Advertisement

Government ban on Bully dogs should go even further

I do not understand the government’s intention to go for a half-measure in banning the breeding of non-pedigree Bully dogs, only to regularise the breeding of the pure breed with Kennel Clubs. This is a lot of bureaucracy that is unneeded and only serves a couple of individuals for doing an activity that is potentially dangerous for society.

No one needs a bully breed in our highly-dense habitat. The privilege should not be allowed and the government is indirectly subsidising this activity by regularising it. Anyone who tells you otherwise is lying and there will be plenty of people in this business who will tell you otherwise.

The reality is that owning these kind of dogs is like owning a weapon. It is not society’s obligation to ensure and check whether you are fit and proper to own such a dangerous being or object. One’s opinions or desires do not fit in the discussion on this matter. Some may find it trifling, but we have long been accustomed by Labour to tolerate and even subsidise bad habits.

 


Comments

  1. Matthew Croker avatar
    Matthew Croker

    When it comes to smaller breeds, like french bulldogs and Boston terriers, this will act as an incentive for breeders to abuse with their prices and possibly incentivising puppy mills.

    These breeds have small litters, typically 3 puppies, and need to undergo C-section procedures to give birth. No one in their right state of mind would breed these dogs for fighting in this day and age. They have been down bread and domesticated to be living soft toys. Now they are gold.

    For bigger breeds, I think this is a good step forward.

  2. Letsnot Generalise avatar
    Letsnot Generalise

    When we adopted a mixed breed mostly Staffie (English not the larger American) from Ghammieri/Animal Welfare, most of the dogs they had were in fact bully mixes, but the biters were a springer and a golden retriever mix. Meanwhile years later my dog is a threat to stray cats, rats and low flying pigeons but nothing else, and is useless as a guard dog (never the intention) as the most she might do is lick a burglar to death. Or drag me under a car in pursuit of a cat. This law is just a way to avoid directly confronting the problem of bad dog owners. So now they can switch to tal-fenek/rottweiler mixes for dog fights, neither of which have been banned, but both of which had attacked my previous dog. Obviously there is a line somewhere, so there shouldn’t be such a thing as a responsible tiger owner going out for walks with the tiger on a lead, but generally, as always, the problem is humans not dogs. The phrase “there are no bad dogs, only bad dog owners” is not 100% true, but it’s close. Dogs have mental problems just like humans, often created by humans, but like humans most can be treated.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *