Amazon.com Widgets
  • Pit Bulls account for 90% of fatal maulings EVERY year for the past 20 years.

    This is not about fluffy dogs or discrimination or the owners. The US takes a stand against KILLER BEES, not all Bees. We watch out for black widow spiders in particular. The statistics PROVE that pit bulls are very dangerous even when they show great behavior with their owners. Read the news and open your eyes. Pit bulls kill without provocation many times to complete surprise by their owners. Don't get fooled by the words that try to make this sound unfair. Any animal that is exceptionally dangerous by nature needs to be regulated.

  • Where it is necessary.

    Yes, I am in favor of breed-specific legislation, because there are some breeds of animals that need regulation and some that don't. Pit bulls need regulation, but cute little white fluffy dogs probably do not. There is no sense in regulating a breed that doesn't need regulating, just because that is somehow more fair.

  • No breed specific legislation

    “Humans buy me… Humans over breed me… Humans cut off my ears… Humans beat me… Humans make me fight… and i’m the one you want to ban? I’m the one who gets the bad rap? I’m the one you fear??”(ARR 1) Because dog bites are sometimes deadly, lawmakers decided to ban certain breeds of dogs by imposing breed specific legislations to try to reduce dog bite rates. Breed-specific legislation (BSL) is the blanket term for laws that either regulate or ban certain dog breeds in an effort to decrease dog attacks on humans and other animals.States should not have breed-discriminatory laws because it is a form of discrimination, it affects public safety, and dogs of the banned breed are sometimes innocent.
    To begin, breed-specific laws are a form of discrimination. According to Global Animal, animal shelters put down dogs based on looks, and first perception not giving the dogs a chance to prove their personality. That means lots of innocent dogs are killed in shelters for no good reason. Since people know racism is wrong, how can people not see that breed specific legislation is also discrimination, only against dogs.”If a dog has certain physical characteristics (like a square head or barrel chest), they may be labeled a ‘pit bull’ regardless of their actual breed.” The definition of discrimination is the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things. And this is exactly what we are doing to dogs.
    Also, breed-specific legislation affects public safety. Breed-specific laws harm rather than improve public safety. The ASPCA says that,“guardians of banned breeds may be deterred from seeking routine veterinary care, which can lead to outbreaks of rabies and other diseases that endanger communities. Breed-specific laws may also have the unintended consequence of encouraging irresponsible dog ownership.1” That means that when lawmakers impose breed specific laws, they just harm public safety, Instead of imposing leash laws and anti-tethering laws which would decrease the rate of urban violence among dogs.
    Most importantly, dogs of the banned breed are most of the time, innocent. According to ForAllAnimals “a dog, whether confined within the dwelling or otherwise, whose owners isolated them from regular, positive human interactions was three times more likely to have aggression than a dog whose owners kept them in or near the home and also integrated them into the family” This means that it is not the dog breed that means it is more likely to have aggression, it is the owner that is responsible. All of this means that we should have breed-specific laws.

  • NO Breed Specific Legislation

    “Humans buy me… Humans over breed me… Humans cut off my ears… Humans beat me… Humans make me fight… and i’m the one you want to ban? I’m the one who gets the bad rap? I’m the one you fear??”(ARR 1) Because dog bites are sometimes deadly, lawmakers decided to ban certain breeds of dogs by imposing breed specific legislations to try to reduce dog bite rates. Breed-specific legislation (BSL) is the blanket term for laws that either regulate or ban certain dog breeds in an effort to decrease dog attacks on humans and other animals.States should not have breed-discriminatory laws because it is a form of discrimination, it affects public safety, and dogs of the banned breed are sometimes innocent.
    To begin, breed-specific laws are a form of discrimination. According to Global Animal, animal shelters put down dogs based on looks, and first perception not giving the dogs a chance to prove their personality. That means lots of innocent dogs are killed in shelters for no good reason. Since people know racism is wrong, how can people not see that breed specific legislation is also discrimination, only against dogs.”If a dog has certain physical characteristics (like a square head or barrel chest), they may be labeled a ‘pit bull’ regardless of their actual breed.” The definition of discrimination is the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things. And this is exactly what we are doing to dogs.
    Also, breed-specific legislation affects public safety. Breed-specific laws harm rather than improve public safety. The ASPCA says that,“guardians of banned breeds may be deterred from seeking routine veterinary care, which can lead to outbreaks of rabies and other diseases that endanger communities. Breed-specific laws may also have the unintended consequence of encouraging irresponsible dog ownership.1” That means that when lawmakers impose breed specific laws, they just harm public safety, Instead of imposing leash laws and anti-tethering laws which would decrease the rate of urban violence among dogs.
    Most importantly, dogs of the banned breed are most of the time, innocent. According to ForAllAnimals “a dog, whether confined within the dwelling or otherwise, whose owners isolated them from regular, positive human interactions was three times more likely to have aggression than a dog whose owners kept them in or near the home and also integrated them into the family” This means that it is not the dog breed that means it is more likely to have aggression, it is the owner that is responsible. All of this means that we should have breed-specific laws.

  • No, it’s wrong

    Imagine if you were black and you were told you cannot life here or be here or you’ll be executed for being a vicious race. This is the same thing for pit bulls as their breed does not make them vicious, their owners make them vicious and use pit bulls because they are strong but they are no different than any other dog. I am not in favor of BSL

  • No, it’s wrong

    Imagine if you were black and you were told you cannot life here or be here or you’ll be executed for being a vicious race. This is the same thing for pit bulls as their breed does not make them vicious, their owners make them vicious and use pit bulls because they are strong but they are no different than any other dog. I am not in favor of BSL

  • Owners are at fault

    In my opinion, the research that he been done into this area show that in almost all cases, the owner is more responsible for the behavior of a pet than the actual breed of the dog. While some concern should be given to having certain breeds with more ill-tempered reputations in certain high population areas just to limit risk, outright bans over entire countries or territories of certain breeds is not necessary. Owners need to be more educated about properly raising a dog to prevent a fair number of more violent incidents.

  • No, bad owners create vicious animals

    No, I am not in favor of breed-specific legislation because bad owners are to blame for the poor reputations of certain breeds. No breed of dog or specific animal is born "bad" or dangerous, and it is poor ownership and training on the part of the human that results in attacks and other tragic situations.

  • No, I Do Not

    I am not in support of breed-specific legislation. These laws are generally targeted towards to pit bulls and they often make it sound as though this breed in inherently dangerous. As an owner of a pit bull I can assure you they are not inherently mean. I have had my dog since she was 8 weeks old and she's simply a huge baby. She is two now with zero signs of being aggressive or mean.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.