banning dogs is not the solution?

Question

So you think we should ban a breed of dog because one of its kind maimed or killed someone? Then let’s ban all 400-plus breeds, because aggression is not breed-specific. Outlaw the English mastiff, the pit bull, the American Staffordshire terrier and the Rottweiler, and soon it will be the springer spaniel, the Boston terrier and the Old English sheep dog. Eventually, we will legislate some of our best friends into extinction.
Breed bans don’t work. They target all dogs of a breed – the innocent as well as the guilty; are difficult to enforce; and do not end the use of guard dogs by criminals. If pit bulls in their various incarnations are banned, drug dealers and other felons switch to another breed or mix. so why banned? its not gonna help any if we do.

Answer 1

i think the ban is retarded..I'm starting to lose faith in people lol. I think people should have to be tested before they have children and before they own any type of pet because some people can't handle these types of responisbilities...and then we end of blaming the children when they get older and have behavior problems or ban breeds...I'm going to stop now before I go into a full on rant

Answer 2

Banning Pit Bulls would be like banning cars because people get killed in car accidents! Who's responsible, the car or the driver/manufacturer? Any car can be deadly in the wrong hands or if built with defective parts. Same thing with dogs... Any dog. Pit Bulls are no more responsible for the way they are bred, raised and trained, than cars are responsible for the way they are designed, built and driven.
Simply put, the best argument against breed bans is that they are costly and ineffective. Breed bans are often a knee-jerk reaction from politicians who want to say they are "doing something", after a highly publicized dog attack (of any breed). This is a useless exercise.
Criminals habitually break laws, so having an "illegal breed" may indeed be attractive to them and might make them want to breed and sell more "illegal dogs". If their dog is confiscated and killed, they really don't care. They will just get another one because breed bans punish the dog, not the owner.
In 1991 when the United Kingdom banned pit bulls it was found that even after the pit bull population steeply declined, the number dog bite incidents remained the same. Why? The number of irresponsible dog owners stayed the same. The fact is that dog bites rarely happen randomly to people walking down the street. Most dog bites (77 percent) happen to a family member or a friend. The majority of bites are perpetrated by un-neutered male dogs.
do you think forbodingdeath so go back on her drugs.

Answer 3

I agree with you !The problem is often the "Holder of the Leash" and not the Dog .

you can make a poodle to an monster if you mistreat him like the bullies was often mistreated !:(


sorry for my lausy english i am from Germany ...By the way APT are banned here and it didn't help . Because now this kind of Shady Dog Owners found new breeds to ruin ( Malanios / Belgian shepherd , Kangal , Presa Canaria ect. )


We have BSL here also but it is not that hard .Or in a other way hard . The dog's dont get killed ( some call it putting to sleep but i call it killed )But they get fenced for the rest of their life. Or you can adopt one (if neuterd ) but you have to pay around 600€ = around 730 $ for dog tax a year .And the dog has to be muzzeld and your landlord have to agree with the dog . Also you have to show a clean letter of conduct (criminal record ) . Breeding or bringing into the country is forbidden . Sometimes i ask myself who is the monster ?The two legged or the four legged one . Uhh it is so sad

Answer 4

Many cities which have put breed bans into place are now repealing them because of a host of problems including the fact that this targets the dog and not the real problem - the person who owns the dog and the fact that this law only harms law-abiding citizens, not the criminals who breed and train dogs to be aggressive.
My favorite motto is "Punish the deed, not the breed."

Answer 5

If there weren't so many idiotic, moronic dog owners/breeders this would not be a problem, it would not be an issue for discussion period. There is no clear solution at this point but perhaps stiffer penalties for the 'bad guys' that enable the 'bad dogs' to become what they are. And still, it won't be much of a deterrent just as the death penalty does not prevent murders.

And to the dog hater...I've been bitten by dogs before...back when I was a kid, because kids are more obnoxious than a dog could ever be and I was blowing in the face of my aunt's beagle. She bit me, right on the forehead, I got over it. My opinion is that dog haters are very unpleasant people to be around.

Answer 6

I agree with the aggression bit, but some dogs are more dangerous due to their strength. Some dogs can literally crush skulls with their jaws.

I've seen dogs from "aggressive breeds" that are complete pushovers. Their desire for affection is more aggressive than their bite, but they still have the capability.

It is sorta like a gun. We limit what type of guns can be owned because some are just too capable of doing too much damage. If we could sort out the idiot owners from the good ones, it wouldn't be a problem, but we can't.

Answer 7

ban the owners, not the dog. owners are responsible for the aggression being exhibited by their dog.. except for security or law enforcement, ban people WHO mistreat any breed of dog , from ever owning another.

Answer 8

I totally agree with you. I have personally not been attacked by any of the dogs mentioned. I've been bitten pretty badly by a beagle, and attacked by a golden retriever who left scars on my face. We need to be focusing on the breeders and owners of these dogs. Not banning the dogs themselves.

Answer 9

well my solution would be not to ban but at least muzzle these types of dogs if you own them . That is to prevent your dog from injuring an innocent party . These types of dogs are quite dangerous and they should at least be muzzled for their own protection as well . it keeps the dog and the owner safe and free from lawsuits that occur from dog bites. Is that a safe and simple solution ? I think so maybe that would help and definately not a ban . good luck and god bless and happy holidays.

Answer 10

I couldn't agree with you more! Banning them doesn't even make any sense and why anyone would think that is a solution is beyond me. They need to focus more on the horrible owners that make dogs that way and quit blaming the innocent animals!!!!!!!