Why not ban the owners of out of control dogs?

*New Zealand - A recent spate of dog attack reports in the media has led to a
public outcry for breed specific legislation to be introduced to ban any dog with bull or pit in the name¹. Several newspaper journalists and TV pundits are actively campaigning for dogs to be killed and tough new dog control laws are in the process of being introduced.

Sounds like a hysterical over reaction to me.  Can't you people see a pattern here?





United States - Several Cities and States have introduced breed bans but these tend to be overturned after a few years when they are found to be both ineffective and expensive. Just recently the Alabama Supreme Court has ruled breed lists illegal in the State and we are waiting to see if the ruling will be challenged further or become a legal precedent.


We've seen this pattern before too.  Thankfully reason and logic prevailed when the AWB was allowed to expire.  Hopefully the pit bull hysteria will die down too some day.

Wow! There was a thread in the DU crowing about banning those dangerous animals as well.

Whodathunkit? Arfcom and the Stalinists agreeing on something wholeheartedly!

Something percieved to be dangerous should be banned! For the Children!

Quoted: A agree, this is government banning perfectly safe, lovable animals. It's all media bias, afterall. I mean, cocker spaniels kill thousands every year, don't they? Wait....do they? Oh well, nevermind that. First they ban the huggable family pet, the Pit Bull, next it'll be furry hamsters and the known-man-killer, the Toy Poodle. Slippery slope, dog lovers.....slippery slope. And, I agree the parallels to gun banning are crystal clear. After all, isn't it the 23rd Amendment that states dog-ownership shall not be infringed? Wait a sec. We don't have a dog-amendment? Shit. The parallels ARE crystal clear.  The two issues closely mirror each other when you compare the "sniper shots" the media take at both guns and pit bulls. I hear the anti-drug people use that line all the time....there's nothing in the Constitution that guarantees the right to smoke dope. So, by that reasoning, there's nothing in the Constitution that says you can't ban dogs. True.  It still doesn't make it a good idea to ban dogs simply because of their breed. Sorry Pit Bull lovers, you're SOL on that one. And, comparing the Pit Bull to assault weapons is spot-on too. Afterall, if an assault weapon gets out of your yard by chewing through the fence, you know it's going to run off and kill something. The comparison between assault weapons and Pit Bulls is not for the purpose of comparing the dangers of one thing vs. another.  The point is that the fear-mongering by media outlets creates an irrational hysteria by using IDENTICAL tactics when dealing with both issues. I'm not for government banning anything, frankly, but I do love to lampoon the naive notion that Pits are wonderful animals and just like every other dog. If Pits hadn't killed and maimed so many people, I guarantee there would be no ban on them....and likewise, if there were 100 deaths a year from labradors, someone would be banning them, and I wouldn't be proud to own one.

Agreed.  Not all pits are wonderful animals, but some are.  If I have a Pit that is a wonderful, gentle family pet, who are you to tell me that I own a monster?

Quoted: Quoted: A agree, this is government banning perfectly safe, lovable animals. It's all media bias, afterall. I mean, cocker spaniels kill thousands every year, don't they? Wait....do they? Oh well, nevermind that. First they ban the huggable family pet, the Pit Bull, next it'll be furry hamsters and the known-man-killer, the Toy Poodle. Slippery slope, dog lovers.....slippery slope. And, I agree the parallels to gun banning are crystal clear. After all, isn't it the 23rd Amendment that states dog-ownership shall not be infringed? Wait a sec. We don't have a dog-amendment? Shit. The parallels ARE crystal clear.  The two issues closely mirror each other when you compare the "sniper shots" the media take at both guns and pit bulls. I hear the anti-drug people use that line all the time....there's nothing in the Constitution that guarantees the right to smoke dope. So, by that reasoning, there's nothing in the Constitution that says you can't ban dogs. True.  It still doesn't make it a good idea to ban dogs simply because of their breed. Sorry Pit Bull lovers, you're SOL on that one. And, comparing the Pit Bull to assault weapons is spot-on too. Afterall, if an assault weapon gets out of your yard by chewing through the fence, you know it's going to run off and kill something. The comparison between assault weapons and Pit Bulls is not for the purpose of comparing the dangers of one thing vs. another.  The point is that the fear-mongering by media outlets creates an irrational hysteria by using IDENTICAL tactics when dealing with both issues. I'm not for government banning anything, frankly, but I do love to lampoon the naive notion that Pits are wonderful animals and just like every other dog. If Pits hadn't killed and maimed so many people, I guarantee there would be no ban on them....and likewise, if there were 100 deaths a year from labradors, someone would be banning them, and I wouldn't be proud to own one. Agreed.  Not all pits are wonderful animals, but some are.  If I have a Pit that is a wonderful, gentle family pet, who are you to tell me that I own a monster?

I wasn't aware that we only had the rights enumerated in the BOR and constitution. I thought there was something about that in there...I could be wrong.

And if my Pit Bull gets out of my yard and bites somebody, you won't get a chance to shoot her, because I will have already done it. Personal responsibility is a wonderful thing.

Along those same lines, if you jump my 6 foot block wall and ignore the "Beware Of Dog" signs, not only will I allow my dog to chew on your trespassing ass, but I will hold you at gunpoint until the police arrive to take you to jail.

If my dog is running loose on the streets, she is fair game. I would hope nobody shoots her unless she appears to be aggressive (and not simply jumping into the back of your truck looking to go for a ride) but, I wouldn't file a law suit. But in my yard, the trespasser is the fair game.

Fucking Hippies!

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Canada is just bringing in the same law on Pits and other 'Dangerous Dogs' as we have here in Great Britain… ANdy Yeah, we all know how well nanny-statism has worked for you guys. You will get the same 'Dangerous Dog' Laws passed in US cities and states before too long…

I instated that law a long time ago.  It's one of those "zero strike" type of laws - packs of dogs (that would be two or more) or remotely aggressive dogs don't get any strikes.

Quoted: That went right over your head, The cynic

You're right. I didn't notice the quotes.
Well played.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: A agree, this is government banning perfectly safe, lovable animals. It's all media bias, afterall. I mean, cocker spaniels kill thousands every year, don't they? Wait....do they? Oh well, nevermind that. First they ban the huggable family pet, the Pit Bull, next it'll be furry hamsters and the known-man-killer, the Toy Poodle. Slippery slope, dog lovers.....slippery slope. And, I agree the parallels to gun banning are crystal clear. After all, isn't it the 23rd Amendment that states dog-ownership shall not be infringed? Wait a sec. We don't have a dog-amendment? Shit. The parallels ARE crystal clear.  The two issues closely mirror each other when you compare the "sniper shots" the media take at both guns and pit bulls. I hear the anti-drug people use that line all the time....there's nothing in the Constitution that guarantees the right to smoke dope. So, by that reasoning, there's nothing in the Constitution that says you can't ban dogs. True.  It still doesn't make it a good idea to ban dogs simply because of their breed. Sorry Pit Bull lovers, you're SOL on that one. And, comparing the Pit Bull to assault weapons is spot-on too. Afterall, if an assault weapon gets out of your yard by chewing through the fence, you know it's going to run off and kill something. The comparison between assault weapons and Pit Bulls is not for the purpose of comparing the dangers of one thing vs. another.  The point is that the fear-mongering by media outlets creates an irrational hysteria by using IDENTICAL tactics when dealing with both issues. I'm not for government banning anything, frankly, but I do love to lampoon the naive notion that Pits are wonderful animals and just like every other dog. If Pits hadn't killed and maimed so many people, I guarantee there would be no ban on them....and likewise, if there were 100 deaths a year from labradors, someone would be banning them, and I wouldn't be proud to own one. Agreed.  Not all pits are wonderful animals, but some are.  If I have a Pit that is a wonderful, gentle family pet, who are you to tell me that I own a monster? I wasn't aware that we only had the rights enumerated in the BOR and constitution. I thought there was something about that in there...I could be wrong. And if my Pit Bull gets out of my yard and bites somebody, you won't get a chance to shoot her, because I will have already done it. Personal responsibility is a wonderful thing. Along those same lines, if you jump my 6 foot block wall and ignore the "Beware Of Dog" signs, not only will I allow my dog to chew on your trespassing ass, but I will hold you at gunpoint until the police arrive to take you to jail. If my dog is running loose on the streets, she is fair game. I would hope nobody shoots her unless she appears to be aggressive (and not simply jumping into the back of your truck looking to go for a ride) but, I wouldn't file a law suit. But in my yard, the trespasser is the fair game. Fucking Hippies!

You're not reading me at all. I'm not for the government banning anything, ever. I'm making fun of the extreme argument of the people who defend Pit Bulls as if they are not more dangerous than most other breeds (they are). I'm making fun of the defense that Pit Bulls are just like assault weapons and are harmless without a bad owner (Pit bulls have a will, a gun is a piece of metal without its owner), etc.

I don't like the banning of these dogs, but they are an extreme breed and cause a lot of deaths and needless injuries. Period.

The only thing wrong with any type of dog is the moron who raised it,same with people. I understand that some are just crazy and cant blame it on the people who raised them.

You're not reading me at all. I'm not for the government banning anything, ever. I'm making fun of the extreme argument of the people who defend Pit Bulls black rifles as if they are not more dangerous than most other breeds guns (they are). I'm making fun of the defense that Pit Bulls black rifles are just like assault weapons hunting rifles and are harmless without a bad owner (Pit bulls have a will, a gun is a piece of metal without its owner Only criminals would want such a high powered bullet hose), etc. I don't like the banning of these dogs black rifles, but they are an extreme breed evil weapon and cause a lot of deaths and needless injuries. Period.

There.  See the parallel?   You can't have it both ways.  

By the way, just to be clear, orders of magnitudes more people are killed by guns than the wildest pit bull could dream about.  

Quoted: You're not reading me at all. I'm not for the government banning anything, ever. I'm making fun of the extreme argument of the people who defend Pit Bulls black rifles as if they are not more dangerous than most other breeds guns (they are). I'm making fun of the defense that Pit Bulls black rifles are just like assault weapons hunting rifles and are harmless without a bad owner (Pit bulls have a will, a gun is a piece of metal without its owner Only criminals would want such a high powered bullet hose), etc. I don't like the banning of these dogs black rifles, but they are an extreme breed evil weapon and cause a lot of deaths and needless injuries. Period. There.  See the parallel?   You can't have it both ways.   By the way, just to be clear, orders of magnitudes more people are killed by guns than the wildest pit bull could dream about.

The difference between guns and dogs is substantial, on a responsibility level.

If you have a gun, it's quite easy to guarantee that you are never responsible for someone else's death. If you don't pull the trigger on someone, you are innocent. Even if someone steals it, THEY are responsible for it's misdeeds.

Contrast that with a dog. You take a walk, a kid sticks his hand in its face and it snaps the kid's finger off. Kid's fault, but YOUR responsibility. You didn't control YOUR dog's instincts, and kid lost a finger.

You leave your dog in the yard. It chews through the fence/breaks chain/jumps fence and bites someone. YOU are responsible, even tho you did everything right. The dog is to blame, it set its course, but YOU are responsible.

You can't guarantee that any dog, no matter how well you raised it, won't hurt or kill. Even my dog, a gentle baby, could harm someone. It's an animal - it has instincts, will, and teeth. It CAN, and WOULD, harm under the right conditions EVEN IF I'M RESPONSIBLE, that damage could occur.

The same CANNOT be said of guns. A gun will not hurt someone UNLESS I employ it to do so.

There is the magic difference. A dog is not a thing. It is an animal, and you CANNOT control it absolutely. You CAN control a firearm absolutely.

Now, what do I have against Pits? Easy - they are BRED TO FIGHT, not bred to be your lovable family pet. They are bred to accentuate a more violent instinct (kill bite) than companion dogs. Therefore, when one DOES revert to it's instincts, its effects will be deadly.

There are thousands of Pits who are good dogs, do no harm, will live without causing any trouble. I'm glad about that, and if their owners do everything right and luck has it they don't hurt anyone, great. That still doesn't erase the reality - that Pits are killers. Even if yours hasn't, it's built to. Even if yours hasn't been hurt or percieves threat and attacks, it can. It CAN. What can you do to guarantee your dog will never revert to its instincts? Can't guarantee it won't kill? Then you are responsible for the death it may cause....even if you did everything right.

That's what I have against pits.

Quoted: Quoted: Having a hard time feeling sorry for Canadians or Pit Bulls I guess that makes 2 of us...

+1

Quoted: WTF is it with SafetyNazi's innate fear (and banning) of objects instead of just going after the people/groups who cause problems...? Tiny sez "WOOF"...! img.photobucket.com/albums/v235/VonErnst/IMAG0059.jpg

It all fits in with the ever increasing lack of personal responsibility and a society that no longer demands that individuals be held accountable for that which is their responsibility. There is a parallel between this and gun control you know. Both slow, devestating cancers for which there is no treatment.(within the 'law') First it's the black rifles and pit bulls. Then because of the ambiguous definition of 'dangerous dogs', the definition will expand to include my working German Shepherd and my Model 70... and so on and so on-
Lee

ETA: just now realizing this has been covered sorta-