Quote:
Originally Posted by WarChild
So is the goal to stop the number of people hurt or killed by pittbulls or to stop the number of people hurt or killed by dogs?
Breed ban legislation will decrease the number of people hurt or killed by pittbulls but no evidence suggests it will decrease the number of people hurt or killed by dogs in general.
Breeed-neutral aggressive dog legisation will decrease the number of people hurt or killed by dogs in general.
So which goal is it you're interested in?
|
I dont have a goal. I believe there is a problem with Pitts and Rotts. I know you have one. I know you love your dog. I also know you're rational and not like Vendzilla who is acting like he's a menopausal junkie looking for a fix.
However, I haven't heard anyone propose a solution other than "blame the owners". It really doesn't matter after the fact if the owner is to blame or not.
It seems to me there are 3 basic options
1) do nothing
2) do something with owners BEFORE they own one and make them accountable, licensed dog, trained etc.
3) ban breeds
Seems to me there is a reasonable answer in dealing with owners... licensing, training etc for Pits, rotts etc.
But the argument should never be "get rid of them all" or "there is no problem". Both are retarded views in my opinion.
When it comes to legislation, either you have a great solution, or you have no solution. It's the "no solution" part, that leads to breed specific legislation.