In a report published in this week's influential British Medical Journal (BMJ), pediatricians said parents bringing a dog into the family home should also undertake mandatory classes to teach them the "responsibilities of dog ownership" while children must attend education programs designed to instill "precautionary behavior" around dogs. (To read the article, click here.)

These are two of the strategies that I have been proposing in Preventing Dog Bites. It is no coincidence that they are being endorsed in Great Britain, the home of the infamous "one-bite rule."

And it is no coincidence that the same report says that the UK's Dangerous Dogs Act is not working. Maybe our mother country will soon admit that the "one-bite rule" and breed specific laws are the wrong approach to curtailing the dog bite epidemic.

The "one-bite rule" is wrong for the world -- not just America, not just Tennessee, and not just Texas.

On February 27, 2006, I will testify before the Judiciary Committee of the Tennessee State Senate, on the subject of dog bite law. Senator Doug Jackson has introduced 5 bills that will go a long way to reducing dog attacks. I will be discussing these bills and the the more general subject of preventing dog attacks.

Senator Jackson's bills will eliminate the one-bite rule, make it illegal for a dog to run at large under any circumstances, increase the criminal penalties for allowing a dangerous dog or fighting dog to run at large, increase the penalty for being present at an organized dog fight, and make it a crime for a dog owner to stand by and do nothing when his dog is mauling a person.

These new laws would implement roughly half of the measures I have proposed in Preventing Dog Bites. I would still like to see Tennessee and all states to enact laws that require dog safety education in schools, make pet stores give customers specific information about breeds, force dog owners to have insurance that would compensate dog bite victims, give every city a fair method of taking dangerous dogs off the streets, keep certain high-risk breeds away from the wrong people, places and situations, and support further research into dog bites.

However, the pending bills are a great start and are urgently needed in Tennessee, and I support them wholeheartedly.

In November, two pit bulls bit a man 150 times. (See the post, below.) Also in November, pit bulls took a sleeping child from his bed and killed him in the kitchen. (See Dangerous and Vicious Dogs.) A month ago, a pit bull chewed off a baby's toes. (See the post, below.) This month, a pit bull chewed off a four-year-old boy's foot, requiring doctors to amputate what remained of it. (To read the story, click here.) Also this month, another pit bull gnawed off both of its owner's arms, again requiring doctors to amputate what was left. (To read the story, click here.)

Pit bull historians often say that this dog was bred to be loyal and safe with its owner. They admit it was bred to kill other dogs, but assert that it is a great family dog, especially with children. Let's assume that the historians are correct. Doesn't that mean that the breed has changed? If so, don't we have to change with it?

Shouldn't our laws be changing too? Doesn't the law need to keep up with the times? I am not saying that we should ban any breeds. I don't believe that there is a simple cure for the dog bite epidemic. I am saying that all states that have 18th Century laws need to modernize them, so that the bad dogs get weeded out, the owners bear the burden of bad dogs, and the victims are properly taken care of.

In Richmond, VA, 6-year-old Matthew Logan Johnson was mauled to death on January 24, 2007, by two of seven Rottweilers owned by his parents. The dogs that killed the boy were newly adopted only days before.

In Brewton, Alabama, on January 29, 2007, 18-month-old Taylor Kitlica was killed on her front lawn by a Rottweiler that her parents had found and chained there, hoping that its owner would retrieve it.

What strikes me about these two deaths is that in both cases the victims were little children, they were killed at their own homes, their parents were not watching as the kids approached the dogs, and the dogs themselves were new to the households.

I wonder how parents can take in new dogs that are known to be the number one canine killers of people, and not keep their kids away from them?

Upon close examination, canine homicides often tell us as much about people and negligence, as they do about breeds and viciousness. These deaths, as well as many other dog attacks, illustrate why I, as a chief advocate for dog bite victims, oppose breed specific laws. The dog bite epidemic has neither one simple cause, nor one simple cure.

Senator Doug Jackson has introduced 5 bills that will make the streets and children of Tennessee safe from dangerous dogs and their equally dangerous, irresponsible owners.

One of his bills would repeal the shameful "one-bite rule," so that dogs will no longer be allowed one free mauling or killing of a human being.

Presently, Tennessee adheres to the dog bite law of England as it existed when the Declaration of Independence was signed. Things have changed since then, including the development of the pit bull as a dog-fighting animal, as well as the use of insurance to spread risks. The "one-bite rule" is completely at odds with modern American beliefs about personal responsibility, and it needs to be repealed throughout the USA. Only 19 states currently follow it, the others having enacted laws that place responsibility upon the shoulders of the dog owners, where it belongs.

Citizens of Tennessee should get behind the passage of stronger, more effective laws. Sen. Jackson also has proposed a number of criminal provisions that will go a long way toward ridding the streets of dangerous dogs. His bills are aimed at irresponsible dog owners, and are not breed-specific. If you reside in Tennessee and want to make your voice heard, follow the three quick and easy steps given on the Tennessee page of Dog Bite Law.

6-year-old Matthew Logan Johnson was mauled to death Wednesday night by one of six Rottweilers found at a residence in suburban Richmond, Virginia

No wonder another child has been fatally mauled in the State of Virginia. It has an official policy of protecting irresponsible dog owners.

Virginia adheres to the ancient and inhumane "one-bite" rule. In this state, as in old England and a minority of 19 other American states, every dog gets "one free bite" -- one free mauling or killing of a human being. However, if the owner or another person caused the accident by being negligent or breaking a law, such as a leash law, then that person will be held legally liable.

To make matters worse and ensure its place in the 18th century, Virginia also follows another ancient and inhumane doctrine, called the "contributory negligence" rule. It says that a person who is even one percent responsible for an accident has no legal right whatsoever to recover compensation for medical bills or anything else.

All things considered, this is a state that applies outdated and cruel law to accident victims of all sorts -- and thereby tells its less law-abiding citizens that they need not fear being held responsible for their negligence. Virginia will continue to see horrible dog attacks upon people until it brings its laws into this century.

The state needs to eliminate the "one-bite" rule as a deterrent to having dangerous dogs. People must realize that they will have to pay the price for being irresponsible dog owners.