Over the past few years, I have become involved
with trying to educate about a type of law
commonly referred to as a BSL. Here are some
frequently asked questions regarding this growing
and frightening trend:
What is a BSL?
BSL stands for Breed
Specific Legislation. A BSL can be anything from
requiring special licensing of a breed or breeds (breed
restriction) to the total elimination of a breed (breed
ban).
Why are
BSL bad?
BSL fail to target the
problem: bad dog owners. Those who are causing the
problems with their dogs will not care about the law.
Either these owners will continue to own the breeds
mentioned in the BSL or dump the dogs, get a new breed
and continue the cycle. Or, a restriction will make the
breeds more attractive to those who get a feeling of
power by intentionally breaking the law. Some owners are
simply poorly educated and do not know what it takes to
properly raise, train, socialize and manage any dog.
Owners who are intentionally bad or owners who are
undereducated and irresponsible are the problems that
need to be addressed. Also, BSL are tough to
enforce, expensive and often very vague with their
descriptions and how to identify a dangerous dog.
Aren’t
the dogs mentioned in BSLs dangerous?
Any dog can be a risk.
Even small breeds have seriously injured and killed
children. An American Pit Bull Terrier in a good
home is a safer dog than a Dachshund in a poor home.
Humans decide how safe the individual dog will be.
In the majority of dog problems, there is the owner to
blame. The dog ends up as much of a victim in many
respects. Is the dog to blame? No, he
is just reflecting the owner. You can tell a lot
about a person through his dogs.
If any
dog can be dangerous, why are only certain breeds
targeted?
These breeds are targeted
because of a lack of education. Legislators and
the general public do not take the time to learn the
truth behind many breeds mentioned in BSL. Instead, they
believe hype and information from undereducated and
unreliable sources. The people creating the most problem
with dogs are: those using dogs as status symbols for
the wrong reasons; undereducated owners who do not
realize the time it takes to properly raise any dog;
those who unintentionally allow undesired behaviors to
grow and fail to address them. How many people let
tiny pups play tug of war with their hands or feet?
Are they aware that this actually teaches the pup it is
good to bite humans when playing? Children often
unintentionally or intentionally do things that can lead
to a bite: teasing, inappropriate play, trying to pat
strange dogs, scaring dogs, etc. It looks better
for lawmakers to ban a breed than to target the true
source of the problem with supposedly killer breeds:
often young, unsupervised, poorly raised kids or the
irresponsible adult looking for another status symbol to
prove machismo. There is little personal
accountability any more. If something is being
used for the bad, take it away from all as opposed to
targeting the source of the bad – the human.
Let’s make an analogy: as this is being written there
is a lawsuit against fast food restaurants: they are
being blamed for obesity. A person can find salads,
juice and milk at these fast food places or choose a
smaller burger, fries and drink. Yes, the employees try
to sell super-sized stuff, but you do not have to buy
it. A person can eat unhealthily at any restaurant
from Beverly Hills to Boston. Yet only fast food places
are being targeted. Where is personal
accountability? What lawmaker will jump on the
bandwagon and try to restrict fast food places and what
they can serve? Can you make the analogy?
Any dog can be a problem. It is the human that
decides what the dog becomes – regardless of the
breed. Personal accountability. Who is in
control of the dog?
If it is
the human causing the problem, why not target the
owners?
That is what people opposed
to BSL are trying to do: get legislators to address the
root of the problem without punishing the good.
But legislators are often poorly educated and/or use the
wrong sources for their information. They go by
what is printed in the media and not reality. It looks
better in the eyes of the undereducated to blame the dog
than the human.
What if a
lawmaker states they can positively identify a dangerous
breed?
Breed identification is
tough. The descriptions lawmakers use to try and
identify “dangerous breeds” are often vague:
(1) The XYZ is a strongly built, medium-sized,
short-coupled dog possessing a sound, athletic,
well-balanced conformation that enables it to
function… Physical features and mental characteristics
should denote a dog bred to perform as an efficient...
The most distinguishing characteristics of the XYZ are
its short, dense, weather resistant coat… a clean-cut
head with broad back skull and moderate stop; powerful
jaws…
(2) The ABC should give the impression of great strength
for his size, a well put-together dog, muscular, but
agile and graceful, keenly alive to his surroundings. He
should be stocky, not long-legged or racy in outline.
Head: Medium length, deep through, broad skull, very
pronounced cheek muscles, distinct stop; and ears are
set high. Muzzle: medium length, rounded on upper side
to fall away abruptly below eyes. Jaws well defined.
What
breeds are defined here?
Both are American Kennel
Club recognized and wording taken directly from the AKC
standards. One is a breed often mentioned in bans
under a generic name. The other is one often
touted as the perfect pet.
What can
I do to stop BSL?
When you hear of a BSL
anywhere, start writing letters, faxes, phone calls,
emails, etc. In a calm, rational and non-insulting
manner, try to educate lawmakers about why BSL are not
the way to go when addressing dog issues. Push for
laws that target the owner regardless of the type of dog
owned. Encourage them to create leash laws and see
they are enforced. Increase penalties for animal
abuse, cruelty and the use of animals as weapons.
In many communities it is a misdemeanor to neglect or
abuse an animal. Lastly, encourage owners of
breeds not mentioned to become involved with the fight.
|
