I wrote to Minister Gildernew and her assistant,Julianne Bailie, wrote back with an attached letter from the minister saying:

"I refer to your recent correspondence about Bruce, who is being kept in kennels having been seized under the Dogs (NI) Order 1983. Under the Order it is an offence for a person to be in possession of certain types of dog, such as the pit bull terrier.

The dog was due to be destroyed on 6 July 2009, under a Destruction Order imposed by a Court here. However, I understand that Bruce's owner's legal team has launched an appeal against the decision of the Court. The Local Council is awaiting the outcome of the appeal.

I am currently reviewing the Dogs and Dangerous Dogs legislation and I hope to bring forward legislative proposals to the Executive after the Summer Recess."

I replied with this, quoting from other fighters in this cause:

"Dear Minister Gildernew and Ms. Bailie,

I truly appreciate your reply, especially with your busy schedule, and
hope that you will be able to help Bruce and his family, as well as
review the current breed specific legislation in Northern Ireland and
fight for change.

Northern Ireland has not adopted the 1997 Amendment Act
(http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1997/ukpga_19970053_en_1) currently
in place in England, Scotland and Wales, despite being proposed
several times, thus meaning any dog deemed to be “pit bull type”
cannot be entered onto the Index of Exempted Dogs. Bruce certainly
"would not constitute a danger to public safety", as the amendment
requires, and if the proposal of this amendment had been accepted in
Northern Ireland, as in the rest of the UK, Bruce would have been home
long before now, alive and well, and registered on the Index of
Exempted Dogs. Northern Ireland is however currently considering
legislative change - but this is not likely to be achieved in time to
save Bruce, so please allow Bruce to be transported to another part of
the UK, where he can survive. I understand (and I may not have all the
facts right) that Bruce's owner has been told by the courts to get
insurance for Bruce so that she can either keep or transport him, but
cannot get the required insurance to transport or keep the dog because
the insurance will not cover "pit bull types." It truly is a CATCH 22!

A veterinarian from my very own state of California had written you in
the past about the misconceptions about certain breeds and the
importance of proper training and socialization, and I would like to
gently remind you of what he said, by posting his words below, as I
really believe they are worth repeating:

"Dear Minister Michelle Gildernew MP, MLA,

I sincerely hope that as a veterinarian and the proud owner of a well
behaved American Pit Bull Terrier (see attached photo), my experience
in the area of dog behavior will help you to understand why banning a
breed of dog cannot be justified. By stereotyping a breed of dog as
"dangerous", lawmakers mistakenly oversimplify the problem of dog
aggression, and innocent dogs, like Bruce, get caught in the ensuing
legal crossfire. When responsible dog owners are forced to use all
reasonable measures to stop government from killing their beloved dog
- something is seriously wrong as you have witnessed by the
International outcry for Ireland to return Bruce to his heartbroken
family.

In the hopes that lawmakers will study reliable and factual
information on this subject, an excellent five year study was
published in the Cincinnati Law Review in 1982, vol. 53, which
specifically considered both Rottweilers and "Pit Bulls" and concluded
in part that:

The statistics did not support the assertion that any one breed was dangerous.

When legislation is focused on the type of dog, it fails because it is
unenforceable, confusing, and costly.

Focusing legislation on dogs that are "vicious" distracts attention
from the real problem, which is irresponsible dog ownership.

In light of this and numerous other studies I have read (available on
request), I urge you to pursue legislation that would render owners
liable for the actions of their pets. It is not the automobile that
kills innocent people; it is the irresponsible driver of that vehicle.
Seek to punish the actions of negligent dog owners and remove dogs at
risk.

To be useful, legislation must be effective, enforceable, economical,
and reasonably fair. Any form of legislative discrimination would fail
in all of these areas, punish responsible dog owning citizens, and
worst of all will not protect the public from dog attacks. Please
remember that any dog can bite and seriously injure people, regardless
of its breed.

Only with the proper training and socialization can we ensure that all
dogs will be welcomed neighbors in society. This is the responsibility
and duty of every dog owner, and those who fail this task are the ones
who put the public at risk. To be responsible legislators, you must
make laws that apply to people, not dogs.

Respectfully yours,

Dr. Paula Terifaj, DVM

Brea, California USA"

In the United States, we see "pit bull types" everywhere - at parks,
on the street, with children. It is truly a testament to the fact that
what matters is a responsible owner, and proper training,
socialization, and love towards the pet.

I apologize for this very long email, but I truly hope that you can
help Bruce and every dog in danger of breed specific stereotyping.

With kind regards,

Is there anything else I can do? I go to a dog park here in California (the land of dog lovers) and am wondering if I should post something on the bulletin board there...

I HAVE BEEN CAMPAIGNING FOR SOMETIME TO SAVE THE GENTLE DOG BRUCE. I HAVE WRITTEN TO: THE RT HON ALAN JOHNSON-HOME SECRETARY, THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR NORTHERN IRELAND-SHAUN WOODWARD MP,
THE RT HON JEFFREY DONALDSON MP MLA-LAGAN VALLEY AND THE EAST GALWAY ANIMAL RESCUE.

I HAVE A SHAREBOOK PAGE ON CARE 2, WHICH HAS DETAILS OF THE 'BRING BRUCE HOME - WE MISS HIM PETITION', THE STORY REGARDING THIS GENTLE DOG BRUCE AND COPIES OF EMAILS I HAVE SENT TO AND RECEIVED FROM THE ABOVE CONTACTS.

I HAVE SIGNED THE ABOVE PETITION AND FORWARDED TO ALL MY CONTACTS ON THE CARE 2 SITE AND CROSSPOSTED TO OTHER CONTACTS I HAVE.

SEND EMAILS TO ALL THE CONTACTS LISTED ON MY SHAREBOOK PAGE AND URGE THEM TO SUPPORT BRUCE AND SAVE HIM FROM THIS UNFAIR LAW THAT ONLY EXISTS IN NORTHERN IRELAND.

THE BREED SPECIFIC LEGISLATION IS FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED. A DOG SHOULD NOT BE CONDEMNED BECAUSE OF HIS/HER BREED, WHEN THE DOG HAS COMMITTED NO CRIME AND HAS PROVED TO BE A GENTLE LOVING FAMILY PET.

THE LAW MUST BE ABOLISHED AS IT IS IN ENGLAND, WALES, SCOTLAND AND SOUTHERN IRELAND.

PLEASE USE THE LINK BELOW TO MY SHAREBOOK PAGE ON CARE 2 - REGARDING BRUCE THE GENTLE DOG THAT NEEDS TO GO HOME.

http://www.care2.com/c2c/share/detail/1196156

I fell so bad that i well do anything to save that dog.
I did have a pitbull till she die because she was taking care of puppies so she started biting people.
I well do anything to save pitbulls because i love dogs.

Minister Michelle Gildernew MP, MLA

Dundonald House, Room 438

Upper Newtownards Road

Belfast BT4 35B

Northern Ireland

Dear Minister Michelle Gildernew MP, MLA

I sincerely hope that as a veterinarian and the proud owner of a well behaved American Pit Bull Terrier (see attached photo), my experience in the area of dog behavior will help you to understand why banning a breed of dog cannot be justified. By stereotyping a breed of dog as "dangerous", lawmakers mistakenly oversimplify the problem of dog aggression, and innocent dogs, like Bruce, get caught in the ensuing legal crossfire. When responsible dog owners are forced to use all reasonable measures to stop government from killing their beloved dog - something is seriously wrong as you have witnessed by the International outcry for Ireland to return Bruce to his heartbroken family.  

In the hopes that lawmakers will study reliable and factual information on this subject, an excellent five year study was published in the Cincinnati Law Review in 1982, vol. 53, which specifically considered both Rottweilers and "Pit Bulls" and concluded in part that:

The statistics did not support the assertion that any one breed was dangerous.

When legislation is focused on the type of dog, it fails because it is unenforceable, confusing, and costly.

Focusing legislation on dogs that are "vicious" distracts attention from the real problem, which is irresponsible dog ownership. 

In light of this and numerous other studies I have read (available on request), I urge you to pursue legislation that would render owners liable for the actions of their pets. It is not the automobile that kills innocent people; it is the irresponsible driver of that vehicle. Seek to punish the actions of negligent dog owners and remove dogs at risk.

To be useful, legislation must be effective, enforceable, economical, and reasonably fair. Any form of legislative discrimination would fail in all of these areas, punish responsible dog owning citizens, and worst of all will not protect the public from dog attacks. Please remember that any dog can bite and seriously injure people, regardless of its breed.

Only with the proper training and socialization can we ensure that all dogs will be welcomed neighbors in society. This is the responsibility and duty of every dog owner, and those who fail this task are the ones who put the public at risk. To be responsible legislators, you must make laws that apply to people, not dogs.

Respectfully yours,

Dr. Paula Terifaj, DVM

Brea, California USA

I am sick and tired of people attacking the pitbull breed. It really upsets me that these poor dogs get euthanized every day for no apparent reason but because they are pitts....I have met very few truly aggressive pits but I have met hundreds of sweet good tempered pits. You never hear about attacks from other dogs like chihuahuas or labradors. All animals have the capabilities of biting, why do people only show or list when the attack came from a pitbull. Pitbulls should not be banned because they are simply pits. It should be based on case by case not just because the dog is a pit or pit mix. Leave the pitbulls alone.