08-29-2011, 12:59 PM
|
|
|
Let slip the dogs of war.
Industry Role:
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bermuda
Posts: 17,263
|
Breed ban laws simply don't work. Anybody arguing otherwise is doing so purely out of emotion. Those are the facts, period.
What does work well are breed neutral aggressive dog laws. If you really want to reduce the number of people being hurt by dogs, you would address the underlying issues and not just a symptom.
Quote:
|
Perhaps the most harmful unintended consequence of breed-specific laws is their tendency to compromise rather than enhance public safety. As certain breeds are regulated, individuals who exploit aggression in dogs are likely to turn to other, unregulated breeds (Sacks et al., 2000). Following enactment of a 1990 Pit Bull ban in Winnipeg, Canada, Rottweiler bites increased dramatically (Winnipeg reported bite statistics, 1984-2003). By contrast, following Winnipeg's enactment of a breed-neutral dangerous dog law in 2000, Pit Bull bites remained low and both Rottweiler and total dog bites decreased significantly (Winnipeg reported bite statistics, 1984-2003). In Council Bluffs, Iowa, following enactment of a Pit Bull ban in 2005, Boxer and Labrador Retriever bites increased sharply, and total dog bites spiked (Barrett, 2007).
|
Quote:
|
Although multiple communities have been studied where breed-specific legislation has been enacted, no convincing data indicate this strategy has succeeded anywhere to date (Klaassen et al., 1996; Ott et al., 2007; Rosado, 2007). Conversely, studies can be referenced that evidence clear, positive effects of carefully crafted, breed-neutral laws (Bradley, 2006).
|
__________________
.
|
|
|