BSL Fails To Improve Public Safety
Despite decades of enforcement in some cities, breed-specific legislation (BSL) — which bans certain breeds, such as dogs labeled as "pitbulls" — has consistently failed to reduce dog bites or improve public safety. A growing body of research — along with real-world data from cities that have enacted or repealed BSL — shows that targeting specific breeds is not only ineffective but often counterproductive. Even worse, when enforced, BSL is unjust — harming good dogs and responsible owners without any justification beyond a dog's appearance or assumed breed.
What do actual bite data and studies reveal?
Tale of Two Cities
In Toronto, BSL has been in place since 2005, targeting pitbull-type breeds. However, rather than improving public safety, the city has seen a significant increase in serious dog bite-related incidents under the policy. In contrast, Calgary adopted breed-neutral regulations and experienced a consistent, long-term decline in incidents.
Toronto (BSL Enacted in 2005)
- +57% increase in dog bite incidents over a 10-year period (From 486 in 2005 to 767 in 2014).
- +39% increase in dog bite incidents in 2022 alone (From 946 in 2021 to 1,316 in 2022).
Sources: Global News | CBC/Radio-Canada
Calgary (Breed-Neutral Since 1985)
- –68% decrease in dog bite-related incidents over a 30-year period (From 2,000 in 1985 to 641 in 2014).
- Dog bites remain well controlled, even with population growth.
Sources: The Montreal Gazette | University of Calgary
The current law isn't working, and thankfully, we're getting the stats to back that up. Anybody who's been on this issue for a long time knows that it’s a predictable failure.
What the Research Says
Numerous studies have confirmed that BSL does not reduce the frequency or severity of dog bites. A recent study in Missouri, which analyzed hospital emergency room records from municipalities with and without breed-specific bans, found that such bans were ineffective at improving public safety.
Missouri BSL Study
- Municipalities with BSL in Missouri saw no reduction in emergency room visits for dog bite injuries.
- Injury prevention should focus on factors associated with the owner.
This study has found breed discriminatory laws have not reduced the risk of emergency department visits for injury from dog bites in Missouri. There appears to be no greater risk to public safety as local governments move to repeal existing breed bans.
Studies on BSL Have Found
- BSL is ineffective and fails to reduce both the rate and severity of dog bites.
- Breed-neutral regulations are more successful at improving public safety.
- Dog bites result from a complex mix of behavioral, circumstantial, and ownership factors — not breed alone.
- Breed risk calculations used to justify BSL do not align with the breeds most often involved in incidents.
- A dog's breed does not determine aggression, bite strength, or likelihood to bite.
Source: Studies on BSL
Flawed Studies Used to Justify BSL
Some limited-scope medical studies on dog bites claim that pitbulls cause more severe injuries — and these studies are often cited to justify arguments against pitbulls and support BSL. However, many have been found to be seriously flawed due to a lack of confirmed breed data, as well as other methodological and statistical errors.
...clear-cut factual errors, misinterpretations, omissions, emotionally loaded language, and exaggerations based on misunderstood or inaccurate statistics...
Limited-Scope Studies Lack Valid Breed Data
- While these studies offer reliable data for assessing bite frequency and severity, they lack verified breed data to accurately identify the breed(s) involved in the incidents.
- Due to the genetic diversity among dogs labeled as "pitbulls," misidentification rates are high — averaging around 60% across studies.
- As a result, these studies are subject to significant errors in their breed data and cannot be relied upon for accurate breed-specific risk assessment.
Source: The Veterinary Journal (2015)
Research on Flaws in Medical Studies on Dog Bites Found
- Factual errors, cherry-picked data, and misinterpreted or inaccurate statistics.
- Lack of due diligence in accurately identifying the breeds involved in incidents.
- Exaggerations and the use of emotionally loaded language.
- Unsupported conclusions, with BSL described as "panic policymaking."
Source: J. Appl. Anim. Welf. Sci. (2017)
Breed-Neutral for Public Safety
The evidence is clear: BSL does not reduce dog bites or improve public safety. Multiple studies and real-world data from cities with and without BSL have consistently shown that targeting dogs based on breed or appearance is ineffective. BSL not only fails to address the root causes of dog-related incidents — such as irresponsible ownership and aggressive behavior — but also misdirects resources away from more effective, breed-neutral strategies.
Municipalities around the country — including many in Missouri without BSL, along with cities like Calgary — have demonstrated the success of modern, breed-neutral policies that emphasize responsible ownership, public education, and targeted enforcement. These communities have proven that breed bans are not necessary to maintain strong public safety standards.
This growing awareness has sparked a nationwide shift. Since 2018, more than 100 cities across the U.S. have repealed BSL — a win not only for responsible dog owners and misunderstood breeds, but for public safety as a whole.
It's time to move forward with facts, not fear — and focus on equitable, effective breed-neutral policies that deliver consistent, measurable public safety outcomes.