BSL.. why or why not?

It, once again, isn't forcing humans to take responsibility for their actions.

 
Bingo. But it is the hardest thing to make humans accept responsibility. BSL won't stop dog fighting. It won't stop ignorant ownership or breeding. It won't stop an ill-bred, ill-trained dog of any breed from biting someone. The "mean dog" status has passed from GSDs to Rottweilers to pit bulls. It's whatever dog that the organized criminals like to fight with that becomes "mean" and is sought by them to be mean. Here's how to stop dog-fighting. Arrest and convict the criminals that engage in it. But criminals shoot back and that's why most cities would rather pick on a dog, who can't fight back than a human who will shoot back. Me, I would rather see a war on crime and I don't mean a rhetorical one, like we already have. I mean, declare actual war on the gangsters and organized criminals that engage in dog-fighting, extortion, contract murder, etc., and shoot them on sight as enemies, like one does in a war. Win by attrition. But none of that will happen and not because people are queasy about declaring war on gangsters but because people have this pathological need to persecute the innocent for the sins of the guilty. If any one needs a license, it should be breeders, with a way to register every litter but even that may not happen.
 
Banning a certain breed makes about as much sense as banning coffee just because it may cause hypertension in some people. It doesn't solve a single thing. Labs have the biggest bit record, primarily because their are so many of them, rather than a predilection towards biting, and the predominance of owners are not even as savvy as we are about training, etc.
 

Yep, ron.

People would rather be...passive and just, in reality, WRONG. It's true. Place blame in the LEAST conflicting way. And, oh dear god, DON'T EVER take responsibility for the blame. Find the closest, least confrontational thing or being to blame. That way humans don't have to face their own short-comings and they can just believe and with things like BSL, and KNOW that they are NOT wrong because now there are laws saying they are not. And BSL is a false sense of security. Like the banning of guns. And law enforcement/government/political agents think they can pacify us with these laws of protection. Because in all honesty, isn't that the purpose of BSL? To make people think they are being protected? "Oh, we'll take care of the problem, we'll ban these dogs." Human who doesn't know better or refuses to know better (you tell me, ignorance or just plain stupidity?) thinks, "oh, well these people in charge of me (HA!) are doing their best to protect me and to take care of me. I'm content and when I become not so content anymore because another problem pops up (inevitably the same one because BSL cures nothing), I'll call for stricter laws and new laws and the people that are taking care of me, will be more than HAPPY to place them."

It's hard for me to "wrap this up" and end it because it goes so deep. But soon so many laws are created and placed that nothing is left. And, it's already happening, but these "people in charge" are not only controlling these "unruly, aggressive" dogs, but now they're controlling the humans. And the humans are more than willing to allow them to do it because no one wants to accept blame.
Far-fetched? Some may see it that way, but I know the way I'm thinking. Thank God BSL hasn't hit my area yet.
But...gas prices have.

I would settle for enforcement of the laws already on the books.  If the laws on dog fighting were implemented with confiscation and incarceration and fines (well beyond one year etc) that might make an impact.  If counties followed up on licensing requirements and collected those dollars, it might be possible to generate income adequate to add more staff.  I currently have a less popular breed (with respect to recognition by folks outside the dog world) but one that will move on to the banned lists quite soon.  It is already on some insurance lists.

BSL really doesnt make anyone any safer, it just drive owners further underground.  They will still be there, no question.

Pro's for BSL - it blankets an entire area to make sure the citizens are not harmed or threatened by certain dangerous breeds.

I know you're not really advocating this but throwing it out there so I'm not really responding against you.  My problem with this argument, like sillysally says, is that breeds that are considered "dangerous" are often not the ones causing the problems.  The other bites/attacks I know of from my circle of friends involved two different German Shepherds and a German Shorthair Pointer.  My school friend's lab used to snap at everyone and I think they eventually got rid of it.  They can go ahead and blanket ban pits, dobes, and rotts, but what does that do?

Personally, I'd rather see harsher punishments for neglect and cruelty, which often go hand-in-hand with an agressive dog.  In some placed you can be jailed for up to two years, but in most placed it's only a misdemeanor.  The bad owners should be punished, not the dogs or the good owners.

wow some wordy replies...
my objections are simple.
-BSL is a short term solution to a long term problem.
-It is treating the symptom and ignoring the disease.
-Never once in this history of this country has such restriction or  ban laws ever actually worked.
-and yet another Mark Twain quote...
"Those people--the departmental interpreters of the laws in Washington...can always be depended on to take any reasonably good law and interpret the common sense all out of it."
any good that could ever, if any ever could, come out of BSL...will be systematically slaughtered by our government. Mark Twain knew it and so should we all.

ORIGINAL: chewbecca

ORIGINAL: dlg81

ORIGINAL: sillysally

Well, do you think that people who own labs should have to get special licenses since they are the ones causing the majority of the trouble in this specific area?

Yes. If there was going to be legislation to require licenses for breeds that cause the most damage to humans then I don't see why labs should be excluded.

No breed should be excluded, then.
ANY and/or ALL dogs are dangerous if not handled by their owners properly.
And while it's unfortunate that BSL will continue to exist, doesn't mean I have to agree with it or lay back and think, "oh, well, this is the way it is." Because BSL forces all blame on the dogs. It, once again, isn't forcing humans to take responsibility for their actions. Sure, there can be "fluke" dogs every now and then, but that's with ANY breed.

And I don't have much more to say about it.

 
I think all dogs should have to be licensed.    I don't see how asking people who own breeds that cause the most damage to people to have additional licensing requirements is taking away the responsibility from the the humans.  In my mind it is similar to having different car insurance premiums depending on the kind  of car you drive.  Those figures are usually driven by statistics.  Any kind of car can be dangerous if handled improperly, but some are more dangerous than others.  It may suck to have a higher premium because you drive one of those cars, but that comes with owning the car. 
 
 
 
 

then who or what determines which dogs are the most dangerous?

Do we, um, take a vote? Or are we just going to leave the decision up to those "in charge"?

Is it the big dogs? Or is it just the big dogs that are more prey-driven? Or is it the dogs that the gang bangers/outlaws/bad people/ whatever have destroyed the rep of so far? Is it the guardian breeds? Is it the poorly bred ones? The over-bred ones?
Is it the pint-size ankle-biters? or the medium size terriers that are tenacious? Which breed defines the need to have restiction? Do you think it'd stop there?

ORIGINAL: chewbecca

then who or what determines which dogs are the most dangerous?

Do we, um, take a vote? Or are we just going to leave the decision up to those "in charge"?

Is it the big dogs? Or is it just the big dogs that are more prey-driven? Or is it the dogs that the gang bangers/outlaws/bad people/ whatever have destroyed the rep of so far? Is it the guardian breeds? Is it the poorly bred ones? The over-bred ones?
Is it the pint-size ankle-biters? or the medium size terriers that are tenacious? Which breed defines the need to have restiction? Do you think it'd stop there?

 
I think any of those factors could be taken into consideration depending on the legislature. 
 
For me personally, I think that size, prey drive, and level of damage hisotrically caused by bites should be taken into consideration.  I wouldn't take into consideration the "gang bangers/outlaws/bad people" thing. 

[linkhttp://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%201982%20to%202006%20Clifton.pdf]http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%201982%20to%202006%20Clifton.pdf[/link]
Here is the updated list of numbers.
Grain of salt warning...always room for interpretation as to breed and circumstance. But it's current thru Nov 2006.

In order to really interpret those numbers you need to know how many of each breed exists.
 
BSL wouldn't do anything to stop the dog fighters around here. They apparently are fighting mixed breed dogs-- pit with infusions of mastiff.

I don't agree with BSL because it's a band-aid solution to the real problem and that's stupid people. It's much easier to ban certain breeds than it is to ban stupid people. If you look at the majority of causes involving "dangerous breed" attacks, it's almost always due to the actions of irresponsible dog owners. Examples include the dog(s) were not properly maintained on the property, the dog(s) were allowed to roam, the dog(s) were chained in the yard with minimal human contact, the dog(s) were not neutered, the dog(s) just had a litter of pups, the dog(s) were abused. This can go on and on but the common denominator is an irresponsible dog owner.
 
Another reason I am against BSL is that most people cannot properly identify dog breeds/mixes correctly. How many times have you watched the news regarding a "Pit Bull" attack and the dog in question is actually a Lab? John and Jane Q Public seem to think if it's black or brindle, has a big blocky head and a wide mouth, it must be a Pit Bull. We, as dog savvy people, know that many breeds and mixes can fall into that description. I mean, I've shown this picture to various people and a lot of them were quite convinced that this dog is a Pit Bull...

 
Yeah. If people can't tell a 10lb Boston Terrier from a Pit Bull that's more than enough reason for me to believe that BSL isn't a good idea.

ORIGINAL: rwbeagles

[linkhttp://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%201982%20to%202006%20Clifton.pdf]http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%201982%20to%202006%20Clifton.pdf[/link]
Here is the updated list of numbers.
Grain of salt warning...always room for interpretation as to breed and circumstance. But it's current thru Nov 2006.

And here is a HUGE problem with these numbers--this is their source "Compiled by the editor of ANIMAL PEOPLE from PRESS ACCOUNTS since 1982" (my emphesis added).  I have had several people, including myself, biten to the point of needing emergency medical care and this has never been covered in the press.  In addition, it says that it excludes dogs who's breed cannot be identified, BUT includes a number of mixes which I think that even an expert would have trouble identifying.  In addition, there were little pieces of info like this "They are also notorious for attacking seemingly without warning, a tendency exacerbated by the custom of docking pit bulls' tails so that warning signals are not easily recognized."  Um, what?  I have never in all my life, with all the pit bulls I've been around, seen a docked tail--not once.  It makes me wonder what dogs they are counting as "pit bulls" and how much the author actually knows about the breed she is discussing.

If you read on, you also see that the author is CLEARLY pro-BSL, to the point where she compares pit bulls and rottweilers to pumas.

It is very important to those reading Gina's link to realize that is not, by any stretch of the imagination, an unbias and accurate gathering of facts.  IMHO, it is like looking to a pro-life activist for reliable abortion info--just not happening.

When Pit Bulls are outlawed, only criminals will have PIt Bulls.  Heck, it'll be even more of a criminal status symbol - a "banned" breed.  Why not just enforce the exsiting laws?
 

I have a friend who has a Pit. He has a signature line on his email that says "punish the deed not the breed". That is how I feel.

a lot of dog bites arent reported... i didnt report it when my boss's feral dobie/aussiexpit puppy and i got into a fight. the puppy had a tick under his eye.... i was finishing up feeding the horse's at the stable when i saw it. not really thinking about it i grabbed the puppy and went to remove the tick... how was i to know this was one of the feral puppies? they all looked the same. i saw them every day, i fed them, played with some of them, most of them followed me around or kept me company while i was working. This tazmanian devil dog and i got into a wrestling match that involved lots of sharp puppy teeth.... i had him, he had me, neither one wanted to let go because we both wanted the last word, i finally ended up tossing him away from me, he snarled and ran away .... i still have some scars from that ordeal! it was hard to believe my own dog was a brother to that monster!
i didnt report the ordeal, this place was covered up in doberman type dogs... this was the only incident. totally my fault for assuming i could just pick this puppy up and do what i wanted... but it was also my boss's fault because he didnt believe in spaying and neutering.

also i just have to ask those of you who own bulldog breeds of some type... has anyone ever said something to you like "Gee i'm glad i own another breed besides a bulldog!" ?
one of my cousins (the breeder wannabe) made that comment to me a few weeks ago.... said she was glad she owned GSDs and Chihuahuas becase she doesnt have to worry about over the top screening or BSL.....
WHAT!?
we were chatting on the computer when she said it so she couldnt see the look on my face...[sm=rolleyes.gif]

you know the more people i talk to about BSL the more people seem to be against it. infact just about everyone i know (inlaws excluded) love the bulldog breeds. There was only one lady i met that actually showed some nervousness when a bully looking dog wandered up into the park last Christmas. Santa Clause was there with a herd of little kids, so i undersntand her worry, but this dog was having a blast being fed cookies and cupcakes and getting scratches behind his ears. He was so calm and relaxed and you could tell he enjoyed the attention. He eventually went back home, but this woman was white as a sheet the whole time he was there (about twenty minutes roughly) i could understand being nervous and watchful or proactive if he had stolen a cookie or knocked someone down, but he just kinda lounged around like he belonged to everyone..
I know he was a "dog at large" which given his breed would have been trouble if he had been trouble, and he had a home, that was obvious. some of the people seemed to know him. but as sweet and friendly as he was, there was that one person who was terrified of him. Why? i even asked her that... the reason was because of what she had heard in the news..... she never owned one, none of her friends owned a pit or bulldog breed, so she was one of the ignorants out there pushing for breed bans. One  other lady and myself  included  tried to put her mind at ease on these breeds. she just didnt have a clue about them. Zero experience!

Also to answer a previous question about the leash laws:
I know we have a leash law, but no one enforces it. I know that bulldog types must be leashed in public at all times, buuut... no one enforces that either.
Believe me, i cant stand people that let their dogs frolic off leash in the parks. Fortunately my dogs are social butterflies and have a thick skin (metaphorically speaking) Kaydee has been rushed at by two huge labs while out on a walk, she just stood her ground and let me handle it. Any other dog could have taken me turf surfing and landed me in the middle of a free-for-all. But thats MY dog.... not everyone else has that luxery. Even other AB owners dont have the luck i've had with mine.... i count my blessings every day too. my dogs just know where their territory ends and begins. Kaydee has been surrounded by loose Chihuahuas nipping at her heels, and she just ignores them. She's been walked past a friend's pet deer, no issues in wanting to eat or chase it. The only time she goes on alert is when people approach. Then she is all ears and eyes, watching and waiting for them to make a move.
I think that is what gets a lot of bulldoggers in trouble. Some of those "Dangerous breeds" are bred and trained to be protective, and they are, intheir mind, protecting! Bo and Kaydee were both challenged on purpose on two sepperate occasions. Both time on leahs, both times by some big dopey idiot that wanted to prove a point. One guy made direct eye contact and stood over Kaydee after making the comment "She dont Bite huh?" he knew what he was doing.She  roared launched herself at him, and he ran away! i was seven months pregnant at the time.... but i had a death grip on that leash! Kaydee thought she was protecting me from this wise guy.
Bo was challenged by a friend of my cousin's... He supposedly worked a lot with the breed and did rescues. one of their "tests" to see if a dog was used for fighting was to stand in a dominant fashion, make eye contact and stamp their feet... a threat display obviously... my cousin was holding onto Bo and he emediately lowered his ears, tail, and head before he got courage to bark back at this idiot. And this guy said "Yep, he was trained to fight!"  [sm=banghead002.gif]
if i had been there i would told him a thing or two.... Bo isnt dog aggressive. he proved that when we took him to a local dog show. he played and played, made friends, shared treats and toys, no issues. not a single one.
So my point is.... if you have a protective breed, and most bulldogs are protective of their people, and you get some smart alec trying to prove a point, he's gonna get bitten.... or growled at, or snapped at, or what ever. Suddenly your dog is a mennace to society.... for doing his job.