As a dog owner I have breeds that are discriminated by the law. I find the laws unfair and unethical and have seen hundreds of families write heartbreaking stories of dogs being ripped away from them due to looking like a “type” as the law like to call it. Understandably larger dogs can cause more impact with altercations however, what the law forgets is that other dogs can often be the cause of altercations etc due to certain behaviours being accepted due to the breed itself being smaller. The negligence of dog owners must be taken into account and not always the dog blamed. Not to mention the conditions the government seize these dogs and keep them in are conditions no animal should be kept in. These dogs wether they have been in an incident or not are kept in kennels, a stressful environment, diet changed, weight loss, not exercised, not socialised and then are expected to pass a temperament test after weeks, months or years in these conditions, it is doing nothing but setting the dog up for failure. Leading to most dogs being euthanised. Even if the dog has never been in an incident and has been seized due to its “type” but passes the temperament test, they are then forced to live life muzzled, on lead and restricted. For doing no wrong. The misconception of these breeds it’s unfortunate, they are not born aggressive, they are man made aggressive by negligent owners. I own these dogs, I go to dog meets with all the same breed you deem “dangerous” and I groom these dogs. Its time to stop blaming the dogs and blame the owners, its time to start considering rehabilitation rather than euthanasia. I believe we should bring out a license holder law to ensure these dogs are only owned by responsible owners and not failed by humans.
Back to group
Back to group
This content is created by the open source Your Priorities citizen engagement platform designed by the non profit Citizens Foundation