Agree, it doesn't matter the size, if your nasty to it, it will be nasty back, or you let it do whatever the hell it wants, and let go feral. To a child, even a small dog can be frighting.
Although there are breeds which do require more firm hand than some others, like Staffy, Pitbull, Alsatians and even Jack russel, bitely little bastards they are.
But the problem with the "its a people problem, not a problem with dogs" is that it is insanely hard to make laws limiting people from doing things. Putting up a dog-lincense would take ALOT of work, since there need to be a general rule set for nearly every dog breed. There would need to be people, who uphold this law, teams going out and checking all kennels and every sale of a dog needs to have new paperwork instigated.
Also, people have a tendency to not follow rules, which makes the specific dog breeds, who are breed for fighting, free to run around, if not for the ban. Having a ban makes thing pretty easy to regulate. If people see a dog of a specific breed, they can report them and the police can come around. With a single picture, the police will know that there is no mistake and things will be dealt with.
With a dog-license, police are gonna see a huge work load pushed onto them, because people are surely gonna "false" report some owners, who actually do have the license.
May the lore be great and the stories interesting. A game without a story, is a game without a soul. Value the lore and it will reward you with fun!
Don't let yourself be satisfied with what you expect and what you seem as obvious. Ask for something good, surprising and better. Your own standards ends up being other peoples standard.
The dogs bred for fighting are also bred to NOT be human aggressive. Yes, they're different. Yes, you can breed for both.
The problem really is that people think it's their god-given right to slap together two dogs with shit personalities, breed shit dogs, label it a [x] breed, sell it to shit owners, that do shit for training and socializing, and when it inevitably bites someone the rest of the world looks at them and says "see, i told you [x] breed was dangerous".
Go ahead and ban the breed in favor of "omg, it's too hard". We tried this with G. Sheps. With Rotts. With Chows. With "Pitbulls" (which are *different* from Staffies, which are replacing "Pitbulls" - said "pitbulls" being a catchphrase for badly mixed bully breeds in general, most aptly demonstrated with the "American Bully" bullshit.).
Charge the owners with a crime if there dog attacks and injures someone without warrant. If someone trespasses on your property then I say that by law the owner wouldn't be responsible for the dog attacking but anything off of the owners property, the owner would be responsible for their dog attacking someone. I don't know anything about the other banned breeds of dogs but I agree on banning pit bulls.
But the problem is not always human aggresive. Some dog breeds are banned, because if they interact with other animals, they go crazy. It is hard to put a note on a dog breed with "only allowed within walled areas". Dogs are gonna be outside and meet other dogs, its pretty hard to avoid it, so when some dogs are breed(its in their genes) to fight other animals, its very hard to train that away or to suppres it.
You are very right, that people have some delusion that owning a dog/kat(also kid) is something, which we all have the right to: We have the right to not be alone, if we can buy the company. And it does create shitty behavier and shitty, but you try to promote the "you don't have a right to a dog" policy and you will see that people are very much against it. So sure, they are very good reasons to have limitations on people getting animals, but people don't care. They just want to have the right.
May the lore be great and the stories interesting. A game without a story, is a game without a soul. Value the lore and it will reward you with fun!
Don't let yourself be satisfied with what you expect and what you seem as obvious. Ask for something good, surprising and better. Your own standards ends up being other peoples standard.
Or, you know, just enforce a "your dog must be spayed / neutered unless you have a breeding license" law. Which would drop 1) the stray population and 2) the aggression of some dogs.
Fighting dogs also aren't bred to go mad and attack wildly whenever they see another dog. Shitty people breeding shitty dogs, yes. The actual breeds? Not so much. How do you keep more than one fighting dog if seeing another dog drives it into a frenzy, exactly?
Every behavior people rail against starts in the same place: shitty owners. Work on owner education, not BSL that accomplishes shit.
This is usually done but at the same time, some types of dogs are sought after by a certain type of people, people that should not have dogs or animals at all.
So yeah, these laws won't work as it's generally the owners fault when a dog turns dangerous.
If they can't find a pit bull they'll pick something else and after a while we won't have ny dog breeds left.
That would helped with the problem in 10-15 years, but it would do very little to solve a current problem. Also, people/politicians are very good at accepting laws, which only starts working in +5 years.
Yes, that is pretty much some dogs are breed. You take the most aggresive dog in a litter and breed with another aggresive dog in a litter. You keep doing that for 50 generations and you got a dog, which dont need to provoked before showing aggresive behavier. But that is often suppresed or can be suppresed through trainning and distance from other dogs. But it is something, which is in them and can easily be pulled out by some event. But as said before, shitty people can make shitty dogs, even peaceful dogs can, with a new owner, become shitty dogs.
While i agree, that working on making better education for dog owners is good, it is not a solution in anyway. People are lazy and getting the trainning is often too much to ask of some people. Having laws, who are pretty simple (which a ban law often is) is often a solution, which has the quickest and clearest impact and is easy for people to know about and accept. The problem with it is, that such laws does not see the individual. It does not see, that some things are different dependent on each incident/object.
So its not perfect, far from, but it is often the only law/ruleset which people will accept and follow.
May the lore be great and the stories interesting. A game without a story, is a game without a soul. Value the lore and it will reward you with fun!
Don't let yourself be satisfied with what you expect and what you seem as obvious. Ask for something good, surprising and better. Your own standards ends up being other peoples standard.
Except for the fact that pretty much all authorities save the ones pushing BSL state that BSL doesn't work. Bites don't go down. Problems aren't solved. They just move to another breed.
Seriously, this is a 30 y/o argument you're using. It didn't work with three breeds before you. Why on earth do people still think it will work because trying something new would be too hard.
The only breed I know of that has documented, well-studied accounts of them simply "snapping" without provocation are Springer Spaniels. And in them, it's an actual genetic defect caused by breeding for show dogs. There was a very decorated show dog that had this issue, and most of the show lines are bred into his line.
- - - Updated - - -
I don't agree on banning pit bulls, as I own one. But I do think that people who own these dogs should be held responsible, legally and financially, for what their dogs do.
- - - Updated - - -
Well, then, what you want is a temporary "fix," i.e. something that makes you feel like you're at least trying. You're not actually interested in solving the root of the problem, meaning that your temporary "fix" is doomed to failure from the start.
Yes, i am implying that that is the current solution. It is doomed to fail or doomed to work subuptimally, but that is the only one people will accept. If you have seen my posts, you will see that i am in noway cheering for these laws, a ban is stupid, but it is the only solution, which the current system will accept. People are simply to afraid of fixes, which have a general impact on their ability to get dogs
May the lore be great and the stories interesting. A game without a story, is a game without a soul. Value the lore and it will reward you with fun!
Don't let yourself be satisfied with what you expect and what you seem as obvious. Ask for something good, surprising and better. Your own standards ends up being other peoples standard.
I've seen far more vicious Jack Russells, for example, than I have of those on the banned list... vast majority of the time its useless dog owners that make these things happen.
Last edited by Daedius; 2016-08-21 at 06:57 PM.
All it does is both humor and feed into the fearful masses...
Some dogs are more demanding of people and I can understand why they shouldn't really be allowed for most common/casual dog owners, but DDA is not the way to go...
As for dog fights, and why people give amstaffs/pits a bad rap is because they were made that way...if they get so outlawed/rare/extinct, they'll find another breed to use instead, continuing the vicious cycle...