Do you think some dog breeds should be banned?

Question

In Australia they have already banned some breeds of dog which are seen to be aggresive and dangerous. Is it fair to wipe out an entire breed because of a few careless dog owners?

Answer 1

BLS is a flawed concept from the moment it is conceived. In most cases the dogs are targeted leaving the owner, which is the responsible, rational thinking party out if it. Some impose fines along with their laws but are often no enforced to the maximum so the owner gets a slap on the wrist.

Dogs are not the problem and BLS dose not recognize this. People are the problem and until we find a way to punish people for their neglectful actions which allow dogs to bite and terrorize the public we will never stop the problem.

First problem is take one breed away, these people will find another breed to replace it. In most places were APBT have been ban the rottweiler is now on the rise as the most popular breed. Now they are taking the heat from BLS and its supporters. They will agin restrict a breed just to have another take its place. This will happen till they run out of large breed dogs and we have lost our right to have the breed of dog we love. BLS can be compared to gender and racial profiling.

Media reports lead the public to believe that packs of roaming Pit Bulls are more likely to bite than the neighborhood dog on his leash. Over 80% of dog bites occur when the dog is with its owner or ON his owner’s property. A large number of small children are bitten by dogs they know while visiting the dog’s home. Because stories of pit bulls stimulate fear, the media is likely to report all cases of biting pit dogs or pit mix but oit stories of injury by poodles and spaniels [which is the most frequently reported biters]. In addition, the media reports “attacks” when guarding breed barks at or chases someone even when no one is injured. This adds to the public’s perception that this type of dog is more dangerous than any other dog. Some statistics lump several breeds into one category and report that “ PIT Bulls” cause more serious bites that any other breed. This would be similar to counting all bites inflicted by Retrievers [Golden, Duck Tolling, Flat Coats, Lab, etc.] and comparing that total to bites inflicted by miniature wirehaired Daschunds. It would appear that Retrievers are much more dangerous than the Daschunds.

A report about the local Labrador Retriever that attacks and maims a child isn’t considered newsworthy No one wants to believe that any family dog, the cute and fuzzy kind, are capable of biting. It’s much easier to blow up and sensationalist a story about a vicious dog when it’s a member of a breed who’s reputation precedes it. Pit Bull are already considered the demons. All reporters have to do is stand in front of the camera, look horrified and say, “A pit bull did it.”


So why is it then that more BLS laws are implement daily? God forbid a person have to take responsibility for their irresponsible actions and BLS supports these people by not placing very harsh punishments on them.

Answer 2

No, it's not fair and it won't solve any problems. Bad owners will continue to corupt other breeds and then what? By bad owners I don't just mean abusive I mean neglecful, irresponsible, passive, and submissive owners as well. I hear so many people say that a Pit Bull from a great family attacked a kid. The fact is the family may have been nice but they probably spoiled the dog and didn't bother to socialize or dicipline the dog which can result in dog attacks because the dog is faced with an unfamiliar situation and bites out of fear. I think if anything these people need to go through a psychological evaluation, training classes, and be able to demonstrate control of the dog prior to being allowed to owne them. This way they only go to presentably responsible people who can properly care for them. While I don't agree with breed discrimination I am willing to compromise for the preservation of the breed. The last thing I want is for my Rottie to be euthanized. Honestly I would move before I allowed someone to control the breed of dog in which I own.

Answer 3

Ban the deed not the breed. If the dogs are banned then the people with the dogs will just turn to some other breed to take the other dogs place,its been going on forever. Chows, GSDs, Dobermans, Rottweilers, now Pitt Bulls.... Its the people who own them that need to be stopped the HUMAN behavior that needs to be stamped out. Not the effing dogs.

Didnt australia ban guns? How did that work out again?

When government makes a law like this, the only people that are affected are the LAW OBIDING population. The criminal population keeps on doing what they were in the beginning. And theyre the reason the law was made in the first place. When govt. bans guns, criminals are the only ones who own guns.
When govt. bans pitbulls, criminals will still own pittbulls, they dont care how many they get taken away and get put to sleep, Miami Dade county kills around 300 pitt bulls a day. The breed ban has been in place for several years now. And for some reason DOGS ARE STILL BEING KILLED... it makes NO effect on the crimial population so there is no point in depriving responsible law obiding citizens their right to own a breed that they love and care about.

Answer 4

I have a problem with bans on specific breeds because what constitutes a breed that is so dangerous no one can have one. when I was 10 or 11 we lived in a suburb of nothing but houses and corn fields and we had families all over with dogs of many breeds. In the first 3 years there were 5 kids attacked by German Sheppard's, and 1 Black Lab. We didn't run out and demand all German Sheppard's be destroyed, The owners started putting fences around their yards and miraculously the dog bites stopped. So it may not be the dogs fault that somebody got chased or bitten or scared. We could have asked for a ban on German Sheppard's way back then but we found that the kids that got attacked were teasing the dogs. So be carefull what you ban because it may be your dogs breed that's next.

Answer 5

I think it is a shame that Australia has banned several breeds incl. the APBT. I mean, the Croc Hunter's dog, Sue, was a Pit. Amazing they should be banned there! Ban stupid people from owning dogs. I am all for THAT. Too bad ignorance isn't painful. Then maybe city councils or governments in other countries than America would funnel money into the right causes, like enforcing laws against abuse, neglect and dog fighting and would fund free and low cost spaying and neutering programs.
What breeds are currently forbidden to own in Australia, and what happens when a person is "caught" with a forbidden breed?

Answer 6

Prejudice is a terrible thing. The more laws we make banning it, the more people look for a new thing to be prejudiced against. I guess it is the ugly part of human nature. To categorize anything into one lump is a very stereotypical and uneducated thing to do. We do it to people, why not dogs? The same people who support banning breeds may next decide to do book burning at their local schools. It is all fed by fear and ignorance, like any other prejudice. Then you get a bunch of "sheep" together, and you have a movement.
It really is too bad that some people can't stand on their own two feet and form their own educated opinions.

And I don't even really care for pitt bulls-wouldn't own one. Not because I think they are viscious, but because that look and size doesn't appeal to me. I have friends with pitt bulls and they are welcome at my home anytime.

Answer 7

No it's not fair but it is happening around the world.We hear of dogs biting children, our most precious asset. Each bad owner of a more aggressive breed, needs to take extra precautions, to ensure the safety of people. It would be great to say that owners of such breeds must take classes and be certified in order to house the dog, but that will never happen. In my state if you own a rottie, pincher, Sheppard, your home insurance is jacked up because of the breed . So banning a breed, insurance hicks, are ways of protecting society, which is the goal.

Answer 8

Cavalier Mom - your answer is hysterical.

Hey - I'm ALL for the ban of breeds as SOON as we ban stupid people. After that, all the smart intelligent people can sit down and ----oooppss - all the smart intelligent people would realize that it is stupid to ban a breed. And since we banned all the stupid people responsible dog owners abound, responsible breeding happens, human aggression no longer exists because only smart responsible people are breeding the appropriate dogs and the world lives in harmony.

Ban stupid people!

Answer 9

I personally do not think it is fair. But if people are scared of them, there's nothing much you can do. If you're talking about the pit bull ban in Australia, you can't change their minds. The only thing we can do is sit with our thoughts, knowing that they are correct. It isn't really consoling, but it helps reasonably.

Some other states have a law to have certain breeds muzzled in public. The only law I agree with in terms of dogs is the banning of docking tails and cropping ears.

I think it's unnecessary suffering to the dog just to make it look 'tougher'. That's my opinion. Sorry if I couldn't help more.

Best of luck! :o)

Answer 10

I think it's ridiculous. There are a lot of careless pet owners out there. People antagonize their dogs and let their children beat up on the poor things and in turn it produces aggressive animals. Then they ask why the dog is being so mean and put it down or get rid of it. It's just stupid.
I have a Siberian Husky and so many people think they are mean and nasty. They are completely the opposite. I have a hard time sometimes when I take him out in public because I get dirty looks and people grab their children. It's awful. He's never been aggressive towards anyone!
It's ridiculous and unfair for those of us who raise our animals properly. It makes it harder on us because we can't bring our pets out in public and we have a harder time renting a house. It's just silly.