|
BREED BANNING "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! The 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!
●Another reason banning does not work is the fact that the dogs being used to fight or as weapons are owned and controlled by people that ALL READY BREAK THE LAW. Bans will not stop them from continuing to use these dogs in unlawful ways. Where is the logic in thinking a drug user or seller that has no care for obeying laws will suddenly obey dog breed bans??? The drug users/sellers are already breaking laws. Dog fighting is a federal offense.
●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 home 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.
CLICK HERE TO VIEW OUR BREED PHOTO PAGE. SEE IF YOU CAN GUESS THE CORRECT BREED! ●YOU MAY READ THE POSITION STATEMENTS REGARDING BREED BANNING OF THE WELL KNOWN AND RESPECTED ORGANIZATIONS LISTED BELOW BY CLICKING ON THE NAME OF THE ORGANIZATION. AMERICAN ANIMAL HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION
NATIONAL ANIMAL CONTROL ASSOCIATION AMERICAN VETERINARY MEDICAL ASSOCIATION
|
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.
I can list 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.
©Kyleewood Kennels 2007