In the 1950s, bully breeds were America's dogs, but today "dangerous dog" laws and breed restrictions are in place in many states and counties.
What do you think is a dangerous dog? What kind of dogs do you think fall under the breed restrictions? Why do you think so?
The ASPCA's position is to oppose any state or local law to regulate or ban dogs based on breed. Do you agree or disagree with the ASPCA? Why or why not? The ASPCA favors effective enforcement of breed neutral laws that include, enhanced enforcement of dog license laws--making sure dogs are properly licensed in each county within a specified amount of time, enhanced enforcement of leash/dog-at-large laws, focus on the behaviors of owners and dogs--obedience training, muzzling, supervision and etc, laws that hold owners financially and criminally liable for failure to follow animal control laws and laws that prohibit chaining or tethering.
Do you think that imposing these laws would decrease the fear of the bully breed? Why or why not? Do you think if these laws were imposed in our state it would make bully breed owners more responsible? Why or why not? Do you think insurance companies should be allowed to deny homeowners insurance to people who own a dog from the bully breed category? Why or why not? You can find information on the ASPCA positions and policies at the following link;
http://www.aspca.org/about-us/policy-positions/
Policies on Dangerous Dogs
Thanks for your thoughts!
Amber
Thanks for your thoughts!
Amber
12 comments:
I don't feel like there are any dangerous breeds of dogs only dangerous dog owners. Anyone can make any breed of dog dangerous, by beating them or starving them or through other means. I agree with the ASPCA on opposing any state or local law banning a particular breed. Dogs by nature are loving and caring and it's not until they are introduced to bad behavior that they become this way. I have a black lab/Rottweiler mix and he absolutely loves children and cannot stand for loud obnoxious noises. Yes he barks loud and sounds mean, but anyone can come up to him and pet him without any trouble.
I do not think by imposing these types of bans that people will ever get over their fear of certain breeds, my fear is of little dogs the ones that bite your ankles when your not looking yea I dislike little dogs. I do think there should be a ban on carrying a dog in a purse or a handbag that is plain ridiculous and if you have to carry your dog then what you have is a large hamster not a dog. As a dog owner I don't feel like an insurance company should be able deny people homeowners insurance because of a breed of dog and I do believe all dogs should be required to have all their shots and be registered with the city, county or state in which they live. All dog owner should be responsible for their animals and pay any fines, fees or penalties imposed, because for me the dogs are just like a family member and you would have to pay for a family to get out of trouble just like you have to do when your dog gets in to trouble.
Buddy Carpenter
i think there should be a ban on the bully breeds.These dogs were bred to be agressive and they can become dangerous very quickly. I think there are three breeds of dogs that should be banned completely. The pitbull, rottweiler, and the presa canario. The dogerman pinsechers were the dog of choice,for protection, but these other dogs have made them look like poodles. i think imposing the law would help to decrease the bully breed.I think there would be less people getting mualed. it should be the homeowners responsibility and they should have to pay alot more for insurance.denying homeowners will increase the burden if something serious would happen. It would be like driving a car underinsured; you are going to still have to pay
kevin h
I believe all dogs could be dangerous. Without proper training, the dogs could be vicious animals. For example: look at bears, lions, elephants they are wild, but when they have proper training, such as in the circus, they can be very gentle animals. It’s the same thing with dogs.
I agree with ASPCA’s position. I do think that imposing these laws would decrease the bully breeds. The dog should always be on a leash. Maybe people are allergic to them or cannot touch dogs for a certain reason. If each dog had to be licensed, and if the dog got out of control and bit someone you would know where to find the owner. It’s the owner’s responsibility to train their dogs, and to keep them from hurting others. In cases where the dog was trained to be a guard dog then the owners should leave them in a fenced in yard big enough to run around in. If the laws were imposed in this state, I believe it might make owners more responsible. But then you would have to think about illegal dog fighting. I think people would hide the dogs knowing that they may be illegal, or not registered, in return not letting the public know that they have a vicious dog. If someone were to get bitten no one would know who the owner is.
No, I don’t think insurance companies should deny homeowners insurance based on owning a bully dog. Owning a house has nothing to do with owning a dog. But, if you asked if owners for apartment could deny you for the apartment I think the answer is “yes”. No one wants to live around a bully dog that might get loose and risk their child getting hurt.
Lori
I believe that bully breeds should not be banned, although the person who is eventually taking in this 'dangerous dog' should have experience in handling with these types of dogs. In my opinion, when I hear the term 'dangerous dogs', I always think of the big dogs such as a bulldog mastiff, not so much of the medium size dogs with an awful attitude, because those dogs can also be extremely dangerous.
I disagree with the ASPCA because all dogs should have a chance to have owners regardless of the size or breed of the dog, some of the biggest dogs are sometimes also the nicest dogs in the world. It really just depends on the dogs background, how it was raised and taken care of as a puppy, to determine if this dog is actually a 'dangerous dog'.
The main word here is really responsibility. If an owner is not responsible for their dog's actions, then they should not ever have been owning a dog in the first place. It is the same way with kids, if they don't choose to raise them right and to teach them to behave, they should have never had kids in the first place. Owners need to get to know their dog and everything about it, train the dog, love the dog, and the dog will no longer be dangerous. An obedient dog is not a dangerous dog, but an in-obedient dog has a very high risk of being a dangerous dog.
Jake Bock
Wild dogs should be the only dogs that are dangerous. But sadly there are really stupid and inhumane people out there that fight their dogs, and give “bully breeds” are bad rep. Pit Bulls are a loving breed, but have such a bad reputation because of irresponsible owners. I actually encountered two pit bulls today on two different occasions, and even as a dog owner and lover they scared me; mainly because they came up to me barking. But one ran straight to me with the deep bark and did nothing but drool down my leg. It sparked a conversation between my husband and me. Why did they scare me? It’s simple what’s more scary a beefy pit bull or a black lab? Their size and their bark are intimidating, and for that I think many people are scared of them. But they don’t have to be—I don’t have to be. Bully breeds are being banned because of people’s fears and the vicious attacks on people and animals. The bans and the laws all steam from people. It’s not the dogs fault, it’s the humans fault.
Heather Denam
I do not think that any dog is dangerous unless they are raised and allowed to act that way. That being said, I wouldn't put any breed under a dangerous category. I have been around german shepherds my whole life, and they only pose a threat to outsiders who are trying to break in or who aren't welcome. I also know pit bulls that are the same way. Dogs are supposed to protect their family, so I don't consider them doing that to be dangerous.
I do agree with ASPCA. States should not be in control of what kind of dog people can have. The government already controls a lot, they shouldn't have a say in our dogs! I do think that imposing those laws would decrease fear of the so called "bully breeds". Owners should be held responsible for the way they allow their dogs to act. If their dog attacks someone, they should definitely be reprimanded in some way for that happening. No, insurance companies should not be allowed to deny someone home insurance because of a dog unless there has already been a report giving reason for why the dog is dangerous.
-Hannah Miller
I think all dogs can be considered dangerous, in one way or another. I in particular don’t really know anything about dogs but, I think that in terms of BREED that Pit bulls, Rockwilders, and German Shepards are the most dangerous. I believe that anything that is breed with a pit should be restricted. Pit bulls have an incredible jaw structure which allows them to deliver a vicious bite. They are also known for locking on the neck of their prey until it is strangled, or has passed over from all the bleeding. They are also known to become disobedient in their ladder years. So a once obedient favored friend of the family, will probably grow up to be a spontaneous and incompetent nuisance. I agree that the ASPCA should ban dogs based on breed, because if you don’t raise them from a pup then, it will come back to bite you later on in life--figuratively and literally. Dogs are more than pets, they are a responsibility. I can see why they want them registered and put on a leash. I think that it’s a safety procedure that protects pedestrians, the dog, and its owner. I think this law would decrease the phobia of “Bully Breeds” but, it would not stop them from being breed--especially in the underground world. In terms of insurance policies, I think that it would be more fair if the bully bread owners gets a higher rate on their insurance. This is because the insurance companies feel that the bully breeds are a threat, and a liability technically speaking.
Pikachu
Alex
I don’t think it should matter what kind of breed you have because you can always train a dog the way you want. You can have a usually nice breed be really mean and you can have a normally mean breed be nice. All my buddies have pits and I’d trust them with kids. My girlfriend has a jack rat and it’s a good dog, but it’s a little on the rowdy side, where her dad’s is real calm. I really don’t see a different in breeds. I do think laws should be enforced just because the fact you never know when a dog can snap. In my opinion if someone wants a certain breed they should be able to go for it, but they just need to follow laws on taking care of it and have it trained just right. A license would be nice though because it shows you have a responsibility and you know what it is.
I believe that these so- called bully breeds should not be banned. They are dogs just like any other dog. If you think about it, most dogs could be considered dangerous. Any dog can be just as dangerous as the next. I also believe that even though they might be dangerous, there are benefits in keeping them. Many people have dogs as protection. They might be more aggressive than other dogs, which makes for a better protection dog. I know several people who own dogs as a form of protection, but love them like a pet. I do also believe that if you have a dog that you know is a bit more aggressive than other dogs that you should be more careful and take proper precautions to ensure that people around that dog does not get harmed, but they should not be banned entirely. Banning these dogs would be like banning an entire race of people because they are considered ‘bullies.’
Ayah
I do believe there are some breeds of dogs (Pit Bulls,German Shepherds,Rottweiler etc.)that are more dangerous because the are trained as guard or attack dogs. These dogs are more likely to cause serious injury when they bite. There is no such truth to the idea that "my dog won't bite." Any dog will bite under the right circumstances.
I don't however believe there should be breeding restrictions for certain breeds. What I do believe is that there should be greater penalties for owners of dogs who are not responsible enough to ensure that their dog doesn't bite anyone that is not an intruder on their person or property. I'm sure that some of the aforementioned breeds fall under breeding restrictions, but as I said I am against breeding restrictions. Therefore I would agree with The ASPCA. I do believe that dogs do need to be chained or tethered when in open public spaces, or when the owner doesn't have an enclosed area to allow their dog to freely roam.
Yes, I believe that tougher enforcement on dog laws would make owners of bully breeds more responsible. We've seen greater responsibility by owners of these breeds because of recent court rulings when some of these types of dogs have attacked people.
No I don't think that insurance companies should be allowed to deny insurance to owners of bully breeds. I do feel that the insurance company should not have to pay on claims where the owners of such dogs are found to be negligent in ensuring that their dog is secure or enclosed to the point that the dog cannot bite.
Khattab
I don't think any dog is a dangerous dog. I think that an animal has animal instincts to eat and survive. I think that the reason these dogs are considered dangerous is because of the people that breed them. I think that they should enforce more on the humans who are breeding dogs to fight and be dangerous. I think there should be tougher laws and fines. I think that if this was implemented more then the dangerous breeds will become extinct. To take away a dog given right to protect what he thinks is his home or family, is like taking that right away from a human being.
Makeisha Riley
"Bully breed" dogs shouldn't be banned. I want to know why these dogs are even called “bully dogs”. Dogs may be mislabeled due to an isolated encounter with a human or another dog/animal. These types of dogs are being stereotyped because some owners what to train them to be aggressive. This is why people see them as the main aggressive dogs and are afraid of them. A dangerous dog is a dog that attacks anything and everything no matter what, sometimes even without being provoked. The thing is that any dog can be trained to do things like that. Chihuahuas can be trained, but why don't people see the little breeds as bully dogs also? I think it is simply because they are cute. I recently had a Rottweiler and he looked like he was a monster ready to kill but he was the nicest dog you would ever meet. Also just because a dog appears nice doesn't mean you can't provoke it and cause it to act as an aggressive dog. I don't agree with the ASPCA because the fact that a dog might have just bitten someone doesn't mean they are out just to hurt any person they might come into contact with.
Robert McClinton
Post a Comment