Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSquealer
I dont have a goal. I haven't heard anyone propose a solution other than "blame the owners".
It seems to me there are 3 basic options
1) do nothing
2) do something with owners BEFORE they own one
3) ban pitbulls
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.
|
Well there is a solution that works much better than BSL, and that's breed-neutral aggressive dog legislation.
Here's a short list of organizations that support that position: CDC, ASACP, Humane Society, American Veterinary Medical Association.
Here's a short list of scientific studies (alas not conducted on GFY) that support the position that breed ban legislation is not effective: Klaassen et al., 1996; Ott et al., 2007; Rosado, 2007
Here's a scientific study that supports the position that breed-neutral aggressive dog legislation does work: Bradley, 2006
I whole-heartidly support breed-neutral aggressive dog legislation. Nobody should have to suffer being bitten, maimed or killed by anybody else's pet. I'm fine with restrictive licensing requirements and severe criminal and civil penalties for the owners of aggressive dogs of all types, Pittbulls included. Shouldn't you be?
In short, let's work to reduce the number of aggressive dogs period and not just the number of aggressive Pittbulls. Surely you can see the benefit of persuing the first course rather than the second?