LAWTON, Okla. — The chambers of Lawton City Hall were filled with concerned residents on Tuesday evening as the City Council heard a presentation from City Prosecutor Alan Rosenbaum regarding the issue of “dangerous dogs.” One of the key proposals discussed was the potential ban of the American Staffordshire Terrier breed, commonly referred to as Pit Bulls, due to their alleged role in a significant number of dog attacks.
The presentation, which was moved to the top of the meeting agenda by Mayor Stan Booker to accommodate the large turnout, focused on statistics related to dog attacks, with Rosenbaum citing that over 90% of dog-related injuries were caused by Pit Bulls. He also referenced a series of petitions related to dog attacks, claiming that approximately 180 of the incidents could have been prevented had a breed-specific ban been in place.
“Out of those 240-something petitions, about 180 of those never would have happened if there was a ban on Pit Bulls,” Rosenbaum said during his address to the council. Despite this claim, Rosenbaum acknowledged that a state statute prohibits municipalities from implementing breed-specific laws and regulations concerning dangerous dogs. However, he suggested that there might be ways around the statute after discussions with City Attorney John Andrew.
Following Rosenbaum’s presentation, Mayor Booker opened the floor for public comments. While 25 community members had signed up to speak, only four were given the opportunity due to time constraints. Among those who voiced support for the proposed breed ban was former Ward 2 Councilman Kelly Harris, who shared his own experience with a Pit Bull attack. Harris recounted how he had initially tried to return a lost dog to its owner, only to find himself in fear for his safety when the dog turned aggressive.
“Suddenly, I went from ‘Let’s take this dog home to its owner’ to… I was afraid,” Harris said.
However, the majority of those present at the meeting expressed opposition to the breed ban. Several individuals argued that focusing on banning a specific breed of dog would not address the underlying issue—irresponsible pet ownership. One concerned community member emphasized the need for better solutions, such as stronger laws to hold owners accountable and an increased focus on the shortage of animal shelters in the area.
“Why are we wasting time trying to ban dogs? Why are we not fixing the real problem ahead?” the community member asked. “Bad owners and lack of shelters.”
Cliff Blasengame, Superintendent of Lawton Animal Welfare, also voiced opposition to the breed-specific ban. Blasengame stated that he does not believe banning certain breeds is the right approach, advocating instead for more stringent ordinances that would place greater responsibility on dog owners.
“I advocate for more stringent ordinances to hold owners responsible,” Blasengame said in an interview after the meeting. He also noted that the shelter had recently hired three new Animal Control Officers to help address staffing shortages.
As the meeting continued, each council member shared their thoughts on the matter. While all expressed concern about the need for responsible dog ownership, there was a clear consensus against a breed-specific ban. Many council members also pointed out that the city already has regulations in place, and the focus should instead be on better enforcement and holding irresponsible owners accountable for their pets’ behavior.
Despite the vocal opposition, the proposal to ban Pit Bulls was not fully addressed during the meeting, and officials did not clarify why the ban was initially proposed, given the state’s prohibition against breed-specific laws.
The conversation around dangerous dogs is expected to continue in future city council meetings, with community members and officials weighing potential solutions to enhance public safety while addressing concerns over animal welfare and responsible pet ownership.
