Breed Specific Leglislation :: Your Thoughts?

Feel free to debate any issues you wish here. Warning: The topics discussed and their content may on occassion offend some.

Breed Specific Leglislation :: Your Thoughts?

Postby k9ruby » Mon Jan 25, 2010 8:44 pm

Breed Specific Leglislation :: Your Thoughts?

I will add my 2 p later. :mrgreen:
Image
User avatar
k9ruby
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2379
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 4:00 pm

Re: Breed Specific Leglislation :: Your Thoughts?

Postby Alice » Thu Feb 11, 2010 2:34 pm

I was in favour of banning certain breeds until I whent to see some cousins in America. I met their pit bull, and their bijonfrise (or however you spell it), and I know which dog I'd rather have. That said, I would always be scared of that pit bull if I had it because it was a pit bull and because it was rescued from a dog fighting ring (it had been put in as bate for the other dogs because it wouldn't fight).

I think that you should have to have licences for dogs over a certain size, and of certain breeds. Perhaps all pets should require a licence but some licences should be harder to get, so a licence for a minature poodle shows you know how to look after it, but doesn't entitle you to own a pit bull because you'd need a licence that showed you could propely train and control a large dog with a potentialy more agressive nature. I know it would deminish the popularity of certain breeds, but at least it would be an enforcable way of making sure responsible owners can have the dog they want, wile irresponsible owners stick to goldfish.

It would be unlikely to happen though. It would be more expensive then saying "this breed is banned, and this breed isn't"
User avatar
Alice
The Cat's Pajamas !!
 
Posts: 1772
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 9:19 pm
Location: Leicester

Re: Breed Specific Leglislation :: Your Thoughts?

Postby k9ruby » Fri Feb 12, 2010 8:17 pm

For me, it depends on who is on the other end of the lead. Believe it or not, labs, collies, poodles, retrievers and terriers can all be dangerous dogs if you have a owner on the end of the lead that hasn't trained or socialized them properly. Likewise, bull breeds, Rotties, GSDs, mastiffs and Dobes can all be big soppy things if they have the right handler.

Personally, I would like a license to be introduced to ALL dog owners. I would also insist, if dogs were to be let off the lead, that they reach the kennel clubs good citizen bronze award or puppy as a minimum. This is a international dog training standard that is recognized at least in Great Britain and the States. It shows that your dog has good manners regarding other dogs and people, will come back when called, will stay until released, will behave properly in the car, will heel nicely both on and off lead (Off lead walking may be required in an emergency- I personally take a alternative lead if I go anywhere different than my normal route- leads can break though and once we had to rely on our dogs off lead heel-work on a holiday in Cornwall- we took both leads, but both broke, and had to navigate a road in a process.- something I would NEVER do if I had a choice, but we had no alternative- no pet shops, no shops selling ropes or string, and the spare lead also broke.).

Pit bulls are not dangerous because of their breed. They potentially dangerous because the majority are in the wrong hands and us humans have bred certain characteristics into the breed for fighting (i.e. big heads, strong jaws, aggressive temperaments, an ability to "lock" their jaws on to something and no matter what to hold on to something for dear life).

Personally I think I would overhaul the legislation and make it the law that ANYONE who intends to own a pit-bull or current illegal breed, must BY LAW:

- Have it micro chipped (that way if it is out of control the owner can be traced)
- INSIST that they attend a nationally run puppy class where they are trained using positive methods and socialized, and are enrolled before any transaction of buying a puppy is made.
- That it would be illegal to breed from a dog with any kind of aggression, nervous or socialization issues
- Insist that a knowledge test in dog behavior is took before being able to buy a puppy
- That the dog MUST be assessed EVERY YEAR for temperament testing
- No one with criminal convictions can own one
- That Good Citizen Bronze (AT LEAST) MUST be achieved within a year of buying a puppy
- That rescue dogs of the breeds must not be able to go to a new home without these in place
- That the sentencing for owning dogs below these standards, illegal dog fighting, breeding dogs below these standards is much harsher (With the aims of locking up those that pose a threat to damming the breeds characteristics)
- That dogs that do not live up to these standards and show consistant signs of agression despite attempted rehabilitation are destroyed (Harsh I know, but with the aim of 'killing off' breeding those who can pass on a threat)
-That the owner must of trained 2 *normal breed* dogs of up to CGC Gold standard, Therapy Dog Standard or Companion Dog standard
-That the owner must have 5 character references (not family members or friends less than 10 years)
-That the owner must have 3 references "Ok"ing them from a experience dog trainer, behaviourists, vet or breeders/rescue organisation before buying a pit bull puppy. (Eliminating those who are obvious criminals, and only allowing those who are committed to improving the breed to own them)
- That the household does not have any children under 7 years old (Avoiding the chance of a child too young to really understand the consequences of provoking a dog on a daily basis)
- That they are walked with a muzzle (Therefore eliminating the chance of a stranger being attacked)

All in all, this would aim to "Breed Out" the bad characteristics that us humans have "Bred in".
Image
User avatar
k9ruby
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2379
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 4:00 pm

Re: Breed Specific Leglislation :: Your Thoughts?

Postby Page » Sun Feb 14, 2010 6:46 am

k9ruby wrote:Personally, I would like a license to be introduced to ALL dog owners.

Personally I think I would overhaul the legislation and make it the law that ANYONE who intends to own a pit-bull or current illegal breed, must BY LAW:

- Have it micro chipped (that way if it is out of control the owner can be traced)
- INSIST that they attend a nationally run puppy class where they are trained using positive methods and socialized, and are enrolled before any transaction of buying a puppy is made.
- That it would be illegal to breed from a dog with any kind of aggression, nervous or socialization issues
- Insist that a knowledge test in dog behavior is took before being able to buy a puppy
- That the dog MUST be assessed EVERY YEAR for temperament testing
- No one with criminal convictions can own one
- That Good Citizen Bronze (AT LEAST) MUST be achieved within a year of buying a puppy
- That rescue dogs of the breeds must not be able to go to a new home without these in place
- That the sentencing for owning dogs below these standards, illegal dog fighting, breeding dogs below these standards is much harsher (With the aims of locking up those that pose a threat to damming the breeds characteristics)
- That dogs that do not live up to these standards and show consistant signs of agression despite attempted rehabilitation are destroyed (Harsh I know, but with the aim of 'killing off' breeding those who can pass on a threat)
-That the owner must of trained 2 *normal breed* dogs of up to CGC Gold standard, Therapy Dog Standard or Companion Dog standard
-That the owner must have 5 character references (not family members or friends less than 10 years)
-That the owner must have 3 references "Ok"ing them from a experience dog trainer, behaviourists, vet or breeders/rescue organisation before buying a pit bull puppy. (Eliminating those who are obvious criminals, and only allowing those who are committed to improving the breed to own them)
- That the household does not have any children under 7 years old (Avoiding the chance of a child too young to really understand the consequences of provoking a dog on a daily basis)
- That they are walked with a muzzle (Therefore eliminating the chance of a stranger being attacked)

All in all, this would aim to "Breed Out" the bad characteristics that us humans have "Bred in".


That sounds really restrictive, and I would rather err on the side of freedom. All those guidelines would create a lot more bureaucratic hassle, and I have yet to see a government bureaucracy work efficiently. Plus, how would you go about enforcing some of those things without being overly intrusive into people's lives?
User avatar
Page
Mega Poster
 
Posts: 459
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 12:54 am
Location: Birmingham, Alabama, USA

Re: Breed Specific Leglislation :: Your Thoughts?

Postby Dan » Fri Jul 16, 2010 11:20 am

I find it disgusting that breeds are created for fighting but I don't believe that they should be put down either. It's a product of human imperfection and removing what we create is wrong too. I hate the phrase "playing God" but it applies quite neatly here although I don't believe in God. I believe that natural selection always takes its course and if we fiddle with it we ruin the biodiversity ultimately destroying our chances of progressing from a hopeless point in history.
Image
Dan
The Cat's Pajamas !!
 
Posts: 1711
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 9:48 pm
Location: UK, England, Watford


Return to Debate Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron