This is a pretty ignorant “suggestion “. I’d highly recommend looking into the amount of aggressive chihuahuas and terriers.
“Pit bull type” dogs are known to be a “nanny” breed because they are excellent family dogs.
27 Likes
[Maybe owner& dog training before owning certian breeds?]
3 Likes
You are the reason that the country has to put in checks and balances before new laws are created. The blame on this issue leans heavily toward the type of owner and how they raise the breed. A better written law would be to make it illegal for certain types of people to own certain breeds (people that abuse or encourage fighting and aggression).
13 Likes
Would you also propose a ban on certain races of people based on statistics of which groups commit the most amount of violent crimes?
16 Likes
Yes. Liability insurance for dogs and pets generally.
Bad owners make bad dogs.
7 Likes
“Pit bull type” dogs are known to be a “nanny” breed because they are excellent family dogs.”
I agree, up to a point. However, being savaged by a neurotic chihuahua or Maltese terrier is a different experience than being savaged by a pit bull or any powerful breed.
6 Likes
I believe your heart is in the right place with this suggestion, but it is a poorly thought out idea. Pit Bulls just happen to be one of the most popular breeds right now so statistically many non-pit bull dogs are labels as PB just because they are mixed. We have had the same problem with Rottweilers and Dobermans in the past. Additionally, how would you ban someone’s pets? Go door to door and ask what kind of dogs I have. No thanks.
7 Likes
In England, they used to be called Nanny Dogs because they are so good with children.
8 Likes
It’s how the dog is raised, not the breed. Some of the most gentle dogs I have ever known have been pits. I think a better approach would be a lifetime ban of anyone caught training an animal for fighting or aggression from ever owning one.
6 Likes
Trust the science you say……
I’ve owned various bull breeds for over 25 years and haven’t had any aggression issues, aside from typical dog-on-dog scuffles over food or toys—situations that can happen with any breed. These dogs are often mischaracterized as inherently dangerous, when the reality is far more complex. Like many domesticated animals, they are bred for specific traits, but their behavior is shaped by their environment, training, and the owner’s responsibility.
Those advocating for a ban often rely on alarming statistics, but it’s critical to look deeper. The problem isn’t the breed itself—it’s the irresponsible ownership that leads to tragic incidents. Bull breeds, when cared for by knowledgeable and responsible owners, are no more dangerous than any other large dog. Unfortunately, many attacks involve dogs that have been mistreated, poorly socialized, or used for violent purposes, which skews the public’s perception.
The solution isn’t breed-specific legislation (BSL), which unfairly targets responsible dog owners and punishes the dogs themselves. Instead, the focus should be on enforcing responsible pet ownership, such as requiring training and stricter penalties for neglect or abuse. This would more effectively reduce incidents than a ban, which penalizes countless well-behaved, loved family pets based solely on their appearance.
Breed bans fail to address the root of the problem and could actually result in the abandonment or euthanasia of thousands of healthy, non-aggressive dogs. Instead, promoting education around responsible ownership and accountability would protect the public without resorting to ineffective and discriminatory policies.
Just my 6 cents
9 Likes
These dogs are a huge reflection on the owners, not the breed itself. If they are trained well when they are puppies and the owners keep up with the exercise they need, they are great dogs. We shouldn’t ban them but I think there should be a requirement to prove that you’re actually capable of taking care of a dog like that.
5 Likes
Its not the dog its the owner or trainer
8 Likes
Agreed.
2 Likes
I agree. Its all on the upbringing of a breed. Pitbulls can be the most loving albeit protective breed around.
5 Likes
If we did this with former breeds that were considered dangerous, millions of people wouldn’t have their beloved pet. This is not the fault of the breed. I’ve had a pit, she wasn’t dangerous for one second of the time I had with her. She was a welcome part of our family who I never thought would harm any of my 3 kids or my other animals. She would literally smile at me! The other 3 breeds that you listed as killing people have also in the past been thought to be just as dangerous as a pit bull is thought of today. It’s not the breed, it’s the training the dog receives from a young age.
5 Likes
I don’t necessarily agree or disagree, but I do wonder if there are some priority issues here.
Absolutely this! As many others have pointed out, if people are really concerned about specific types of dogs, then you should not be targeting the dogs themselves. Instead, people should be more concerned about the owners. Stories about people who let poorly trained dogs off leash and make excuses for them are all too common. Moreover, there has been a rampant problem about people adopting dogs because of how they perceive them to be but never doing proper research about them. This is why these dogs have such high statistics. They attract fools who want a “cool” or “intimidating” dog but who are unwilling to properly train them. Any dog can be violent if not well-trained.
Also, the suggestion that German Shepherds should be among those banned makes this fairly foolish to me. German Shepherds are very popular dogs and it is well known they are commonly used as K9 units.
3 Likes
I don’t like this idea. I DO LIKE the idea of a minimum 5 year prison sentence for people who chain or fight dogs.
10 Likes
There is absolutely no need for the government to regulate any breed of dog. Of all that is going wrong is this country you can come up with something better to focus on.
10 Likes