Quote:
Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll
How does everyone feel about the humane societies and the AMVA/CMVA saying that breed specific laws are not the answer? These are probably the more knowledgeable people on the matter, should we not be looking at their input in the matter?
|
I don’t think having a special interest group dictate public safety policy is a good thing. How AARCS and Humane Society and the hundred other animal loving groups feel about things should be of very little consequence when it comes to policy decisions. They all do great work no doubt, but obviously have a view that leans pretty hard in one direction.
Honest question, because I haven’t seen the stats (other than the odd news article reference). Has any pit bull ever been adopted from a ‘rescue’ agency, commites a violent act, and been pre-identified as being violent? It seems to me the stories are always ‘never had issues’ or ‘otherwise a gentle loving dog’ yada yada yada. If the groups and people in positions to identify aggressive dogs are unable, how can a family who sees a cute face and puppy dog eyes be expected to?
The day I meet someone who can accurately predict their dog will bite, I’ll maybe give some credence to the idea that breed specific bans aren’t good. Until then, it’s Russian roulette.
And again, most of these owners do a huge injustice to their dogs in the first place. These aren’t breeds designed to sit in a yard all day. You better be running that dog well last the point you think is enough. When your dog is pulling you along a walk, that’s a pretty solid indication it has a hell of a lot more energy than you are allowing it to express.