COM 210 - There are no BAD dogs, just BAD owners!

Dog breed specific bans or legislation are laws that regulate or ban a certain breed type of dog in hopes to reduce dog attacks on people. Some cities and towns have passed these laws into action for their citizens to regulate or ban dogs. Regulated or banned breeds include American Pit Bulls, American Staffordshire Terriers, Staffordshire Bull Terriers, English Bull Terriers, Rottweilers, American Bulldogs, Mastiffs, Chow Chows, German Shepherds, Doberman Pinschers, or any mix of these breeds as well as any dogs who simply resemble those breeds. Does banning or limiting a type of dog really help reduce dog attacks? Personally, in my mind these laws don’t do anything but cause frustration and heartbreak. I have met my fair share of these “banned” dogs and they are probably the sweetest dogs I’ve ever met. While on the other hand, I’ve seen some pretty aggressive “non-banned” dogs. The difference is the owner’s attitude toward the dog and how they raise the animal.  Articles from the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) as well as Modern Dog Magazine talk about how Breed Specific Legislations (BSL) are not good for the community, families, and most importantly the dogs banned for being “bad”. The two articles give two different incites on the same topic.

            The ASPCA article is more formal, giving the facts of dealing with reckless dog owners and their dangerous dog in your community and how BSL's aren’t a very effective way of getting these dogs of the streets. The Modern Dog Magazine is more informal, giving the author’s point of view and journey through seeing how these “banned” dogs specifically Pit Bulls are not monster but family members. The target audience for the ASPCA article for people who just want the straight facts of why BSL is wrong while the Modern Dog Magazine article’s target audience is those who are afraid of “banned” dogs and want to know how someone who used to be afraid of them learned about how it is the owner not the dog that controls the way the dog acts. The ASPCA article tells the audience the how, what, where, when, and why. It has bullet points as well as the article split into sections with clear divisions. The Modern Dog Magazine article is like a story for the audience. It gives the audience the author’s, Corey Van’t Haaff, journey of learning about how BSL is a terrible thing for not only the humans but for the dog as well. The ASPCA article has no emotion while the Modern Dog Magazine article has a ton of emotion packed between its words. The Modern Dog Magazine article uses real life cases in its article while the ASPCA article uses straight facts and statistics of how BSL is not working.

            Both articles agreed the breed specific legislation is punishing good owners and their good dogs. The articles says no matter how good the dog is; the owners is subject to having their dogs taken away, leaving the community, or try to legally challenge the community. Another the articles agreed about is what can be classified as a “banned” dog. Mixed breeds have risen in popularity and sometimes it is hard to tell what type of dog a mix is. Any type of dog can be an aggressive dog, it doesn’t matter what breed the dog is but solely on how the owner raises the dog. I believe BSL shouldn’t be argument up for debate. The ban on dogs is not only unfair to owners of good “banned” dogs but also for the breeds of dogs, which were used for aggressive things like dogfights and aren’t allowed to show what they are truly about which is friendliness and compassion.

Sources:

·      http://moderndogmagazine.com/articles/what-would-you-do-if-your-city-banned-your-dog-s-breed/35623

·      http://www.aspca.org/fight-cruelty/dog-fighting/breed-specific-legislation