• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Breed Specific Bans.....

Status
Not open for further replies.

ChristianMilitaryWife

Active Member
Dec 27, 2006
158
26
✟22,932.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
For those who aren’t aware or are just seeking additional information.

Please know that any breed is capable of biting and that the breed isn’t at fault for this it has to do with handling and training of the dog not it’s breed.

Breed Specific Bans
A group of laws that bans particular breeds, usually pit bulls (a type of dog, not a breed) and sometimes Rottweilers, German Shepherds, Akitas, Dobermans, Chow Chows, and a few others. These laws are usually passed after several attacks by a particular breed so that city councils can assure citizens they are “doing something” about a voter concern.
But breed bans don't work. They target all dogs of a breed -- the innocent as well as the guilty; are difficult to enforce; and do not end the use of guardian dogs by criminals. If pit bulls in their various incarnations are banned, drug dealers and other felons switch to another breed or mix. In the meantime, the ill-tempered terrier mix that bites the hand that feeds it and the poorly-bred purebred that attacks the neighborhood children pose a far greater danger to people than the obedience-trained American Staffordshire Terrier that is a registered therapy dog but cannot step foot inside the city.
Far better than breed-specific bans are strict laws to control aggressive dogs of any breed or mix. Known as generic vicious dog laws, they put restrictions on the ownership of dogs that pose a danger to people, restrictions such as confinement in locked, escape-proof kennels while outdoors on the owner's property; muzzles when the dog is off the property; and purchase of a liability insurance policy.
Breed specific legislation is exactly what sounds like...regulation of your right to own or, in many cases, not own a dog based solely on the breed or "type" of dog, not your responsibility as an owner.
Breed specific ordinances are quick fixes and not a sufficient long term solution for the following reasons:

1. Dog problems are generally problems with owner responsibility and are not limited to breeds. When breeds are singled out as dangerous or vicious, responsibility is removed from the dog owner which is where it belongs. Irresponsible people are also less likely to follow the law - and as a result, everyone has to suffer.

2. By limiting the ability of citizens to own certain breeds, responsible law abiding citizens will shy away from those breeds. These are the types of owners that communities need to encourage, not drive away.

3. Communities that have instituted such bans often find that the irresponsible owners and the criminals who use dogs for illegal purposes simply switch to another breed.

4. Breeds and mixes are hard to identify and often dogs are mislabeled and destroyed based on paranoia and prejudice and also punishes those that are good canine citizens. Many breeds function as assistance dogs for handicapped owners, search and rescue dogs, drug-sniffing dogs, police dogs, etc. and drives them out of the community.
The American Veterinary Medical Association and several state veterinary medical associations oppose breed-specific legislation for just this reason.

5. The dog most restricted is the "pit bull." A pit bull is a type of dog, not a recognized breed.

6. Passage of laws that are only enforced through complaints cause two problems: 1) they create disrespect for the law if authorities require compliance only upon complaint, and 2) they provide ammunition for neighborhood feuds.

Suggested alternatives to breed bans include:

1. Stronger enforcement of existing dangerous dog laws. If they are not already in place, lobby for protection from untrained and unsupervised dogs of any breed or mix. This is a broad-based effort that protects all citizens as any dog can bite and be a nuisance when owned by an irresponsible owner. Those who would deliberately train a dog to act aggressively towards people or other animals, or to use dogs in the commission of a felony or misdemeanor should face additional penalties.

2. Encourage local animal rescue and welfare agencies to provide responsible dog ownership seminars and canine safety education. The American Kennel Club has a free education program created for elementary school children.

3. Protect the rights of all citizens with nuisance ordinances such as anti-barking, pooper scooper regulations and leash laws.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Key

ChristianMilitaryWife

Active Member
Dec 27, 2006
158
26
✟22,932.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Pit Bull Rescue Central (PBRC) fully supports reasonable, non-breed specific, dangerous dog laws;
laws that will protect responsible owner’s rights and promote a safe community for all residents.
PBRC does not support any form of breed specific legislation (BSL), which targets specific breed(s) for
restrictions or bans. We know that BSL is ineffective, costly to residents and unfair to responsible dog
owners. Below are some facts regarding BSL and Pit Bulls.
• Costs associated with BSL may include:

Payroll for additional Animal Control officers to enforce the legislation.

Kenneling cost to house the pets that are seized or given up.

Additional vet care for animals who are seized because the breed has been banned or restricted. These dogs are held by the city or county while owners work to meet restriction requirements, or file lawsuits to fight the ban.

Court costs (Many responsible dog owners are choosing to fight these laws in courts and they are winning the cases).

Baltimore, MD estimated that in 2001 it cost the city $750,000.00 a year to enforce their BSL and they repealed it in favor of a non-breed specific law.

• Breed Identification:

Pit bull is not, in fact, a breed of dog. The term “Pit Bull” is typically associated with these three breeds: American Staffordshire Terrier; American Pit Bull Terrier; and Staffordshire Bull Terrier.

The only way to identify a dog’s breed is by its appearance. There is no genetic test to determine
a specific dog breed. There are 25+ breeds of dogs that have similar appearances and are commonly mistaken for pit bulls. It is almost impossible for the average person to
accurately identify a pit bull.

• BSL is Unconstitutional as found by US Courts:

The United States Supreme Court - Nicchia v. People of the State of New York 254 U.S.
228 (1920) : gave police the power to regulate and control dangerous dogs with drastic measures, as long as it does not infringe on the dog owner’s right to liberty with due process.

The Alabama Supreme Court - WAF/Sheila Tack v. Huntsville Alabama (2002): upheld a decision that pit bulls were no more inherently dangerous than any other breed. This case was very costly to the city of Huntsville.

The Toledo Municipal Court- Tellings v. City of Toledo CRB-02-15267 (ACF 2005): ruled American Pit Bull Terriers are not dangerous and granted dog owner’s due process rights.

The Ohio Supreme Court - State v. Cowan (103 Ohio St. 3d 144, 2004-Ohio-4777)(2004) struck down ORC955:11 which declared the "Pit Bull" vicious, because it violates our rights to be heard (due process).

Westbury, NY (Spring 2003) court ruled that the city’s BSL was unconstitutional and repealed the law.

Organizations against Breed Specific Legislation:
American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA)
The American Kennel Club (AKC)
The United Kennel Club (UKC)
American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA)
Dog Legislation Council of Canada (DLCC)
American Temperament Testing Society (ATTS)
National Animal Control Association (NACA)
Maryland Veterinary Medicine Association
Humane Society of the United States (HSUS)
American Canine Foundation (ACF)

• Some common myths about Pit Bulls
“Pit Bulls have locking jaws.” Pit Bulls are members of the canine species and have the same jaw structure as any other dog. If they had a special enzyme or other mechanism allowing them to lock their jaws, we would have to reclassify them as a different species.

“Pit Bulls are aggressive toward people.” Pit Bulls have never been bred for human aggression. In fact, Pit Bulls were bred to be loyal, tolerant, and loving toward people, especially children.

“Pit Bulls attack more than other breeds.” Not true, bite reports are inaccurate and do
not factor in population vs. bites. For instance: 10 attacks by a Doberman relative to a total population of 10 dogs implies a different risk than 10 attacks by a Labrador relative to a population of 1000 dogs. (A community approach to dog bite prevention, AVMA
taskforce report)

Pit Bulls are also productive, active members of society working in: search and rescue; narcotics
detection; hospital therapy; U.S. Customs; the service dog area; educational programs; and more.
Pit Bull Rescue Central (PBRC) is an on-line virtual shelter and educational resource center. We
have been on-line since 1996 and received our 501 ( c ) 3 non-profit status in 2002. PBRC is staffed entirely by volunteers who come from across the United States, Canada and Europe.
PBRC works tirelessly to promote spaying and neutering, to educate the public, to present positive
pit bull images, and encourage responsible pit bull ownership.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Key
Upvote 0

encouraging loves animals

formerly known as encouragng_angels
May 31, 2004
39,026
595
39
South East Victoria
Visit site
✟64,317.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Labor
My dog has tempermental streak, she wasn't brought from a proper breeder, i expect at least one of her parents was aggressive. She more fear aggressive. She is nervous dog-genetics is part of it.
SHe is well trained and is mostly a well manner dog. But to be on the safe side we muzzle her when we have visiter and take her out for walks.
 
Upvote 0

Sabina41

Well-Known Member
Oct 27, 2005
573
46
41
Maryland
Visit site
✟944.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Breed specific bans are simply ways of getting around the harder problem of making owners be responsible. Believe me, it's harder to get an owner to do something than to get a dog to do somethign. Still, breed specific bans are not the way to go.
 
Upvote 0

comana

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Jan 19, 2005
7,934
4,501
Colorado
✟1,126,242.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I really don't agree with breed bans. This is not the solution but a poorly applied band-aid.

Some breeds have been targeted because they are more likely to cause severe or fatal injury, but this is a direct result of poor owner training/handling and poor breeding practices.

It should be obvious that the majority of dogs that fall into these banned breed categories have never attacked, but the few that do become headlines and create panic.

The majority of dog bites come from breeds that have no stigma associated with them. It is difficult for a chihuahua to kill a human but small breeds account for more bites than pit bulls.

Beloved pets are becoming outlaws when these bans take affect. Pets that have never shown agression or any inclination to be dangerous.
 
Upvote 0

ChristianMilitaryWife

Active Member
Dec 27, 2006
158
26
✟22,932.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Some breeds have been targeted because they are more likely to cause severe or fatal injury

While this is the excuse and criteria they use it's really false. No one breed is more liable to bit then another. I have a friend who has two pits and a Chihuahua in her house. The Chihuahua is the one to be afraid of. Same thing in my house... I have a huge Great Dane/ Saint Bernard mix puppy and he is literally petrified of my Chihuahua. It isn't the breed that makes a biter it's how they are trained and handled.
 
Upvote 0

Key

The Opener of Locks
Apr 10, 2004
1,946
177
Visit site
✟26,507.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
True, but who is going to admit that a Yorkshire Terrier bit them into submission, really?

So, it's always gotta be a big dog, a mean dog, a Pit Bull, yah, that sounds though, a Pit Bull done got me!

Just like "You should have seen the one that got away"

It's all hype.. a Pit Bull is any dog that has bit someone.... or so the media thinks...

God Bless
 
Upvote 0

qpmomma

The Internet Elf
Nov 4, 2005
702
39
41
Indiana
✟23,554.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I don't like banning breeds either. When I moved into my apartment they had a list of banned breeds.

I was walking my beagle one day and someone was walking thier beagle. I asked if it was friendly, and the owner said no.

Now, I can't have a rottie b/c they are "agressive" dogs, but this person can have an agressive beagle. It doesn't make any sense to me.

Christina
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.