LogFAQs > #974601581

cjsdowg posted...

First Cosmos is cute as a button. But I am going to have to disagree with your assessment. I keep odd animals so I am not someone suggest with cull them or anything like that. But they are just so dangerous, this isn't people just making things up.

The guy you quote highlights how we know this. The pounds are full of a Pitbulls. Because people can't handle them, and they can hurt you. If a Chihuahua goes crazy and mauls me, it is noting to feel like my turtle biting. If I am mauled by a Pitt.

It is RIP CJS.

But my point is that there are several others breeds that will just replace it as the top aggressive dog (that will also RIP CJS), as there are people who look for aggressiveness and bad ass-reputation in their dog selection.
So what happens when those same individuals go for the "next-best"? Ban that too, when they top the list of maulings?

The people who research this, and the same conclusions are done in my country as well, is that it's an owner-problem, not a breed problem. So ban all dogs that can do maulings with a certain intensity? Well, that is another conversation. I'm challenging the pitbull narrative that seems to be frequent here.

Or instead of going down a list of breeds to kill off, regulate dog ownership so that irresponsible people don't get dogs that are capable of that degree of mauling. Maybe mandate insurance on dog ownership, so that the statistics of damages regulates the price, like with cars.

It's not that I don't see that there is a problem. It just seems to me that banning one breed won't help, as the irresponsible people will just get the next dog with a bad reputation and the same conversation will happen again, now with a new name.

This topic got a bit out of hand, so I started to just read and not respond. I have you tagged as Nice & helpful, so I decided to engage you in conversation :)