Tell me about breed specific legislation

Question

I have a small breed under 25 pounds and live in a rather nice, upscale apt. community. Our pet policy is pretty simple in that we can have two dogs per unit maximum and each dog must be under 25 pounds. BUT our community has been sold and the new owner is allowing larger dogs which is fine BUT our municipality is considering breed specific legislation and I would like to hear some mature, serious, polite (no mud slinging) as I attended a town hall meeting and it was a mess as both sides in my opinion were rude, immature and were more concerned with putting down each other rather than addressing the issue in an adult manner. What are the pros and con's of breed specific legislation? I'd appreciate mature focused responses to my question without adolescent behavior. Thanks.

I have to cast my vote on this issue with my property owner by Sept. 10 and he will vote with the majority of his tenants as he said he won't go against the grain even though he, the new owner, is permitting large dogs.

Tell me why I should tell my landlord to vote for breed specific legislation in our municipality.

Tell me why I should tell my landlord to vote against breed specific legislation in our municipality.

Answer 1

The apartment complex I live in uses Breed specific legislation.. I don't agree with it, but it's what the world is coming to. I know that you can of course have a VERY loveable pitbull, or "wolf breed" dog. Other common banneds are, dobermans, and rotts.



All 4 of these are banned in my Apartments now, but they allow my two Malamutes because of who I am.



That being aside.. You'd be BETTER OFF to vote in favor of it. It causes less problems down the road, and theres a good chance first time you have a pitbull get loose that wasn't trained properly.. They wont even have a vote. They'll just put it into action.



Many places are going that direction now, and honestly... It's what going to win as people that aren't big dog people... Don't want to have to worry about their kids.

Answer 2

My vote would be against.



All dogs can bite, and all dogs can do damage. The worst biter I met was a dachshund, the second worst was an English Setter, both breeds you don't normally think of as needing legislation. The best results in stopping biting have been seen in regulating aggressive dogs and holding owners more accountable. The "Calgary Model" is known as having been extremely successful in reducing bites while not increasing costs to tax-payers.



Now, this site (http://ilovemypitt.150m.com/breed_specific_legislation%20in%20canada.htm) is pretty one-sided as to being against BSL, but also gives some of the main concerns that people should be thinking about when considering voting for it.



My main concerns with BSL have always been the enforcability of it. For instance, identification of "pit bulls" or the dogs on the list. I met a Boston Terrier who had the entire neighborhood hiding because they were sure it was a pit bull. It wasn't even an AGGRESSIVE dog, just because it looked what they thought a pit bull looks like... they pulled all their kids inside. I went out and picked the dog up and waited for the pound to pick him up so he'd find his people. Very friendly dog.



You might say that a trained individual would know the difference between a pit bull and some other breed, but unfortunately that isn't the case. I've known malamutes taken under pit bull laws. If there's ever a difference in breeds... that's it.



Since pit bulls also have been proven to be good service dogs, police dogs, and family dogs, judging only on looks and not on behavior puts many wonderful dogs to death every year. Honestly it makes no sense.



I would prefer to see people have to pass a basic behavioral test when they get their vet-shots, and if the dog doesn't pass have them pay a higher cost as well as be on records until they get training to pass. That would make logical sense.

Answer 3

BSL infringes upon the rights of responsible dogs owners. End of story. The problem is BLS do not fix the problem they just turn owners who own BSL targeted dogs who are doing good and have properly trained animals into criminals. So what if not everyone is a big dog fan, that doesn't give them the right to dictate what type of dog I have. I live in a building that allows dogs of all sizes and breeds with the exception of so called 'vicious dogs' only because of the insurance on the building won't cover them



Yes the Gov't tells us what to do all the time, but when it comes to some that is considered property and dogs are just that in the eyes of the law, if I have a well behaved and well trained Pit bull, why should I be excluded from owning that dog while people are allowed day in and day out to walk around with lapdogs they have spoiled the crap out of and allow to bark, yip, yap bite, nip and growl and random people for doing nothing more than walking by them? Explain to me how fair that is.



Tell your landlord to vote against the BSL but also have him include that ill behaving dogs of ANY breed will not be allowed within the property in the lease. Simple. There are better way to preventing problem animals than BSL which are not applied fairly or with concret information

Answer 4

Breed Specific Legislation is a 'quick fix' for a problem that doesn't start with the dog, it starts with the owner.

I work in a shelter, and you wouldn't believe the amount of dogs turned in because their owners couldn't take them with them. And do you know how many of those were euthanized?

BSL, whether in a apartment complex or for a state DOESN'TWORK.

It doesn't target those who are breeding/training these breeds of dogs irresponsibly. These people will simply move on to another breed of dog.

I don't think targeting a specific breed of dog is fair, any dog has the potential, purebred or mutt to be dangerous. Perhaps if the landlord created a proposal or rules for /all/ dogs in the complex, that would be different. But targeting specific breeds only worsens the stereotype of 'vicous breeds' and the whole 'Pitbulls are bad.'

Answer 5

Here in the UK the Dangerous Dogs Act was brought in several years ago as a knee jerk reaction to attacks by pitbull type dogs, and other fighting dogs. it was meant to eradicate these breeds from the country by neutering those that were already here, and prohibiting the import of any more.



Well... it hasn't worked. All it means is that these dogs are now only owned by the exact people the law was meant to stop - ie, those with complete disregard for the law and dog fighting. Responsible, sensible owners, who would have had well trained, well socialised and safe examples of the breed - respect the law and cannot own the dogs they would like to.



This pretty much covers why I am against Breed specific legislation of any sort. You cannot tar all members of the same breed with one brush - and it is irresponsible owners who create irresponsible dogs. Jack Russells, and other terriers - are some of the worst culprits when it comes to biting people (actually, chihuahuas are pretty notorious for having bad tempers) - but because, fortunately, they rarely do much damage - no one wants to legislate against them. Does that mean that all JRTs/chis are bad dogs? No - and the same goes for pits/dobies/rotts/gsds... etc etc.



In my own personal experience, my GSDs and dobie have been the most laid back, gentle giants... the little Heelers and Jack Russell crosses have been much more of a challenge when it comes to socialisation (but we've got there - I won't have a badly behaved dog - regardless of breed!).

Answer 6

Pros:

Since the backyard breeders of aggresive breeds cannot be controlled, and education has failed on how to buy and train a dog, the only thing left is to control the dog and access to it.



To protect the public from the few bad seeds, sometimes the gov't needs to step in.



Cons:

People are terrible at identifying breeds. Boxers, Bull Terriers, Mastiffs, and even Bulldogs often get cited under BSL, simply because police and Animal Control aren't trained well enough to identify the difference.



Breeds are not the problem. It's the people who breed them irresponsibly and the people who buy then and don't train them.



Killing dogs and forcing people to move because of dogs is not moral.



BSL keeps otherwise upstanding citizens from considering certain towns.



BSL can overwhelm staff and will increase spending and tax dollars



Pit Bulls (most frequent target of BSL laws) are not any worse than other dogs. THey just get reported more in the media.



Where does the line get drawn? I was bitten by a cocker spaniel - does that mean that banning them is the answer? How bout the lab that bit my friend?



Any badly bred, poorly trained, or abused dog is a danger. Why single out certain breeds?

Answer 7

Where to begin...



There are sufficient laws on the books to protect us from vicious dogs and their irresponsible owners the fact that the vast majority of those are not being enforced due to lack of funds or personal is no reason to make more laws that will also not be enforced for the same reasons.



Instead of BSL we need to be education John Q Public about responsible pet ownership and DEMANDING that the current laws are being enforced. We need to have the legitimate registering bodies in the schools, boy & girl scouts, 4-H etc to get the word out to those who are most likely to hear the message our youth. (I'm older so I can say this ) People of a certain age can be rather set in there ways and harder to reach - not that we should stop trying just that it is harder :)



If you haven't guessed I am not a preponent of BSL. Here is a link to a great group for those that want to really learn more indepth information

http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/pet-law/

Answer 8

This is not a good place to find this information.



There are way too many sites that have pros and cons.



I'm completely against it. Oh did you know that in some areas Pugs and Boston Terriers are on the hit lists? And that's just a small example of what you'll find out there.



BLS is BS!



What should be happening is the laws already on the books being inforced and this country not becoming a dictatorship.



Just type in a search and read. Ton's out there online!



You'll get bits and pieces in here, just like with any other subject. BLS is something that you can't just look at and decide yah or ney. It's complex and too many people follow like sheep and then wonder where their rights have gone.

Answer 9

Pros:

*Unsavory people cannot own these breeds (and by unsavory, I mean those who own them to look "tough").



Cons:

*Ignorant people get their way.

*People wont learn how great these breeds can be--with the right training and owner

*BSL wont stop--Pitties, Rotties, Dobes now, Aussies, Chows, Labs, and maybe even Chihuahuas and Pomeranians in the future. Whatever the country fears enough to sling around in the future, will earn a spot on the list.