Should some dog breeds be banned?
The recent controversy over the contention of municipalities to ban certain dog breeds (you know who you are) due to aggressiveness, provoked predictable outrage from doggie debaters who fear a repeat of Ontario’s reaction to dog related near death expeiences. Ontario has banned pit bulls.
The axiom, that there are no bad dogs, only bad dog owners, came under particular scrutiny on my broadcast this week. The postulate falls short when it comes to the nature of the ramifications of bad dog ownership: if you mistreat, or otherwise brutalize a poodle, the consequences are marginal; kids don’t die of poodle dog mauling.
The same isn’t true of Pit bulls, Doberman’s, and their ilk.
Say whatever you want, how can you really argue with my logic regarding ramifications?
If even one child is saved, or if even one person is saved from being maimed, isn’t it worth it to give up on certain breeds? Remember, specific dog breeds are not fundamental to human survival or to quality of life. It is an aesthetic choice, analogous to hand gun ownership.
I enjoy target shooting with pistols but I would give it up knowing that fewer handguns in circulation means less access. Period.
So, what about the black market in banned breeds or firearms for that matter? At least it is marginalized and subject to prosecution, despite the fact that a black market in animals means more abuse of the animals themselves.
I never did understand the over-emoted approach many have to their breed loyalties. For many, it supersedes their human affections.
All it will take is for one serious mauling or dead kid for the public to turn, as they have in Ontario.
Do you remember that tacky example of extreme kitsch that is that bizarre 1870 painting by Cassius Coolidge? Well, dogs don’t play cards. Not even Poker.
But, for many, George Orwell’s Animal Farm is something to be desired.
In that one, dogs vote when pigs rule.
May 27th, 2008 at 6:57 am
I totally agree with you on this matter. I do not trust these breeds of dogs at all, don’t get me wrong I like dogs. Where I reside all of my neighbors have dogs one is a chocolate lab which is very friendly, on the other side there is a golden retriever also very friendly, then behind me there is a doberman which makes me very nervous as I have a 2 years old son. This dog will pace the fence back and forth just watching my son he also barks and growls at us constantly. I think that there should be some kind of regulation on these dogs. I should not be afraid to let my child play in his own backyard
May 27th, 2008 at 7:33 am
Tougher penalties for owners who allow their dogs to become vicious, such as banned for life from owning dogs.
May 27th, 2008 at 9:03 am
It is true that certain breeds of dogs tend to be more aggressive than others, with the large aggressive dogs being a threat. I think that no matter on the breed, the owner of a large dog should have special training on how to control large dogs. Just because the breed is not known to be aggressive, does not mean that it cannot be dangerous. The dogs behavior depends on the training, environment in which it lives and genetics. I don’t not think that certain breeds should be banned, however I do believe that if you are to own a large, potentially aggressive dog it should be necessary to have plenty of confined space in which it can freely rome. It is more likely for a dog to feel threatened in small highly populated/crowded space. As long as the dog is properly trained and cared for in proper living environments there should be no restrictions on the breed of dog you are allowed to own.
May 27th, 2008 at 10:32 am
Hi Andrew,
This is not a comment on your blog ( I didn’t know how else to reach you), except to say you write well and have vaery clear opinions……it is just a follow up to our conversation in the parking lot of Mont Blanc last evening..:):):)
I’m interested in having you take a look at my books…a writing style very different from yours…and probably a vastly differing ideology?
But I’d like to get your feedback and see if our lines intersect at any point.
Can I drop them off somewhere before I leave tomorrow am for a mother/daughter fling in Tor?
Thx Dianne
May 27th, 2008 at 4:29 pm
My family dog, Zora is a German Shepherd. We as owners took her to obedience class when she was small so that we could learn how to discipline a dog. My son was four at the time, and later we added another bundle to the family. Zora was three, nearly at the age of relaxing, and she proved that with guidance and responsibility of her owners she would never feel threatened to bite a child. Or else I become a lazy dog owner no one should feel threatened around my beautiful friend or else of course you break house rules. It is damn right ridiculous to band a breed of dog. If you own a dog take care of it and if a moment comes that you need to be protected your dog will try to rescue you, after all wouldn’t any or your companions do the same.
While living in Alberta I was told I would have to pay to have my dog licensed. I found this odd because the only way you would need a license is if you let her loose and it bites someone. I lived there for two years, and I put my money into the expensive dog food. I never had a problem. This wouldn’t solve the problem here in the Maritimes either. The bottom line is if Momma raised a fool then hopefully the dog will teach it something.
May 29th, 2008 at 10:04 am
Of all the things that could cause harm to people, dog attacks are relatively rare. Sure, it’s horrible if I kid gets attacked, but is it any less horrible when a kid dies in a car crash. Should be ban certain models of cars that have more of a tendency to be driven fast?
Why harp on the “dog lobby” for at least three shows? We live in a democracy. If there is that many people who disagree with the ban, why do you consider the government to have “caved in”? They are supposed to enact the will of the people.
How many people are hurt by cigarettes and tobacco each year? Why aren’t you harping on those lobbies?
June 10th, 2008 at 7:42 am
Darn right some breeds are more dangerous, only a fool makes the arguement that there isn’t!!!
The problem we face and the question here is, what to do about dog owners who like owning a dog that has a greater potiental to inflict devistating injuries? I agree that everyone probably knows someone who owns a “Pitbull” (you can substitute any of the breeds in question, Pitbull’s get most of the press), who is a softy and wouldn’t hurt a fly. That same person has also heard the stories of a “Pitbull” who has killed or severly mamed, and the owner of that dog, says something like “My dog has never done anything like this before?”.
I would love to ban “these” dogs, however given our rights and freedoms I don’t think it’s proper to simply do this. Yes there are great dog owners who can properly train there dogs, and also know the limitations of owning a dangerous breed and act accordingly (like the caller who said here dog is harmless yet wouldn’t let it loose around kids or other dogs because it was more agressive in it’s nature than her other dog which was raised the same way).
I think we have to protect ourselves and our children from bad dog owners. My solution, when you get your dog (make it any breed so we can’t be accused of being discrimatory) you sign a document (on the registration perhaps) which states that the owner is responsible for the actions of the animal. If the dog somehow manages to attack someone, that’s an assult charge for the owner, dog kills someone, that’s a murder charge (manslaughter thru to 1st degree) depending on the circumstances.
I think that would make some owners think twice when making the choice between a lapdog and an attack dog for their next family pet.
June 16th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
While I appreciate the fact that a larger dog with a larger jaw can inflict more damage than a smaller dog, I have to say that the owner must be the one to be held accountable for the pet’s actions. Dogs, any dogs, should not be loose, even on your front lawn. At all times they must be on a leash, in a fenced yard etc.
I live in a rural area, and yes…you guessed it..not one but two rottweilers. Both rescued from shelters, both gorgeous animals. I have an eight year old child and never, ever…has he been alone with these dogs. Never have my dogs mingled with people without being on a leash. As far as I’m concerned they are terriers in a large body. Sweet temperments, loyal and obedient. But because I am responsible, I don’t take anything for granted and do not take risks. This should be the way with every breed of the dog, not just the intimidating breeds.
It is the owners that have to be taken to task. Not the breed of dog. Make the fines higher for having our dog off the leash, make us pay more money to license our dogs. How do you police banning a breed? What if it is a cross breed? Can’t be done. Would cost the taxpayers a lot more to ban a breed than to seize more dogs and hold more people accountable.
August 5th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
Ok honestly everyone would have to admit that certain breeds are typically more potentially agressive such as pit bulls. And i know everyone would be arguing saying “ohh its always the owners fault and never the dogs” Thats not always the case. Its like saying all pit bull owners are horrible owners but its not the truth. Sure a owner can train a dog well but u cant train instinct or a temperment that its born with. Children, adults and dogs are dieing and having severe injuries due to some of these breeds so isnt it worth it? Even though some individual animals of the breeds are extrodinary animals and are very loving. And how half the world thinks whatever no big deal if it happens then just say they cant own another dog? What if it was provoked? and the owner couldent do much about it? and how you can only find out about these owners through other peoples injuries and deaths?