I've always thought of the idea of "Dangerous breeds" as silly. Any breed of dog is inherently dangerous, they are instinctual animals with teeth. I know a lot of people say that some breeds are more predisposed to violence than others. I'm inclined to believe that this is an ownership issues: Some breeds are more likely to attract owners who are "tough guys" and irresponsible. It's frustrating to see this phenomenon create negative public opinion towards a breed. I guess what I'm concerned about is a wide-spread or "federal" implementation of the localized BSL's (for example).

Is there anything that the dog loving community can do to curb breed specific legislation? What if we euthanize the irresponsible owners that give all APBT's and PB's a bad name? :\

I started thinking about this because of a story that just ran on the local news. How do you let your dog get to this point? The owner is ultimately responsible, obviously, but what degree of responsibility do genetics (not breed specific, but perhaps "breeder" specific) play in a situation like this?

This post is really...impotent. I'm just frustrated I guess. At the whole situation. Mostly, at humanity.

With stories like these I can see why lawmakers are looking into banning certain breeds, but I see the breed banning as just a temporary fix. If only they made people go through training and licensure requirements to own a dog, maybe these types of incidences would drop dramatically.


http://cbs3.com/topstories/local_story_234234758.html

http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=animals_oddities&id=5586994

http://cbs3.com/topstories/topstories_story_234153125.html

The problem is much more complex than a “Dangerous Breed”.

The problem is that the Pit-Bull, Dobbie, GSD, etc. have the ability to inflict serious injury when they go off their nut. The 5 lb Chihuahua or Pom is going to do much damage.

People in general are much more irresponsible than they were 30 years ago. They don’t take responsibility for their action or inaction.

I was watching crime program last night. They guy killed someone in cold blood; he flew all the way from Hawaii to Ohio and waited in the guys apartment. He confessed to the policy on camera. If they aren’t going to kill that guy, they aren’t going to do much to someone who raises a vicious dog.

You bring up a good point, Keith. My parents admittedly deranged chihuahua is much less dangerous than a GSD or Pit with the same psychosis. I guess you have to look at the potential damage, not just the degree of craziness. It's extremely frustrating to see irresponsible people ruin things (remember when you didn't have to 'shush' someone every time you went to the movies?), I guess it's a cultural epidemic not limited to dogs.

Kimberly: On the surface, I'm all for it. But where does it stop? Right now, the only things I can think of that you have to have a license to own are guns and cars. Spreading the restriction of personal freedoms isn't something I can endorse...

I grew up around Pitbulls for over 15 yrs WITHOUT ONE INCIDENT. Why can't there be stories written about that?

I really, REALLY, REALLY wish you'd have to apply for a license and pass a course to own a powerful breed. That would cull all the stupid @ss owners.

It's all about money and if restrictions were put on owners and breeders ,that kept people who dont know what there doing ,from breeding and owning dogs that they cant control,by making it to costly to take on lightly, then fighting and backyard breeding would have to stop as it would wipe you out if you tried, it would leave the working dogs to owners who can afford to train and supervise the animals of all breed,and allow them to do what come natural.

Higher taxes, in the form of a license, will do nothing.

If someone is going to breed and fight dogs, do you think one more law is going to stop them?

Just like the breeding license will not stop the BYB.

I have to pay $50 per year to “register” my unaltered female; it is only $5 if she is fixed.

The person cranking out 100 pups a month in a trailer located in the middle of nowhere isn’t going to pay that and chances are they won’t be caught any time soon.

Keith, nail on the head again.

Alex the law you are speaking about implementing is actually one that Massachusetts is looking into using. I think the issue is implementation and enforcement.

I'll see if I can find the website with all of the details.

The real issue and problem gets lost in translation like most other problems when politicians get involved. The only way to truely control and monitor large powerful breeds is to connect a temperment and control test to licensing. I, for one, would endorse a test, such as the CGC (as basic as it is) to be a requirement for licensing. I think this could solve the issue of liability with insurance companies and allow responsible owners and breeders to not be lumped in with the individuals causing the problems - who are quite frankly criminals. Someone that gets a badly bred dog and then chains them in the yard and does not socialize or train them is exactly the same as someone building a bomb. Both are uncontrollable weapons that can go off at any time. Test me, then leave me the hell alone.