Q: Do you think BSL (Breed Specific Legislation) shuold be legal?
BSL - the act of restricting or banning ownership of a specific breed of dog based soley on it's breed rather than individual personalities of a dog.Usually targeting pit bull type dogs, rottweilers, dobermans and other larger breed dogs.
Aug 06, 2009
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO. DID I MAKE MYSELF CLEAR? NO, NO, NO. Breed Selective Legislation is very stupid. It is like telling someone that is not a criminal; "well your cousin is a murderer and a rapist, so we are arresting you and putting you to sleep". What a joke these fools need some education. Live on Pit Bulls, Rotteweilers, German Shepards, and Dobermans, and every other breed. It is our God given right to own and love whatever dog we want.
Thumbs Up: 1 |
Aug 11, 2009
No, no, no, no, no...and 1,000,000 times over NO! I'd kill anyone that tried to take away my Sasha, my Sheba, my Baby Girl or my Ceohus while he was around...just because they are a certian breed or mix of a reed. None of those dogs has ever nor ever will harm a single soul! If anyone believes that BSL is right I think they need to look a little farther into the matter rather than believeing the media hype. Go check out www.forpitssake.org www.hellobully.com www.pinupsforpitbulls.com www.pawsitivelypitbull.org www.lawdogsusa.org but most importantly look up these two sites: www.AKC.org (that is the American Kennel Club... you know, in simple terms, the people that set the standards of what a dog is and what a dog isn't.) as well as www.atts.org (That would be the American Temperament Testing Society, the people that are certified by a series of specific tests to determine a well temperamented dog.) So, before you stand up for BSL look at these sites first and then if you STILL think BSL is the best way to protect your family, neighborhood or city against dog bites... You're just as bull headed and stubborn as a 'pit bull'
Thumbs Up: 1 |
Aug 09, 2009
Yes, I think BSL should be legal. I don't see a big problem with it.
* If it's easy for us to accept that certain breeds have positive or friendly dispositions (e.g., Black Labs), then we should accept that other breeds have inherently bad features, on average.
* We already ban many kinds of wild and dangerous animals (wolves, cougars, etc.) If it's really true that some dog breeds are overly dangerous, then it'd make sense for them to be similarly restricted.
* The cost to society and individuals is low: there are plenty of other dog breeds out there to choose from. No fundamental right is taken away by BSL.
Thumbs Up: 0 |
Aug 10, 2009
DOGWEATHER you need to to a little research The cost of Breed Selective Legislation is not (* The cost to society and individuals is low: there are plenty of other dog breeds out there to choose from. No fundamental right is taken away by BSL.) as you put it. You only say this because you mght not be affected. If someone told you you could not own a green car or wear a black shirt on tuesday you might take offence. You do not know the extent of BSL. It is unconstitutional. How dare you. Please go to www.understand-a-bull.com, www.badrap.org, www.aspca.org, www.pbrc.net and get a little education on the matter. It is wrong. So wrong.
Thumbs Up: 0 |
Got a question about your pet? Get the answers you need from Zootoo's community of pet experts and owners.