-
-
112 VotesVote Now!
-
Ban Breed Specific Legislation
Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) -- policies that ban or otherwise target certain dog breeds -- are often passed under the guise of protecting citizens and preventing dog bites. Instead, these laws are ineffective, expensive-to-enforce, and punish responsible people and innocent dogs.
Here are a few of the problems with BSL:
1) All dogs can bite. People have been injured or killed by Labradors, Huskies, and even Pomeranians. Pit bull breeds consistently pass standardized temperament tests with flying colors and have been employed as service dogs, search and rescue dogs, customs officers, etc. It's not the breed of dog that's dangerous, it's people who are irresponsible with their dogs.
2) If pit bulls, for example, were banned, would criminals who mistreat their dogs, chain them, and fight them just put away their abusive natures and become upstanding citizens? Not likely. They'll just move further underground or switch breeds. BSL punishes responsible owners and good dogs.
3) Since most people can't identify dog breeds, and since DNA tests have proven that even those who thought they could identify breeds are often wrong, there's no way to single out a breed for enforcement. Innocent dogs are at the mercy of officials playing guess-the-breed...which tends be a costly game for the community, in terms of finances and safety.
The only way to protect people from vicious dogs is to go after the dogs that are actually dangerous. Dangerous Dog Laws focus on any dog, of any breed, that has a history of aggression, and on the people who deliberately train and/or use dogs to act aggressively or for criminal activity.
It's time that we stop blaming the wrong dogs and start addressing the real problem: bad owners.
-
Comments
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Ideas for Change in America is a national competition to select the best ideas from across the country and turn them into reality.
Submit an Idea View all Ideas »Promote an Idea
This idea is currently in 7th Place in Animals
and needs 373 more votes to make it into the final round
Support this idea? Here's how you can help:
1. Share it on social networking sites
3. Post a Widget on Your Webpage (Get Widget)
Top Ideas about Animals
-
912 VotesProvide Legal Protections for Animals Through the Animal Bill of Rights - Animal Legal Defense Fund, Cotati, CA
-
773 VotesSTOP cruel BLM round ups of WILD HORSES - golde wallingford, clayton, ID
-
483 VotesEnd Chimpanzee Experiments, Pass the Great Ape Protection Act - Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, Washington, DC
The top 3 rated ideas from each issue category will make it into the final round. Read More »
The real problem is the owners, however, the problem remains and no one should have to experience such an attack, especially a child. Yes, dogs do bite, but most dogs do not kill. These dogs were bred to kill. The breeders are at fault as well due to inbreeding, which sets the dog and the owner with a time bomb situation. We should not have to live in fear of these dogs, yet I teach my children to stay far away from them regardless of what the owner tells them.
Posted by Deborah H on 01/26/2010 @ 03:48AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Deborah Lucky for you us perfect humans were never bred to Kill,Thank Goodness there are no such things as Rapists,Paediaphiles,Drunken Drivers,etc etc.etc.But allow your Kids to to deal with us Master race humans but keep them away from dogs who per annum kill 16 humans(all breeds) in the whole USA 2008,info supplied by CDC(Canine Disease Centre) and murders human upon human =16000 this info supplied by FBI.Something definitely does not make sense here,maybe politicians are lying(heaven forbid) or the media are less than honest.
smarock10@yahoo.com
Posted by selwyn john marock on 01/27/2010 @ 09:58AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I agree with Marock here. ALL dogs can bite, and pits rarely kill. I'm much more scared of people than any dog. In the temperment tests, pits scored higher than retrievers, german shepards, chow chows... in fact the most dangerous dogs in order according to these tests are 1) German shepard, 2) Golden retriever, 3) chow chows. Pits didn't even compare.
Look at it this way: Some people fear black people (I mean no offense here to anyone) because they see them as gangsters or thieves... in reality, our world wouldn't be what it is to this day without them. There are many intelligent African-Americans out there. It all depends on how they were raised... or any race for that matter. You can't ban a certain race for things only a small handful have done, cause ALL races have done things (causasian, african-american, asian...). The same goes for dogs. They're all different, and very often loving caring pets... especially pits.
Posted by Katie Boland on 01/28/2010 @ 02:05PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Deborah, I have to say at one time I thought the same way you did. I believed what the media had told me about pit bulls. Visious animals that attack people. That is until my son rescued and brought home our pit bull. My first reaction was; we can't keep that kind of dog, abused or not. I have grandchildren coming over all the time and it could hurt them. My husband was working out of town at the time and he agreed when I told him about the dog. I told my son he had to find it a good home quickly with no children. The dog could stay for a week, that is all the time he had. I knew if he took the dog to our Human Society it would be put down and I didn't want that. I took the dog to the vet the next day to make sure at least she had her shots. The vet explained to me there was nothing wrong with this type of dog, in fact they were an awesome breed as long as they are taken care of with love. The vet explained to me that socialization was the most important part of bring her up. As long as she wasn't put outside on a chain and left out there with no social skills she would be a perfect pet. I came home and started making phone calls to trainers to find out their opinion. I heard the same thing over and over again. Great breed if in the right hands. By the end of the second day I was in love with this darn dog. She was so loving. All she wanted was to lick my to death and to have close contact with me. My son has moved out and the pit bull is still here. I has been 11 months of pure joy to have her. She loves the grand kids and cannot wait to play the second they walk in the door. They are strong dogs so of course I watch to make sure she doesn't hurt them while playing, but it isn't the fear of bitting, only the size of her. Since I have owned her I have a whole new respect and have become a strong advocate for her breed. If you would let your fear of what you have heard go away and allow even one of these respected pits give you some love, you to would love them back.
Posted by Joanne Dixon on 01/29/2010 @ 07:53AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Actually, pit-bulls and many bully/mastif breeds were bred as working dogs, many were used to help plow and till fields in the coloies before oxen were brought from Europe. The nature of this particular type of dog is to please its master, so unfortunately, if an owner wants to train it to kill another dog- it will. Your ignorance of these dogs is just as bad as the people that wish to have them euthenized. And if you look back on all "attacks" by any dog, how many were the child doing nothing and the dog charging up to bite him/her? In ernest, the real criminals are the unsupervised children that taunted the animal until it snapped. And if you believe that the children are innocent, you are dead wrong, I see what children do to animals and if an animal is put down for biting someone, then your child should be put down for taunting an animal. I hope your cat doesn't bite you, if it does, you have a strong chance of getting cellulitis (bacterial infection of body tissue).
Posted by Eben Osgood on 01/30/2010 @ 10:51PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
PS to my above comment - Home Insurance Companies cancel policies if they find out you own a Pit Bull or Doberman. Lack of responsibility on the homeowners part? or the nature of the dog..................
Posted by Deborah H on 01/26/2010 @ 04:54AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
If you are going to say that you better have your facts right. A LOT of insurances companies or okay with you having them too. I beat that you donot keep you kids away from Goldens and they are at the top of the list for bites. Plus they are breed to love people even if they were fight dogs. I am agianst fighting dogs 100% but it is people like you that have a cat posted to your name and bash the breed but are even around them to know. The only animal that has done anything to me is a cat so maybe we should ban your FAMILY PET. Thanks pit bull lover
Posted by Joe Quinones on 01/26/2010 @ 01:48PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
My sister has two pits. My daughter was bitten by a Golden Retriever last summer, completely unprovoked, she wasn't even near the dog. My sister's two pits cover her with slobber! You decide, I already know my decision and I have first hand experience!
Posted by caroline rothwell on 01/27/2010 @ 09:12AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Deborah if you were a Jew in Germany in the late30's,I doubt there were too many insurance co's that would sell you a policy,does not necessarily make it right though,does it?
smarock 10@yahoo.com
Posted by selwyn john marock on 01/31/2010 @ 06:06AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
While I agree with you, I really don't think this is the forum for this.
Posted by Ellen Frisch on 01/26/2010 @ 08:04AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
The idea of pit bulls as killers is a common misconception. The flipside of the heritage of dog fighting is that dogs who weren't completely trustworthy around people -- no matter the circumstances -- were culled, leaving behind only the friendliest, most loyal dogs. That's why pit bulls score so high, year after year, on the American Temperament Testing Society tests.
As I mentioned above, plenty of other dog breeds do, in fact, kill: http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Articles/OtherBreedBites/AllDogsBite.htm
As for insurance companies, Joe is right. There are several companies that do not have breed specific policies. Also, in Michigan, it's illegal for an insurance company to deny coverage based on your breed of dog. So, no, I don't think those policies have anything to do with the nature of the dog.
Breed specific laws are a public health threat (because they don't address the actual problem of dog bite prevention), a waste of taxpayer dollars (because they're expensive to enforce), and, according to a judge in Ohio, unconstitutional (http://abclocal.go.com/wtvg/story?section=news/local&id=7232074). And that's not even getting into the issue of innocent dogs being killed or families losing their beloved pets.
In my opinion -- beyond my personal investment as a pit bull owner -- demanding effective, efficient, and constitutional laws that affect nearly 40% of U.S. households (that's just counting dog owners, not the people around them), aimed at keeping everyone safe, absolutely qualifies as an Idea for Change.
Posted by Stephanie Feldstein on 01/26/2010 @ 02:35PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Hi Joanne,
They can increase your rates, but you cannot be denied insurance in the state. A number of companies are generally pit bull friendly and don't have any breed specific policies. You can find more info on those here: http://www.pbrc.net/losinghome.html
You're right that your senator was quoting statistics that are completely outdated and inaccurate. If you're not already familiar with this website, check it out for some great tools to help fight BSL: http://www.understand-a-bull.com/BSL/BSLindex.htm
Posted by Stephanie Feldstein on 01/31/2010 @ 09:03PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I have come to a conclusion that the law BSL has very little to do with dogs but rather failing politicos who are trying to redeem themselves."Look Voters I am saving all the little children and little old ladies that are being mauled by packs of marauding pitbulls vote for me you can see I am not useless"These politicians need media help to create the hype and away they go ,the Deputy-mayor of London Malthouse has given these poor persecuted animals a name "Weapon Dogs"In the USA the new kid on the block Parris of Lancaster has made public statements that by murdering pitbulls he has brought down Gangster levels by 42% in his city.Yea after these so-called Gangsters lost their dogs they all became "Choirboys"
My opinion forget about trying to defend the animals by stating all the good points our family pets possess,these ambitious politicians are not interested .Start campaigns in their area and canvass voters and get these Lunatics REMOVED FROM POWER.This does work ask Tom Skeldon of Lucas County,he was the Dog-Warden he has been REMOVED.
smarock10@yahoo.com
Posted by selwyn john marock on 01/26/2010 @ 07:09PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Bad owners are a problem, but bad breeds are a problem as well. Staying away from breed specific legislation would include allowing pet "ownership" of wild, feral, or non-domestic breeds, which are not suited to the environment any human can provide. This is another nature vs. nurture question, and neither side is right all the time. Breed specific legislation is a means of dealing with this nature vs. nurture question AFTER a specific breed proves to be a consistent problem statistically. There are enough stray animals that can actually use human help -- we don't need to create more problems and strays by nurturing unadapted breeds.
Posted by Jared Hardy on 01/27/2010 @ 12:01AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I don't believe in breed legislation, but I do not like pit bulls. I see they are often alone in a vet's office, and I avoid them, also. I'm not crazy about another breed (chows or akitas) when I see them.
Posted by Mrs M on 01/31/2010 @ 05:45AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Dogs DO bite and bite often. I have the scars to prove it. IF we can reduce the number of dogs from breeds that quite frankly are overreepresented in the biting stats we should try to weed them out. I totally disagree with this idea as posted, but DO agree that we need to go after owners.
Posted by Cal Hastings on 01/31/2010 @ 06:53PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Bite statistics are notoriously unreliable indicators of which dogs are dangerous for a number of reasons, including:
1) Only bites that are reported become part of the statistics and many bites go unreported for a variety of reasons.
2) Bite statistics are based on subjective breed identification. It has been documented that the media reports bites far more often if they can attribute them to pit bulls than if it was done by another breed. Since people believe (for no reason other than what they see on the news) that pit bull bite, they therefore believe that any biting dog must be a pit bull. That's how these so-called statistics are made.
The National Canine Research Council has done a number of studies on the issue of dog bite statistics: http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/
The American Canine Foundation has also done a number of studies on the subject, including one that showed an increase in dog bite incident reports after breed bans were enacted. http://www.americancaninefoundation.com/breedspecificlegislation.html
Posted by Stephanie Feldstein on 01/31/2010 @ 09:12PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Stephanie you are 100% correct.In Denver after the BSL was introduced and the Genocidal attacks began,recorded dogbites are on the increase.In fact Denver is the highest in the whole of Colorada.I beleive this because the "FEAR SYNDROME" created by politicos has made certain members of the Denver public very aware of the dangers of these vicious animals called dogs.I was young once also got bitten by a few of my pets and other dogs,never went to a hospital, never reported it to authorities,I hurt myself more doing tricks on my bicycle,also being stung by Bees was far more painful,fell out of trees a few times almost broke my leg once,these activities are called "Growing Up) .Are Kids WIMPS these days or are politico's teaching the parents to be whingers.
smarock10@yahoo.com
Posted by selwyn john marock on 01/31/2010 @ 10:17PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I don't think the kids are Wimps, lol. Parents listing to the media and BSL unfortunately, and coming to false conclusions. I hate to say this, but you were one ruffed up kid when you were young. My boys weren't much better on the ruff playing.
Posted by Joanne Dixon on 01/31/2010 @ 10:46PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Stephanie, Thank you very much for all the wonderful informaton. I will be giving that senator a reply letter. Joanne Dixon
Posted by Joanne Dixon on 01/31/2010 @ 10:40PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
This is much too narrow of a topic for national consideration. Besides, I for one would not want to limit the power of a legislative body to do what they deem to be best for the population. A better approach is to educate and advocate. I strongly suspect that such a ban on legislation would be found unconstitutional.
By the way, if more pit owners would take responsibility for their dogs, the breed wouldn't have such a bad name. Perhaps your efforts would be better suited if you would target them instead of legislators.
Posted by John Hewes on 02/08/2010 @ 11:48PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.