v. Solesky designating all dogs identified as pit bulls and pit bull mixes "inherently dangerous," and holding a dog's owner or anyone with the right to control the dog's presence on the property strictly liable for damages caused by a dog, purely by virtue of the dog's breed. This breed-specific rule is a massive shift in Maryland law, expected to bring about great expense to innocent parties and to keep good dogs in our already overpopulated shelters.

As one of letter writer Mark T. Pfaff's animal "kooks," I just wish to bring one simple fact to his attention ("The court didn't go far enough on pit bulls," June 22): Mr. Pfaff mentions not understanding "why anyone would own a dog with a vicious nature. " For his information, dogs are not born with vicious natures; circumstances and people are to blame for making them vicious. Furthermore, there is no such thing as a "pit bull" breed, although several breeds are lumped into this category.

I spent last Tuesday at the Maryland Senate listening to a variety of people talk about "pit bulls" and the Maryland Court of Appeals' ruling in Tracey vs. Solesky ("Parents of Towson pit bull attack victim testify in Annapolis," June 19). During the proceedings. Mr. Solesky made it a point to say several times that he felt that the animal advocates were minimizing his feelings by attending the hearing. After leaving the committee meeting, his comment stayed with me. As a dog owner and a parent, my heart goes out to the Solesky family.