Breed Specific Legislation "Intellectually ridiculous" in UK, Dutch Repeal Ban
The number of people hospitalized for dog attacks in the UK over the past decade has increast almost 50% according to a new report. In 1997, the UK "upgraded" the Dangerous Dogs Act which banned four breeds of dogs: American Pit Bull Terriers, Dogo Argentinos, Japanese Tosas and Fila Brasilerios. In spit of banning breeds of dogs (which was supposed to decrease the number of dog bites) the country has seen a huge increase in bites instead.
These numbers have been consistently reported as rising and I've written about it here, here here, and Scottland's 150% increase in dog bites following the law here.
The Dangerous Dogs Act in the UK continues to provide an example of how ill-fated laws are that deal with types of dogs vs types of irresponsible owners. For every aggressive dog, there is an irresponsible owners. Dealing with those people, regardless of the type of dog they own, is the way to deal with the issues. Not by restricting particular breeds. Unless you get to the root of the problem, you will not find a solution.
As the country continues to deal with the "devil dog" issue, Richard Brusnstrom of the RSPCA notes:
"We have not been seeking out problem dogs and doing something about them....In my opinion, the breed type legislation is stupid, it is intellectually ridiculous and bankrupt, but we are stuck with it."
In related news, just this week, a 5 year old boy was attacked by a dog in the street suffering facial injuries that required surgery. The dog was described as a Japanese Akita-Alsatian Cross-breed.
Meanwhile, Donna over at Bad Rap was first to report that the Netherlands repealed its 15 year old breed ban on "pit bulls". They repealed the law because they didn't see a decrease in dog bites following the law. The law was passed in 1993 (don't let the bad math by the AP headline writer throw you).
It took 15 years, but the Netherlands has put in print that breed-specific legislation DOES NOT WORK. Yo, idjit legislators, are you listening?
Posted by: SocialMange | June 10, 2008 at 08:42 AM
Ironically, when the DDA was passed there were no Dogo Argentinos and no Filo Brasilieros in the UK, and only one Tosa.
Just a quick point, though. Richard Brunstrom is the Chief Police Officer in North Wales, he's nothing to do with the RSPCA.
He's also the one who came up with the bright idea of muzzling all police dogs, so they don't bite criminals (and can't protect themselves when shot at or stabbed, but hey, why would he care about that!).
Posted by: Kimba | June 10, 2008 at 09:21 AM
Kimba - seriously? Muzzling all police dogs? That's genius - . So the police there don't have guns and their dogs are muzzled, good luck when facing some real bad guys.
Posted by: Brian Cluxton | June 10, 2008 at 10:32 AM
Thank you Kimba. Police dogs are very genius. If the have no gun at that time this dog catch the muzzle of the bad guys.
Posted by: jhonebreeds | June 11, 2008 at 12:56 AM
Actually, the police in the UK carry guns these days - changing times, changing strategies.
Sweden came out with a good law last year and also stated that there is no evidence that any 'breed' of dog is more dangerous than another. They went after incompetent dog owners.
I'm hoping that this is a trend now. We've been working hard and maybe it's finally starting to pay off.
Posted by: Caveat | June 11, 2008 at 08:44 AM