eddie007

as many americans do... not necessarily shotguns... but lots of other much more powerful weapons... shotguns appear quite tame in comparison to some of the firepower owned by my US friends....


Quoting forbes....
“Firearms were used to kill 30,143 people in the United States in 2005, the most recent year with complete data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.1 A total of 17,002 of these were suicides, 12,352 homicides, and 789 accidental firearm deaths. Nearly half of these deaths occurred in people under the age of 35. When we consider that there were also nearly 70,000 nonfatal injuries from firearms, we are left with the staggering fact that 100,000 men, women, and children were killed or wounded by firearms in the span of just one year.


makes a random rogue dog pale into insignificance doesn't it?

Back in the day dog bites weren't recorded or reported in the press. And I can tell you from my ED experience that the overwhelming majority of bites serious enough to warrant a trip to ED were from family pets not related to these breeds....

A responsible owner who has a dog that shows aggression gets help... and takes precautions to prevent situations where the dog can/will/may bite.

Its IRRESPONSIBLE owners who need restrictions... not a breed of dog....

brissybee

The trouble is Eddie, this is like saying it's drug addicts who need restrictions from opiates so they should be available over the counter because not all opiates are bad.

It does seem to me that a lot of the people (not all) who are attracted to this type of dog are exactly the ones that shouldn't have them.

Because you can't stop bad people from buying dogs, I think there is cause to restrict the type of dog available... just like you can't stop bad people buying drugs so you have to stop making drugs readily available.

Sadly, not all humans are self-regulating with good intentions.

Zen10

There's the crux of it right there. Some of those attracted to the really aggressive breeds are invariably exactly the kind of people who will not act responsibly, so the only solution is to remove the option of owning the dangerous breed. As we have discussed already, the argument made above that because more people die of X than Y, then Y should be permitted, is fatuous.

Dreamy

But the problem is that the research shows that breed specific legislation doesn't work.

Just like drug controls don't work, like Prohibition failed etc etc. Humans always seem to find ways around any given legislation. Mandatory training, of owners and dogs would be a better way forward, although how that would be policed and enforced is anyone's guess.

Zen10

If the breeds didn't exist, the people we're talking about wouldn't be able to find a way around the legislation.

Dreamy

But the breeds do exist and breed specific legislation is ineffective. So how do you propose the breed is made extinct?

Zen10

Round up the breeds in question and either put them down or let them live out their lives in secure parks. Impose massive fines on anyone caught with one illegally or trying to import one.

brissybee

Honestly, I would be happy if this type of dog became extinct. (And I love animals.) If there wasn't a market for them, fewer people would breed them. Plain old human greed.

Yes, they'd go underground (like drugs) but the legal deterrant would at least limit the damage.

Dreamy

So that's pretty much the Dangerous Dogs Act in the UK. Is it working? No.

Zen10

This is commonly said about many laws and the reason is they're not enforced. Try and get a council to act against a barking dog in your neighbourhood and you'll see what I mean. The laws are there, but they're not enforced. To stop this problem, like so many other anti-social problems, all they have to do is enforce perfectly good existing laws.

Dreamy

I'm having a Rihanna moment... so I'm out.

Have fun on your merry go round.

petensue

In the latest reported case if people were educated they would not get a dog like that from someone that wants to get rid of it when you have children in the house.You do not get a dog that you don't know and leave it along with children and you also educate children not to tease animals.My 9 year old knows that!

Not a fan of pitbulls or American bulldog types but I have had nothing to do with them.I have owned a rottie from a puppy and had children with no problems but told my husband that I did not want a rescue rottie while my youngest is only 9 as you don't know their past and how its owners have treated it.I do know my rottie was nothing like the picture painted by the media and feel responsible owners suffer because of a few idiots.

The media also choose which attacks to report and I think some people have no idea that so called good dogs can attack if not educated.The other week a girl needed hundreds of stitches on her face after an attack my a kelpie.There must be sadly lots of attacks that go unreported.Are people going to take my kelpie cross away from me if they decide there have been to many attacks but let some thug keep his attack dog because he has encouraged it to be that way and it is not licenced?

Some people should not own dogs and give every dog owner a bad name but what do you do with them?There are a number of them where I live that have never heard of the word walk or training but there are also a lot that have and their dogs are nothing alike even though they are the same breed.

Zen10

Kelpies are another notorious breed, so not surprised by that. The bottom line is if the dangerous dogs were not available they couldn't attack people, especially kids. I have never understood those arguing for the right of people to keep dangerous dogs when they certainly wouldn't argue that people should be allowed to keep lions or jackals as pets. I presume it's because they had a (insert dangerous dog breed here) when they were kids and nothing happened, so they are attached to the breed. This is not my point. I am not saying every individual specimen of that breed is a killer.

petensue

I don't like certain dogs because their owners are idiots.Most are not.The point I am making is some dogs that have never caused trouble have been put to sleep because they look a bit like a pitbull and as a cross breed they can't prove that they are not.Meanwhile these same idiots have dogs that cause problems.

I would love to find a solution to this but I know only responsible dogs owners will be effected.The people that have no idea will just carry on and even make more money breeding these dogs.They will not care if they are banned or not.

Zen10

If the punishment outweighed the gain, and the law was actually enforced, they would care.