Question

Write a thesis and use supporting claims to complete the working thesis

rking thesis: Breed-speeific regulations on dogs are a bad idea, and people should be allowed to own whatever kind of dog they want. Many states have breed-specific regulations outlawing owning certain breeds of dogs as pets. Breed-specific bans are based on the assumption that some breeds of dogs are more dangerous than others. Studies show that even breeds of dog considered "aggressive" can be trained to be safe and unthreatening, if their owners are knowledgeable. An inconsistent or neglectful owner has a much bigger impact on whether a dog will bite than any inherent characteristics of the breed. The incidence of dog bites and other aggressive behaviors would be greatly decreased if more pet owners learned how to train their dogs properly Thesis:

Answer 1

Breed-specific legislation (BSL), also called breed-discriminatory legislation (BDL), is ineffective at keeping communities safe because such laws target the wrong thing and ignore the real issue. Several cities, towns and states across the United States and Canada have adopted breed-specific measures in an attempt to prevent dog bites in their communities. However, while BSL may look good on the surface, it is not a reliable or effective solution for dog bite prevention.

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC), more than 4.5 million people in the United States are bitten by dogs each year, and more than 800,000 receive medical attention for dog bites, with at least half of them being children. It is no exaggeration to say that dog bites pose a significant health risk to our communities and society.

The issue of dangerous dogs, dog bites and public safety is a complex one. Any dog can bite, regardless of its breed. It is the dog's individual history, behavior, general size, number of dogs involved, and the vulnerability of the person bitten that determines the likelihood of biting and whether a dog will cause a serious bite injury. Breed-specific bans are a simplistic answer to a far more complex social problem, and they have the potential to divert attention and resources from more effective approaches.

AVMA's (American Veterinary Medical Association) Policy on Dangerous Animal Legislation states: "The AVMA supports dangerous animal legislation by state, county, or municipal governments provided that legislation does not refer to specific breeds or classes of animals. This legislation should be directed at fostering safety and protection of the general public from animals classified as dangerous."

There are several reasons why breed-specific bans and restrictions are not a responsible approach to dog bite prevention:

Breed-specific laws can be difficult to enforce, especially when a dog's breed can't easily be determined or if it is of mixed breed.
Frequently, breed-specific legislation focuses on dogs with a certain appearance or physical characteristics, instead of an actual breed. "Pit bulls" are the most frequent targets of breed-specific legislation despite being a general type rather than a breed; other breeds also are sometimes banned, including Rottweilers, Dobermans and boxers. However, it is extremely difficult to determine a dog's breed or breed mix simply by looking at it.

Breed-specific legislation is discriminatory against responsible owners and their dogs.
By generalizing the behaviors of dogs that look a certain way, innocent dogs and pet owners suffer. BSL can lead to the euthanasia of innocent dogs that fit a certain "look," and to responsible pet owners being forced to move or give up dogs that have never bitten or threatened to bite. Furthermore, dogs that are considered to be of a "dangerous breed" may already be serving the community in positions such as police work, military operations, rescue purposes, and as service animals. Contrary to being a liability, these animals are assets to society; however they, too, suffer due to misinformation and breed-based stereotypes.

Breed bans do not address the social issue of irresponsible pet ownership.
Dogs are more likely to become aggressive when they are unsupervised, unneutered, and not socially conditioned to live closely with people or other dogs. Banning a specific breed can give a community a false sense of security, and deemphasize to owners of other breeds the importance of appropriate socialization and training, which is a critical part of responsible pet ownership. In enacting breed-specific legislation, cities and states will spend money trying to enforce ineffective bans and restrictions rather than implementing proven solutions, such as licensing and leash laws, and responding proactively to owners of any dog that poses a risk to the community.

It is not possible to calculate a bite rate for a breed or to compare rates between breeds because the data reported is often unreliable. This is because:

1. The breed of a biting dog is often not known or is reported inaccurately.
2. The actual number of bites that occur in a community is not known, especially if they don't result in serious injury.
3. The number of dogs of a particular breed or combination of breeds in a community is not known because it is rare for all dogs in a community to be licensed.
4. Statistics often do not consider multiple incidents caused by a single animal.

Breed popularity changes over time, making comparison of breed-specific bite rates unreliable. However a review of the research that attempts to quantify the relation between breed and bite risk finds the connection to be weak or absent, while responsible ownership variables such as socialization, neutering and proper containment of dogs are much more strongly indicated as important risk factors.

A better solution to dog bite prevention

Animal control and legislative approaches to protecting a community from dangerous dogs should not be based on breed, but instead on promoting responsible pet ownership and developing methods to rapidly identify and respond to owners whose dogs present an actual risk.

The AVMA recommends the following strategies for dog bite prevention:

1. Enforcement of generic, non-breed-specific dangerous dog laws, with an emphasis on chronically irresponsible owners
2. Enforcement of animal control ordinances such as leash laws, by trained animal care and control officers
3. Prohibition of dog fighting
4. Encouraging neutering for dogs not intended for breeding
5. School-based and adult education programs that teach pet selection strategies, pet care and responsibility, and bite prevention

A large group of organizations and experts believes, "do nothing to the dogs, but educate dog owners, children and the elderly, enact strong criminal laws prohibiting dangerous behavior on the part of dog owners, and gather more information about the problem."

A respected group of canine professionals took this position in the authoritative paper entitled, A Community Approach to Dog Bite Prevention. They advocated dealing with the epidemic by instituting a combination of animal control ordinances and educational efforts, as well as more accurate reporting of dog attacks. They opposed breed bans on the ground that any dog could be a bad dog, that it is too difficult to identify breeds like pit bulls, and that people with bad intentions will turn harmless breeds into killer breeds to stay one step ahead of the law.

Other organizations that exist specifically to oppose breed bans and, in particular, pit bull bans, also promote stiff criminal laws against people who abuse dogs or habitually violate the animal control laws. See, for example, the "Three Strikes You're Out" proposal by Animal Farm Foundation, Inc., an organization devoted "to restore the image of the American Pit Bull Terrier, and to protect him from discrimination and cruelty"