posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 01:31 PM
Having read the article, the following can be stated:
This is nothing new, infact this has been around for years, and there is a history in the US of doing such. During World War I and World War II, the
german shepard was an unpopular dog to own and some suggested banning such.
Having read the law that is propsed, there are a few things that can be stated, one is that it is not banning one breed, but those that are deemed as
being dangerous to the general public. This would include, based off of the data that is collected, any and all breeds that are known or have been
shown to be agressive, if there are any bites or known deaths specific to one particular breed.
The problem is, that the pit bull has a bad history in this country. At one time, if you look back at the popular media, it was the all american dog,
every home had one. Even looking back at the old Our gang or Little Rascals, the dog known as Pete, was a pit bull. From my own experience, having
worked for a humane society, they were very lovable and just wanted attention from anyone. But that has been changed, bred to bring out their more
agressive nature, to where they were used in dog fighting.
It is this agressive nature of theirs, the want and drive to fight, is what should be addressed, not the species. Even the dog whisperer, Ceaser
Milan, who is known to work with and rehabilitate these kinds of animals will state, that it is not the breed, but the people. The laws should
reflect this, rather than just to ban one breed or as they could be damaging or harmful. What is not taken into consideration about this kind of law,
or any like this is that dogs have been bred for traits from the dawn of time.
Man has domesticated the wild dog to be a companion, then bred for fur color, or size, or to resist water, or to hunt, and even to protect. And no
one ever thought about it having a negative impact on the dog, when they go through this form of selective breeding, to keep one particular trait or
another going. And people find these traits to be desirable.
Nor does this law address things like what is the responsiblity of the state, when it comes to say those who have said animals as family pets, or even
what sort of compensation that they can give to those families who will have to give up their family pet, in order to follow the law.
It is only a symptom and this law is a bandaid. Right now it is pit bulls that appear to be the target, what is next say the home owner that likes
exotic pets such as scorpions, or the person who has parrots as pets? ARe they going to be targeted next cause some one could get bit or hurt due to
the nature of those animals?