Should Pits (and other large breeds) Require Special Licenses?

Do you think that it would be a good idea to require an additional license to legally own a pit, or other similiar other large breed dogs (like akitas, huskies, chows and german shephards)?
Personally, i think it would be.
I realize that pits make wonderful pets, and that in the right hands they can be the most amusing, protective, docile, and sweet dogs. In the wrong hands, however, they can become organic weapons.
i think that people should have to demostrate the knowledge and ability to properly handel and train the dogs before they should be allowed to own them. i might consider allowing limited searches, to ensure that no dog fighting is occuring.

 

I absolutely agree.

Better than having them all banned.

 

I own a pitbull and she is the friendliest dog I have had .I think that before they give certain people these dogs they should see if that person can handle that dog and would not put them in a fighting ring

 

I doubt that most of the attacks contributed to pit bulls are actually pit bulls. I mean most of the "pit bulls" you see on the news look like a bunch of half starved mutt's they are chained in somebody's backyard and kick and beat till they snap and lash out at someone.To bad such a wonderful breed of dog has to take the blame for peoples ignorance. As far as licencing goes unless it's across the board for all dogs i'm against it

 

co signed

 

I agree, too. ANYTHING that singles out ONE BREED or TYPE of dog can go awry. In a perfect world, only responsible people would own any animals. The whole breed-licensing thing is, in my opinion, just a well-intended pipedrem...I mean, those that break the law now would just break the law in the future. A new law such as this would just make it harder for the responsible people. The jerks would more than likely be blissfully uneffected...

 

Eugene has some good points. I have been owned by several Chows, and many Chow rescue groups will only release rescued Chows to people that have had experience with that breed.
Personally, when I did home health, I was MUCH more afraid of little dogs (chihuahuas, etc.) than pit bulls, Rottweilers, etc.
Just my two cents

 

I agree 100% that little dogs are much much more likely to be dominant, agressive, hyperactive and just plain mean. I have a pug mix and a golden retriever at my house at the moment. the golden retriever is one of the most docile, submissive, and calm (although incredibly jealous sometimes) dog i have ever met. the pug, on the otherhand, is a little marauding terrorist.

The difference is, that while small dogs are less balanced, the odds of them successfully killing another animal or human being is slim to nil. A chow, rot, pit or german shephard was bred to be able to kill large animals, including humans.
I don't think that large breeds should be banned, but because of public saftey issue they become when improperly handled, that extra care should be taken to ensure they go to responsible homes.

It's kindof like how the test to get a regular driver's license is easier than the test to get a big-rig license. Due to the increased risk of operating a big rig to others on the road, and also the increased difficulty and responsibility needed to safely operate them, we, as a society recognize the need of extra licensing.

 

Are you kidding me??? Require Special Owners? That is just absolutely ridiculous. It takes work to make a dog aggressive. Yes some dogs do have mental problems but that is evenly spread throughout all breeds. If anything owners of aggressive dogs should be charged being inhumane. People make a dogs aggressive. Typically by neglect. As a dog trainer, time and time again I see aggressive dogs. Their dogs are aggressive b/c the owners are too lazy to get off their asses and socialize and exercise their dogs.

 

Oh and check this out http://www.pitbullsontheweb.com/petbull/findpit.html

Let me know how many tries it takes

 

You're kindof supporting my point. People who neglect, abuse, or are just clueless about how to raise their dogs create dangerous dogs. Because larger, more agressive, breed dogs can become a public safety hazard when they turn agressive, extra care is needed in order to make sure that their owners "get off their lazy asses and socialize and exercise their dogs".

I'm not ragging on pit bulls. I know that the statistics tend to be a bit skewed in reporting attacks. You will, however, have to concede the point that being attacked by a yorkie is semi-commical, while a pit attack can be deadly.
do not delude yourself, these are dogs that were origionally bred to take down bulls, and then later bred to take down other pits. everything from their phisiology (their underbite) to their psychology (stubborness, and a lack of care for pain) is influenced by this.
They still make wonderful pets. All breeds have their challanges and quirks, but you need to be aware of these challanges in order to adress them. Saying that pits are not prone to agression is like saying that golden retrievers aren't prone to hip dysplasia, or chihuahuas aren't prone to epilepsy.

 

id like to point out that when raising a dog for gaurd dog purposes socialization is taught on there territory in a regulated environment. they are also taught that if there master aint around,what they were taught about being social is null and void.
so when speaking of dogs that were bred for GD or LGD purposes you really cant make such generalizations because many people dont have there dogs solely for pets.

anyway,

as one that has dogs for protection and protection only, i voted no but not for the reason you may think.

the government has a big push right now to start a national ID on all farm animals. to me,and apparently most other farmers in the united states things like that or what you are proposing here is just another step into desensitizing america into registering every aspect of there lives with the government. just another stepping stone to a national ID and eventually the chip.

on a side note, i do believe a animal owner is responsible should there dog attack someone or someones animals unduly. that means medical bills missed work,funeral expenses,compensation to family for future earnings should victim be unable to work again etc.

howver, if someone trespasses and is attacked by a animal living within its own boundaries and the property is properly marked,well then oh fucking well..

and that includes stupid little kids jumping a fence to get there ball or whatever.
in that case the parent of the child should be charged,not the animal owner.

 

I'll say no, but I kinda almost wish there was a law requiring that all pet dogs be spayed and neutered. For those who wish to breed, it would be nice for them to acquire a license. I believe this would bring the dog population down & perhaps preventing animals going into the wrong hands.

 

First off let me start by saying I don't think that owner's of large breed or agressive breed dogs should require a license. That is simply ridiculous. Dogs are what they are RAISED to be, how you raise them is how they will be. They are what you make them to be.

I am happy to report though that a week ago, I put in an adoption application to adopt a pitbull mix from the local humane society. Well, they were very thorough in the application. I had to have a backround check, they called my past vets (for my other dogs which are deceased), etc. it took over a week to get my pup. All i can say is, at least shelters are TRYING to make sure these dogs go to the right homes.....

 

Here in oNtario Pit bulls are banned, and have been for the past 2-4 years.

I heard on the radio two weeks ago, that someone had a puppy pit bull (in mIssissauga) and the humane society said they were putting it down.
For no other reason than it was a pit bull and brought in the province after the ban was in place.
But after all, the idiots of this province voted the lIberals in for a second time :/

 

I live in Atlanta, pits are VERY popular here. Unfortunately it's because they are SO good at fighting. A pit will often win against larger dogs simply because they are so insanely aggressive. I know some of them are pets and I agree they make great pets as do most dogs that are properly raised. Which is largely true of all dogs. However, when I see neglected dogsthey are nearly always aggressive and skiddish at the same time. When I see neglected pits, they're pretty much ALL homocidal monsters.


The reason for a ban is to protect the public not specifically from dog bites, that happens with all breeds, but from dog owners. Face it folks, there are plenty of people who should not have dogs at all. While I am never in favor of a blanket ban, I would certainly like to see special licensing for breeds we ALL know have potential for being dangerous to people they don't know. I'm also in favor of putting serial numbers on bullets and casings and making people sign for them when they buy them. Why? Because when we fish a bullet out of an innocent drive-by victim, we'll know who purchased the bullet and have a greater chance of catching the pussy who thinks a gun makes him a man.

Also, if people brought a dog in aafter a ban was put in place, they were breaking the law. This is why authorities get involved and have every right to. The people who brought the dog in are at fault and should have the option of returning it to a safe zone (for the dog) or they should pay to have it killed. Instead they decided the law didn't apply to them for some special reason, formed an emotional attachment to the animal and are now devastated because the mean old authorities want to kill their dog. Stupidity breeds these situations, not the law.

CF

Also, if some loser's pit attacks one of my children, I'm inclined to gut the animal and hang it on their door. Take me to court, I welcome it!

 

a

 

No,the owners should have to prove that they have and can actively use ,a brain.

 

*sigh*

I'm tired of fighting this, but I know it's so important.

All I can say is my dog loves everyone, regardless of who loves him. And who hates him.

He doesn't know he's hated, and he doesn't know he's supposed to be scary. He doesn't know he's supposed to be mean.

He just wants to know when it's time to go for a ride. To play. To kiss everyone.

I guess he fails as a pit bull.

 

just need to vent. in most cases, i blame humans in the UN-willingness in making a commitment from start to finish for the animal. dogs by nature want to make you happy. each breed has its "bred purpose". i fault owners, being pro-active in the well being of your loved pet,includes the well being of others in the out-side word. its your dog. it depends, trusts and looks to you for validation.dogs in my life,are like children,keep them away from strangers,keeping awareness ,outside the "home" too many mindless humans (small and large) find a twisted humor in teasing these 4 legged beings ,that can destroy your once loved, trusted pet. owners need to be accountable. owners need the puppy/dog classes.peace to you,and your 4 legged poooder.