The government should ban vicious breed of dogs or should not?

Question

Please tell me WHY should or WHY should not?

Answer 1

I don't believe the government should be banning any dog breed.
I realize it's done for the protection of the public because there are far too many irresponsible owners.But those owners should be targeted not the general population of certain breed owners.It's just not fair.
I have dogs on that are on the dangerous breed list.And it makes me mad.
I'm a very firm believer that people who own big supposedly viscious dogs should'nt need to hide behind the dog in a confrontation.If they can't handle themselves in a fight how can they handle the dog?
There's no honor in driving by an innocent person and shooting them dead for no better reason than for some fool to say they killed someone and there's no honor in hiding behind a dog to do your dirty work for you.But in the same respect if I'm walking down the street with my 2 german shepherds and a group of men confront me with the intent of robbing and raping me then I fully expect to have the dogs go into full attack mode to protect me while I do what I can to deter them from harming me and them as well.
The government has taken away most of our rights on self protection.
It used to be if someone was on your property you were within your rights to shoot them if they refused to leave.Then it got amended to were if someone broke into your home and you shot them inside the house you were within your rights to do so.Now if you do either you're a murderer and will be convicted.
People who have dogs excpect to feel secure in knowing they can leave their homes or sleep at night in comfort knowing the dog will protect the property from intruders.But these BSL's as they stand make it so if someone breaks into your home at 3a.m. and the dog bites them it's your fault for having a viscious dog.And it's not going to matter much that the cops find the home owner tied up and gagged and the intruder with tools obviously used to break into the home and a sack full of the homeowners property at his feet.The homeowner gets sued big time cos the dog did it's job and bit someone!
What's left as a means of self-protection?
Cops are real big on telling people to get a restraining order.I'm sure that piece of paper was a great comfort to all those who had one but were murdered by the person named on it.
I believe there's an answer to the problem.But it's not banning any breed.

Answer 2

No, since no dog breeds are inherently vicious (the AVMA along with many other dog professionals will back this fact up). Breed Specific Legislation has not done anything to stop dog attacks. It is the product of simple minded people trying to over-simplify a complex problem. Essentially it is the same as arresting a gun for murder or a car for vehicular homicide. Another reason I don't see the point of banning breeds is that the number of animals from these targeted breeds that do attack people are a minority and a small minority at that, not the MAJORITY. What sense does it make to punish the ones who have done nothing wrong? Things like BSL show how dumbed down Americans have become and why there is a sudden need for the government to regulate our every move.
As for Kate M's misinformed view on medical and home insurance: The REAL reason ALL insurance prices are going up is because they are trying to take as little loss to their profits as possible in light of all the recent flooding, hurricanes, tornadoes and mudslide damages, on top of all the fraudulent claims and frivolous lawsuits they have to contend with. This is because insurance companies are more responsible to shareholders than they are to their customers, they are after all, a business. The idea of a business is to turn a profit. People getting bit by dogs have little if anything to do with the problem.

Answer 3

THERE IS NO VICIOUS BREED OF DOG!!! Though several are labeled as so, which is very sad and unworthy. It's NOT the dog breed, it's the OWNER who trains them to be vicious. One can make ANY breed vicious by various means. I have a very loving Pit Bull. ALL of her litter mates and parents are just as GENTLE as she is! There are many reasons that cause a dog to be vicious. Here are some of them: Owner induced; Lack of socialization, training, companionship; They can receive a dominance aggressive gene from parent; Beating which will either cause a very submissive dog or an aggressive dog. The list goes on and on. So NO, I DO NOT feel that the government should ban ANY breeds. In all my years of being involved with animal welfare, I have seen MORE mixed breeds than standard breeds that are vicious. One of the Spaniel breeds is known for developing an aggressive temperament...who would ever of thought that a Spaniel would be vicious! This I can account for firsthand during my career at a Veterinarian Hospital. All the “labeled vicious dogs” by Shelters and Home Owners Insurance Companies (German Shepherd, Doberman Pincher, Rottweiler, Pit Bull/Staffordshire Terrier, Chow, Wolf Hybrid, etc.) is BS!!! I have encountered MANY other breeds (full and mixed) that are ferocious when it comes to human contact. Why you ask?...all and more that I stated above. Stricter laws need to be applied to people who own dogs that will attack, ALSO HIGH OFFENCES TO THOSE WHO COMMIT ANIMAL CRUELTY! This problem all revolves around the OWNER...NOT THE DOG!!!

Answer 4

You cannot judge an animal's behavior just by breed. Yes certain breeds have tendancies to act or react to certain situations but that reaction is not completely defined just by breed. It is nature vs. nurture.

I had a male pit bull for eight years that I adopted at the age of three from a no kill shelter. He was the sweetest, smartest, most loving dog you could imagine. He never showed aggression towards any people yet he did show aggression towards a couple of dogs that came rushing him while walking him although I think that was more of a protection instinct in him. I gave him a lot of attention, exercise, and love. I had no problem having him around my daughter that was a baby. He loved her and let her pull on his ears, sit on him, poke him, etc. If he had enough, he would leave the room.

Pit bulls do not make good home protection animals as people may think. My dog would have licked the person to death before doing anything to them. I have also read that on websites dedicated to pit bulls so that is not just my personal opinion. Should my dog have been banned? I think not. That is breed profiling similar to racial profiling. A dog should be looked at by past and present behavior not breed. There is a golden retriever two blocks from me that is vicious and I would be much more worried about getting attacked by that dog than my pit bull.

Answer 5

No, because it's not the dogs who are vicious. Some owners mistreat and mishandle these dogs & turn them into something they don't want to become. Dogs are social animals, loving, loyal, and can be manipulated to behave in any way a master teaches it. They only want to do what they are told & to be accepted within a social group, just like a pack animal. Owners should be held responsible for how their dogs behave. If a dog attacks another, or a human, it should be put down. The owner should pay a heavy legal price in the event that that takes place. They should also be charged with animal cruelty. I wouldn't ban breeds of dogs. I would enforce existing animal security laws that are already on the books.

Answer 6

Yes, to some degree, but only the ones that were originally bread for fighting, like Pittbulls, dobermans, and such. There was a little girl that was attacked by their family pet, a Pittbull Terrier because it was chained up and she got too close. It's not always the owner that is the problem, but a lot of the time it is. It is bread into some breeds to be protective, but when they start to attack there owners, it is time to do something. Maybe breed them with a less abrupt breed. Pittbulls and Dobies are notorious biters, but the number one biter in the US is believe it or not, a Cocker Spaniel, so it is not just the fighting breeds that are dangerous. It also has to do with knowing how to raise them and knowing the dogs temperment.

Answer 7

No. Breeds are not in themselfs vicious. People make dogs that way. Laws should be passed aginst the people who chose to make a dog like that. Very few dogs just snap and kill. If you look at not just attacks but tha whole back around most are by dogs that are abused, trained to fight, running lose, or are straved. In passing laws aginst dogs we are punishing the wrong end of the leash.

Answer 8

they shouldn't ban any dog breed. no do is naturally viscious. it's all in how the dog is trained. so if one breed is banned then all breeds should be. restrictions are a whole different thing though. dogs that require specific training to be great dogs around everyone should have special requirements that be met so that the poor dog doesn't have to be put down because of the owners mistake.

Answer 9

They need 2 ban stupid owners. Any dog with teeth can become vicious. Training and only those prepared 2 own a dog with certain propensities should b permitted 2 have them.

Answer 10

The government shouldn't ban any breed, however, people that have a history of raising dogs to fight should not be allowed to own any! Screen the owners, not the dogs.

Excuse me WANGER: Bulldogs were bred to attack bulls, but look at them now!