Canine Racism

by teenyuck 9 Replies latest jw friends

  • teenyuck
    teenyuck

    Canine Racism???!!!

    Last week in the Columbus Dispatch an article was published that told people how insurers are cancelling policies of homeowners who own certain breeds of dogs.

    The quote below is an editorial in today's paper, regarding the article. The article is posted below.

    Letters To The Editor
    Insurance companies are going to the dogs
    Friday, April 19, 2002

    I was appalled at the stance insurance companies are taking on a canine issue ("Big dogs frightening insurers,'' Dispatch, Saturday). Threatening to cancel homeowners insurance for people who own a particular breed of dog is reprehensible. In some cases, the policy will be forcing people to choose between their beloved family pets and their homes. As the article pointed out, most homeowners pay for their homes with mortgages that they won't be able to keep without their homeowners insurance.

    Thankfully, my breed wasn't on the list -- this time. But I can only imagine the agony I would face if it had been. The insurance companies' position is the equivalent of canine racism. While there is no doubt particular breeds have similar and predicable personality traits, it is unfair to assume all dogs of a particular breed exhibit the negative behavior associated with their breed.

    If particular breeds are more likely to cause an insurance company to pay a claim, I believe the company has a right to charge a higher premium to cover the statistical risk. But to threaten policy cancellation is crossing the line.

    What about the effect this kind of policy is going to have on rescue groups, animal humane societies and shelters across the country? These organizations will be overrun with animals that have absolutely no possibility of placement. Euthanasia will be the only option. An edict of this type could eventually render extinct the breeds on the list.

    Carolyn Jordan
    Columbus


    BIG DOGS FRIGHTENING INSURERS

    Saturday, April 13, 2002
    NEWS 01A
    By Lornet Turnbull
    Dispatch Staff Reporter
    Illustration: Photo, Graphic

    Faced with hefty payouts, insurance companies are issuing ultimatums to owners of certain breeds of dogs: Get rid of Fido, or lose your homeowner's coverage.

    Neither option appeals to Mary Alice Bentley.

    Nationwide Insurance has given the 77-year-old, Northland-area resident until July 7 to give up the Doberman pinscher that has been her companion for two years or the company won't renew the policy it wrote on her home nearly 10 years ago.

    "I'm certainly not getting rid of my dog,'' Bentley said this week as she sat in her back yard, stroking the shiny, black coat of the 65-pound dog, Holly.

    "She's an absolute pussycat, wouldn't hurt a soul. These dogs are better than any security system you can have, and they don't have to be vicious.''

    In the wake of high-profile dog- attack cases nationwide, Dobermans, Rottweilers, chows and other breeds of powerful and sometimes-aggressive dogs have emerged as victims in a new form of profiling.

    Insurers say dog bites are the biggest reason for claims on homeowner's policies, costing them more than $300 million a year.

    To limit their exposure, Nationwide and some other companies maintain a list of breeds whose owners are ineligible for home coverage. On Nationwide's list are chows, Dobermans, pit bulls, Presa Canarios, Rottweilers and wolf hybrids.

    "Nationwide appreciates that an individual dog may not be representative of an entire breed,'' the company says. "However, we find it necessary to apply our standards consistently as it is difficult, if not impossible, for us to determine the true disposition of any individual dog.''

    Other providers aren't as restrictive: Some consider an individual dog's pattern of behavior, rather than its breed, to determine an owner's eligibility for coverage. Others look to state law or their own exposure to guide their decisions.

    Most won't write policies for customers who own pit bulls, citing state law that deems the animal vicious and requires owners to carry at least $100,000 worth of liability insurance.

    Pit bull owners would have to shop around a lot to find an insurer willing to cover their dog. Even the insurer of last resort -- the Ohio FAIR plan, designed to extend insurance to those who can't otherwise obtain it -- won't provide coverage.

    "It's become a lot more prevalent as companies have seen more loss experience and injuries as a result of certain breeds,'' said Loretta Worters, spokeswoman for the Insurance Information Institute.

    Some believe that such restrictions are arbitrary and in many cases unfair, particularly because insurance is essential to obtaining and keeping a mortgage.

    About 40 percent of American households own a dog, the Humane Society of the United States says.

    "You can't simply take a breed and peg it as vicious,'' said Dr. Paul Knapp, a Columbus veterinarian. "That's a dog-by-dog situation.

    "Some of the worst dogs I've had are not on any list. Some of these 3-pound chihuahuas can take down a big guy if they wanted to.''

    Knapp said he encourages clients who own the more commonly blacklisted dogs to contact their insurance carriers.

    "There are a lot of people who just don't realize they don't have liability coverage when it comes to certain breeds,'' he said.

    That's because although the insurance industry tries to teach people about responsible pet ownership, it does a poor job of spelling out its dog-breed policy.

    Companies say insurance agents typically ask about dog ownership and breed when someone applies for coverage. But those who get a Rottweiler or Doberman after they buy their home might not find out that their new pet has rendered them ineligible for coverage until they have a claim.

    If there's a dog-bite claim, the client is covered, but likely will be told to give up the dog or find other coverage.

    In Bentley's case, Nationwide discovered the dog during a routine inspection of her home a few weeks ago.

    Bob Cunningham, spokesman for Nationwide, says there's no good system for informing customers about the policy. The exclusions aren't spelled out, not even in the fine print of policy statements.

    "Each agent has his or her own way of communicating to their customers,'' he said.

    "It's true most people don't know.''

    Patricia Dews, an American Family Insurance agent, said she inspects every home she insures and follows up each year.

    The dog breeds on the company's blacklist are Akitas, chows, pit bulls, Rottweilers, wolf hybrids or any mix of those breeds. It also won't cover any dog an agent determines is vicious during a home visit.

    "I visited a home once where this woman was trying to hide her pit bull in the bedroom,'' Dews said.

    "We tell people upfront, 'Don't get any of those breeds, or you'll be canceled.' ''

    Excluding dangerous breeds isn't new. Nationwide has excluded coverage for certain breeds for five years. It added the Presa Canario within the past year, Cunningham said, after one of the dogs killed a San Francisco woman.

    Insurers say their dog-claim costs have been escalating since the mid- 1990s as more people have bought aggressive dogs for security.

    A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study two years ago found that between 1979 and '96, dogs killed more than 300 people -- mostly children. Rottweilers and pit bulls were involved in more than half of those deaths.

    Word about the restrictions is spreading among dog owners, and some are fighting back. A bill introduced in New York would prevent insurance companies from discriminating against breeds. Pennsylvania already has such a law.

    Rosemary Booth, secretary of the German Shepherd Dog Club of Central Ohio, said the restrictions are unfair to responsible dog owners.

    "If my dog is not a risk to the public,'' she asked, "why should I be penalized?''

    [email protected]

  • Shimmer
    Shimmer

    I may get blasted for this but I totally agree with the insurance company. My kids and I like to go for walks around the neighborhood. There is this one house that has a HUGE Rotweiller. It is in a kennel but every time we walk by the house it barks fiercly like it wants to eat us and tries its damndest to jump out of the kennel. It scares the sh** out of me every time. To the point I almost don't even want to go by the house. Now why should I have to live in fear of going for a walk because someone wants to keep a monster in their yard? What is the point of having that dog? It can't be for protection because it's in a kennel. And you could get a less fierce dog to bark if someone came on your property.

    Shimmer

  • spender
    spender

    i agree with shimmer. There's no difference with insurance companies doing this than raising insurance for people with mustangs that are red. Those kinds of dogs have a higher chance of injuring people, no matter how well they are trained...it's sad how many little kids have been injured by those kinds of dogs when the parents thought the dogs were fine..

  • target
    target

    In the Phoenix area car insurance rates vary greatly by what area you live in because of the high degree of theft. Sun City has the lowest rates because theft is the lowest. That is the way insurance companies work. Some dog breeds have killer instincts and are often owned by people who have no idea how or desire to train the dog. They cost the insurance companies more money.
    Some people get a kick out of having a dog that scares people. We had a neighbor who had such a dog and it was always out looking for trouble. It ended up dead.

    Target

  • finnrot
    finnrot

    I used to read meters for a utility (P.G.&E.). Every time I was attacked by a dog, the asswipe owner of the dog would put their hands to their cheeks and say, "Oh my, he's never attacked anyone before". The response to that was, yes he's never attacked YOU before.

    I remember I had a house on my route that had a yard full of Rottweilers. I was careful to make sure that the owner put the dogs in the house before I entered the yard. Even then you are weary, because if there is a kid in the house there is a 100% chance that he or she will wait until you are in no mans land and then open some sort of door so you can be eaten by the dogs for the childs entertainment. Anyway, one time I noticed blood on the street by the front fence. I asked the owner of the Rotts what happened, she told me that some kid was teasing her poor dogs and they got out somehow and attacked their tormentor.

    She is a typical vicious dog owner, it's the victims fault, not her dogs and certainly not her fault. People with dogs that hurt and maim people need to serve some jail time.

    "Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
    Terry Pratchett.

  • teenyuck
    teenyuck

    I agree with all of the above. I was bit by a dog when I was a child and had to undergo rabies shots...OUCH!!! The dog was roaming the neighborhood and the animal control could not find it.

    My neighbors have 1 male Husky and 1 Malamute. Both are "fixed" and both are extremely aggressive. I know they get the weekend paper; I was hoping that perhaps this article would wake them up.

    The poor dogs are chained outside, 2-4 hours a day. For 1 hour at a time. That is their exercise. It does not work. The poor dogs need to run....in an area where there are no children. There are kids all over here and since there is no fence, the kids walk up and get the crap scared out of them by those two.

    We have agreed to "house sit" the dogs on occasion, when the owners go out all day or out of town for the day. When we walk in the dogs are in cages!!! In the house!!! When you try to let them out, the Malamute snarls. I let my husband work with him. We bring dog bones and treats and they are still not thrilled.

    We know these dogs and see them 1-2 times a week at the neighbors home. I just know that the Malamute is going to go bonkers and bite someone and the neighbor is going to give the assinine response of "but he never attacked anyone."

    The idea that "canine racism" could enter someone's cranium is beyond belief.

  • Hyghlandyr
    Hyghlandyr

    Canine racism? Because the insurance companies take a stand, not for canine racism but AGAINST canine slavery, they are to be blamed. One hundred years from now, they are going to be sued for dog reparations for having insured the homes of people who enslaved these dogs..

  • one
    one

    How do deal with problem, personally? I hate it, i see people who go juging or walking with a broom stick, you know why.

    I am looking for an small portable, hi power, electronic dog repeller. It would be fun...

    If not available I will find out what is the 'supersonic' frequency that bother dogs and buld one myself.

    Then i will dog hunting, everyone invited...

  • one
    one

    Then i would be afraid of running against a firercy deaf dog.

    Anyway, for a lasting positive result carry a juicy poisoned piece of steak...

  • Carmel
    Carmel

    one,

    Yours small dog repeller is simple and cheap. Just pick up a kids squirt gun, you know the little plastic pistols, fill it with amonia straight from the bottle, 100% strength. Any mutt that comes at you just a squirt and it will temporarily blind it plus if the amonia gets into the mouth it will sting and take the breath away briefly. Both conditions are neither long lasting or do permanent harm, but I guarantee you the mutt will run for cover anytime it sees you again.

    cheers,

    carmel

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit