|
e-mail:
blurose@gmail.com
e-mail:
info@bluerosedoxies.com
"Dangerous animal behavior is
the function of inherently dangerous dog owners, not inherently
dangerous dogs."
The Question and Answer
format below is to help you understand breed
banning laws and the problems associated with
breed banning. For more information on breed
banning, please go to the AKC website at
http://www.akc.org/canine_legislation/index.cfm
What is dog breed
banning?
Breed banning is
a law that limits or prohibits the residents of
a municipality from owning or breeding specified
breeds of dogs or dog mixes.
What happens if I own
or keep a breed of dog listed in breeds banned
from my city, village or town?
Punishment for
breaking a breed ban law depends on the
lawmakers of your community. Usually fines are
given for breaking ban laws. Some municipalities
go as far as to list serving jail time as a
punishment for breaking ban laws.
What kind of dog or
breed is usually included in breed bans?
Pit bulls,
American Staffordshire Terriers, Bully type
mixes are usually the breeds or breed mixes
covered in most bans. Some cities go as far as
to ban Rottweilers and Mastiff breeds (Cane
Corso, Bull Mastiff, Neapolitan Mastiff).
What is to stop
lawmakers from adding dog breeds to the list of
banned breeds?
NOTHING! If
lawmakers in communities are permitted to ban
one breed of dog, there is nothing to stop them
from adding breeds to the "banned breeds" list.
Why
should I care if a community I do not live in
bans certain breeds of dogs? Their laws do not
apply to me.
Lawmakers across
the country pay close attention to laws passed
in other cities. If banning laws are allowed to
be passed in one part of the country or another
city, the chance that your lawmakers will
consider using the same law/s will increase.
Most municipalities do not want to spend the
money defending a law that will be overturned in
higher courts. If ban laws are allowed to stand
in other cities after being challenged it sets a
president for other cities, villages or
townships to follow. What happens in other
cities DOES affect decisions made by your
lawmakers.
I
have heard all Pit Bulls are dangerous!
Why not ban them?
A dog is only as
dangerous as it's owner allows it or trains it
to be. I have trained well over 5000 dogs. The
actual number of dogs I've handled in training
is probably closer to ten thousand than five
thousand. I have had hundreds of students in
class that owned Pit Bulls. I actually saw less
temperament issues in the Pits I handled than In
other breeds of dogs. The most important factor
in a dog's temperament, regardless of breed or
mix, is the quality of the nurturing and
training given to them by their owners.
Do
breed bans work in the way they were intended?
-
NO!
T he reason given most
by lawmakers for passing Pit Bull breed bans is to stop Dog
Fighting. Another reason is the frequency they see drug houses using
Pits as weapons against Police, and the frequency of Pit Bull
attacks on people or other animals. All of the problems just
mentioned are a social issue, NOT A DOG ISSUE. Take away The Pit
Bull breed, the same people will move onto another breed. As a
trainer I have seen thousands of small breed dogs that do not
hesitate using their teeth to solve their problems. This of course
is a behavior problem that was actually developed unintentionally by
the owner or a poor breeder. Because these dogs are very small, the
behavior is tolerated many times by the owners. When a large dog
reacts with any aggression it is seen as it should be in a much more
threatening manner. The fact remains though that all dogs can bite!
-
Most areas that Pit Bull attacks and dog fighting are seen in are
located in municipalities that are already incapable of enforcing
their dog laws. Many areas that ban these dogs still see the
dogs being used to fight or as weapons against people. Irresponsible
neighbors that use their dogs as threats against others will simply
find other breeds to use in this manner. Lawmakers would have to
rely on citizens to alert them to ban law breakers. Relying on
citizens to help the police uphold laws would be about as efficient
as looking for a needle in a haystack!. It is just not a feasible
way to enforce laws!
-
Breed bans will not and cannot work in the way intended. There is
always a large chance that dogs will mistakenly be taken and
euthanized because many times officers and humane agents are not
trained or skilled enough to make breed mix determinations. It is
also a fact that mixes of two purebreds can create offspring that
somewhat appear bully, but have no bully breeds in their lineage.
The result of this would be dogs being forcibly taken from their
owners and euthanized even though they are not pit or pit mixes.
Attempting to judge a dog's lineage, will always be GUESSING. The
thought of innocent dogs being put down is very upsetting indeed and
opens up another area for legal action against the communities that
ban these dogs.
-
Lawmakers should not take it upon themselves to dictate which breed
of dog the citizens they govern can or cannot own. Dogs are in most
cases considered family members by the people that own them. Once a
breed is banned in a community, where does it stop? Does it stop at
all? Laws to protect citizens are understandable when the laws are
reasonable and solve the problem they were meant for. Banning breeds
will not and cannot control a person that has no respect or care for
the law in the first place. Laws must be based on logic and have a
large degree of enforceability. With such an emotional and
controversial issue as breed banning, lawmakers must remember logic
and facts, not fear, panic or frustration when considering laws
meant to protect the people in their communities.
| ·
Insurance companies that provide hom
e owners insurance are
dropping insurance or refusing to cover home owners that own
and keep certain
breeds of dogs. Every year
this list grows. As breed bans increase so does the breeds
listed as refused by insurance companies. Insurance
companies are using breed ban laws as the foundation for
this practice. The most
common dogs on the list are Pit Bulls, Pit
Bull Terriers, and American Staffordshire Terriers. Several
companies have begun to include the following breeds to their list;
All mastiff type dogs (Cane Corso,
Neapolitan Mastiff,
Bull Mastiff etc) and all bully type
dogs. This includes the Bull Terrier..
you may recall this
breed if you watched the "Spuds Mackenzie" dog
commercials or the television series "Bah Bah Black Sheep". Other
breeds on lists include Chow Chows,
Shar Pei,
German
Shepherds (usually in the top ten of
AKC's most popular breeds of dogs), Siberian Huskies,
Doberman Pinschers,
Dalmatians and even
Labrador
Retrievers (1st many times in top ten
most popular breed of dog). Breed banning only feeds the
frenzy of insurance companies denying coverage for
homeowners that own dogs. For the dog lovers that
believe breed banning will work. Be careful, you may end up
feeling the "bite" of your very own insurance providers in
the near future. The "bite" that you helped inflict on
yourself. |
|
·
The last point I would like to make is to stress how
difficult the task of breed identification is. Most
municipalities do not have the funds to hire experts in dog
breed identification. Such a person would need an
extensive background in dogs as well as training in breed
identification and the genetics of dogs. Even then, there is a
high percentage of GUESSING involved. To show my point I am going to
post photographs of breeds that are in no way related to one another
yet appear very similar. Please take the time to view the
photographs. |
|
Please read the information below!
1. In the Netherlands when the
Pit Bull breed was banned, people began importing the following
breeds to use in their stead:
The
Presa Canario and
Bordeaux. As mentioned
previously, breed bans fail for the simple reason that people
who are motivated to interject danger into neighborhoods or use
dogs to support illegal activities will find other breeds to
accomplish such ends. Bordeaux are already in many homes
throughout our country. Since they have been purchased as pets
for the most part, the breed has not yet been ruined and very
few people are aware of the breed's existence.
2. Laws were passed in 1991 in
the United Kingdom banning four breeds of dogs:
The Pit Bull Terrier, Japanese
Tosa, Dogo Argentino, and
Fila Braziliero.
After enacting the breed bans, a study by
the Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Department of Accident and
Emergency, confirmed that the number of dog bites was
unaffected. B. Heady and P. Krause, "Health Benefits and
Potential Public Savings Due to Pets: Australian and German
Survey Results," cited in Australian Social Monitor, Vol.2,
No.2, May 1999.
3. In Japan, the
Shiba, Akita
and
Toza are regarded as the
most dangerous breeds of dogs. The Shiba Inu is still a new
breed when compared to other breeds in the United States. A dog
of small to medium build, they are considered family pets here.
The Akita is a strong powerful dog with a thick fur coat but not
a problem in this country for the simple fact that this breed,
luckily has not been singled out by the wrong people. Each
country has different breeds of dogs they may consider
dangerous. This confirms that breeds in themselves are not
dangerous until owners cause the dog regardless of the breed to
be used in a dangerous manner.
There are many more examples of the
failing of breed bans. They all verify the fact that breed
banning does not serve the purpose it is meant to. Punishment
must be more harsh for the owners of dangerous dogs or those who
sponsor and hold illegal dog fights. Using dogs as weapons
against police should be a federal offense (with automatic jail
time) as well as considered dog abuse. |
| |
Here's an Article that the AKC Has put on
their site!
|
Writen By: Terry
Copyright to: Terry
This page is not to be copied without writen
permission by Terry of
Kyleewood Kennels |
|
