Dog ban in New York

This morning I picked up my free copy of the New York Times on my back to my dorm after my 9 o'clock class. While scanning the headlines I saw this adorable picture of a pitt bull named Denim from Manhattan. Well, of course being a total dog lover I just had to read the article that went with it. The article, "Large Dogs in Public Housing Are Now Endangered Species," shocked and dismayed me. It describes a ban that was enacted in May of 2009 that prohibited people that live in public housing from owning dogs larger than 25 pounds. The owners were forced to surrender their dogs or else face the possibility of eviction. The New York City Housing Authority has stated that the ban is a response to complaints about dangerous dogs. I say that this is their attempt to make a devestating occurance even more devestating. Yes, children have been mauled or killed by large dogs in apartment buildings, I acknowledge that. I am fully aware that these occurances are horrible and should never occured. However, I also acknowledge the fact that most likely those dogs that attacked people were trained to be agressive, not kept on leashes, or were owned by people who could not handle them physically. Pitt bulls can be just as docile as any other dog. To punish the entire breed because of human's stupidity in training them to be aggressive is simply barbaric. As a result of this ban, 113 dogs have been surrendered to "shelters and centers run by Animal Care and Control of New York City, the nonprofit group that has a contract with the city to take in unwanted animals." That's not what gets me, though, it's the fact that "49 have been euthanized, beccause of illness, behavior or lack of space." Lack of space? Why not find a shelter that has space? Or a foster program like the Animal Rescue Center of Bay County to take in the extra dogs? I'm sure that there are shelters or programs that are no-kill closer to New York. I'm curious about whether these dogs ever even stood a chance. Were they posted on the internet? Did the owners of the shelters that took them in do everything in their power to avoid having to euthanise these animals? Or did they just sit back and watch the clock tick by until they could get rid of these dogs once and for all? 59 dogs were able to be adopted out. Why weren't more? That's only 52% of the dogs taken in that were adopted out. Three dogs were able to be reclaimed by their owners, and two dogs still remain in shelters. I pray that these two remaining dogs are adopted soon so that they do not have to face the same fate as their counterparts.
Where do we draw the line? Does the New York City Housing Alliance get the privilige of telling residents what days to take their trash out on? what about vacuuming? If I lived in New York, would I have to check with the Housing Alliance before taking a shower? Would I be allowed to have a child without checking in with them first? Do they not realize that dogs can be a part of the family? That they are sometimes your only friend, your comforter? I wonder if any of the people that are a part of the Housing Alliance own dogs. How would they react to us telling them that they are not allowed to have Fido, the golden retriever that they have had for the past 7 years. The pet that they have showered with their love and have watched grow throughout the years. I bet that they would not be so accepting of this new rule. But wait! This person walked Fido in the park last week and Fido looked scary to the 3-year-old playing in the sandbox. Does anyone else see the crazziness of this? I'm I all alone on this one? Why not just require all dogs, regardless of age, size, or breed, to go through intensive training? Why punish dogs based on there breed or size? Is the Housing Alliance just trying to proove how prejudice this country can still be?
I am so dissapointed...

If you would like to read the article yourself pick up the September 23, 2009 issue of the New York Times or go to http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/23/nyregion/23dogs.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=large%20dogs%20in%20public%20housing%20are%20now%20endangered%20species&st=cse