Also, if it was ignorant at 30lbs+, but not at 55+lbs, does that mean you don’t think their are any “gentle giants” above this weight?

I’m sorry I just don’t understand how you can insult the author of the site’s views, and then say they would be fine if only they were changed- for the sole purpose of making you happy.

…. My aunt and uncle were shocked, even though the bite barely broke the skin. They took her to the vet and found out she had cancer, and was in a lot of pain, which was probably why she bit me for poking her eye. I’m surprised she didn’t bite harder; I would have, poor thing! Point being, I think sometimes circumstances align to make a dog doing something completely out of character, which wouldn’t be the owner’s fault.

- I had the same idea about testing owner’s of certain breeds too! You have to pass a test to drive anything big enough to hurt someone when wielded incorrectly, why not the breeds of dog that are more prone to causing damage if trained/treated incorrectly? I think it should cover more than body language though. Like how to train your dog to prevent biting, and stuff too. Only certain breeds though; otherwise I think less people would get dogs.

Anyway, I hope I didn’t sound at all critical, I was just throwing in the only improvements I would make, because I agreed wholehearted with the rest! Thank you for making this site, and starting the discussion on some new laws that work for humans AND dogs!!!!

-I love the idea on fixing most non-breeder dogs, and seriously agree with breeders having to get a license, but I think maybe fixing could be encouraged rather than mandatory? We thought about breeding our dog, and ultimately decided not to, but if we had wanted to have the option open I would have liked to be able to. Most breeders charge more for a puppy that has breeding privileges. They don’t give out the AKC registration until the new owner spays/neuters if they don’t pay for breeding privileges. Maybe a decent sized charge to keep your dog intact? The money could go to enforcing all these laws, or more animal control or something maybe.

-Maybe invisible fences could be allowed, but you have to have a sign or a certain colored line to let people know there is an invisible fence. That way the kids can run around if they want.

-Muzzle law- I don’t even know what I would do if that went into effect in my city. I have a 100+ lbs. Lab, and she is the kindest thing I have ever met. Biting would never even occur to her, plus she has never not liked anyone. It’s so cute, no matter how excited she is, she won’t grab a treat from you, she’ll very very slowly and gingerly remove it from your hand, so she doesn’t get you at all. ESPECIALLY with children. Anyway, we had something called a gentle leader for her for a few days, but she would run and hide everytime we asked her if she wanted a walk, because she hated the thing so much. All it was a collar with a loop for the nose too (for dogs that pull on the leash a lot). If she had to wear a muzzle on every walk, I’m afraid my poor skittish baby would start having panic attacks. I’m sure I wouldn’t be the only one with a problem. Maybe an exception for temper tested dogs (who passed anyway)? Or temper tested dogs with a legit reason, like her (fear)?

-Personal responsibility- I agree, but I think it should be based on how much reason the owner had to believe the dog was violent. My Uncle’s super sweet boxer bit me when I tried to pet her eye (I was young, okay?) when I was a kid (not that hard at all, but still.)

I do know that if a dog attacks a person there are laws protecting that person. But if a dog attacks another dog because the owner decides to let go of the leash what laws are there to protect the other dog? The leash laws say that the dogs have to be restrained. But if a dog is let out of a fence due to unruly kids then he is not protected. My dog has no protections by the laws due to his breed. He is a gray Rottweiler. He has a very docile temperament and was the one attacked. Not only did the lady turn the dogs lose on my dog, she turned the dogs lose on another dog much younger and able to escape unlike mine. Joe has never been aggressive regardless of his breed. None of my dogs are aggressive. He was let out of the fence by some unruly kids. There is now 3 bolts on the inside of the gate. They guy told me that my dog attacked his wife and dogs. Three neighbors were out there while this all happened. One of which was trying to pull the two boxers off my Joe who was scream for mercy. He stated that she just let go of the leash and stood there with her hands folded smirking. He asked her to get her dogs and she said “he shouldn’t have been lose.” He never fought back; Joe is not a fighter. Because he was lose and because of his breed he has no protection. Why is this? Why did she have the right to sick her two boxers on my dog and get away with it? I do not believe that temperament is due to the breed. I believe that their temperament is determined by how they are raised. Even my abuse cases are very loving. They have accepted every animal that has come and gone through my door regardless. I even threw a goat in the mix and they loved and licked her and accepted her as one of their own. But yet there are no laws to protect certain breeds. Some days I just don’t like people; especially for what they do to the animals.

While I do think that laws will change the law-abiding more, it doesn’t mean that there will be no change. I know a ton of fairly respectable people that still don’t follow leash laws, for example, because the enforcement is so terrible, even when their dogs will run up to another dog when off leash. So it’s really important to make sure that whatever law gets passed applies to all breeds *and* gets funding for enforcement.

The 4.7 million number was from the article I linked to in the SF Chronicle. Their number came from the Centers for Disease Control. The biggest section of dog, by far, that did the biting was, “Unknown Breed.” Clearly, if only 20% of the bites in Seattle come from pit bulls, we need to make sure that we make a change that influences the other 80% of bites, as well.

Would be interested to know where the figure of 4,700,000 dogbites per annum is derived from.

They wrote,

“Conclusions—Although fatal attacks on humans appear to be a breed-specific problem (pit bull-type dogs and Rottweilers), other breeds may bite and cause fatalities at higher rates. Because of difficulties inherent in determining a dog’s breed with certainty, enforcement of breed-specific ordinances raises constitutional and practical issues. Fatal attacks represent a small proportion of dog bite injuries to humans and, therefore, should not be the primary factor driving public policy concerning dangerous dogs. Many practical alternatives to breed-specific ordinances exist and hold promise for prevention of dog bites.”

Keep in mind that the average number of deaths was very small, something like a dozen people. Not that I’m saying that those weren’t tragedies, or that bites that don’t kill are no big deal, but that the risk that a child will be killed by a dog is quite small.

I think that dogs of all breeds should be sterilized, unless the person is a registered breeder and the dog is a registered breeding dog. That could include show dogs and working dogs whose handlers want them to remain intact. The breeders could then be educated about temperament, health problems, etc. I’d also love to have registered breeders’ dogs be temperament tested, and if they failed the temperament test, the dog would be sterilized. That solution takes away the very big problem of having to decide whether a dog is really a pit bull, increases the temperament of the entire dog population, and also goes a LONG way toward keeping dogs out of the shelter. The shelter then has more $$ to go toward spay/neuter.

Here are some snippets from the article about San Francisco: “Animal Care and Control Director Carl Friedman said the city has impounded 21 percent fewer pit bulls since the law passed than during the previous year and a half. The number of pit bulls euthanized has dropped 24 percent.”

“San Francisco’s law allows animal control officers to issue a fix-it ticket to noncompliant dog owners, requiring that the pit bull be sterilized within two weeks. Animal Control officers also hand out information on low-cost and free surgeries.

“Officers follow up with visits to the homes of owners who have not complied. A first violation can bring a citation and $500 fine; more than one citation can land an owner in jail and result in the city seizing the dog.”

“Usually, however, Animal Care and Control officers don’t let it get to that point. If they return and have to write a citation, officers will take the dog from the owner – sometimes forcefully – spay or neuter the animal and return it, unless the pit bull is aggressive or officials believe it is being used in dog fights.”

“I’ve seen pit bulls make wonderful companion animals – they are good for families and children,” Friedman said. “I understand where (opponents) were coming from, but I didn’t want to see us going the same routes as other communities that are banning certain breeds altogether. In my mind, this is a very good compromise and it’s been a success.”

There’s at good graphic at http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2007/08/28/mn_pit_bull.jpg

That’s what they have in Texas: here’s an article including a mention of their policy.

Another important bit of info from that article: “Each year, roughly 4.7 million people are bitten by dogs and about 800,000, half of them children, seek medical attention, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”

“On average, a dozen people die each year from dog attacks, according to the center. In 2003, 32 people died from dog-related incidents.”

25 of the states make owners legally liable if their dogs maim or kill. Why only 25? This doesn’t need to be breed specific, clearly.