“Punish the deed, not the breed”
Those that know me, and to an extent those that don’t know me that well, know one thing about me; I love dogs. They don’t have to stay small, cute and playful puppies in order to receive my adoration; a big old Doberman is as special as a new born Scotty. Sadly however, it would seem that the government would like us to think differently. They would like us to think that certain breeds of dogs are inherently “evil”. This is nonsense. Allow me to explain why I think so.
Imagine for a second that I was an Imam at a local mosque and I was teaching young boys how to martyr themselves - I apologise for this analogy, but it is one that I feel explains my anger and frustration in a way that is easily understandable to many so I will continue with it, as crude as it may be - teaching them how to make bombs with which to kill innocent people in the name of some twisted ideal, and promising them immortality in return. Who do we blame for this? Do we blame the young, corruptible boy who straps the explosives to his chest? He may have been threatened. His family may have been threatened. He may not even go through with it and be punished for his inaction – violently so. No. We should punish the hate-filled preachers who blacken the young hearts of these impressionable children. These are the true villains. It is no different with dogs.
Racism, prejudice, homophobia, religious extremism are not something you are born with, they are taught; and for the most part this is true with vicious dogs - of course there are exceptions, some dogs are just born broken as are some humans - but the following is an exert of what people do to “train” a fighting dog, http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-in-entertainment/dogfighting.aspx
Forced to Fight and Left to Die
The dogs who are most commonly bred for fighting are generally known as "pit bulls": Staffordshire terriers, American Staffordshire terriers, American bulldogs, and American pit bull terriers. Dogs who are used for fighting are usually kept penned or chained (often with heavy logging chains), and many are taunted and starved in order to trigger extreme survival instincts and encourage aggression.
Some dogfighters train dogs by forcing them to tread water in pools; run on a treadmill while a caged rabbit, cat, chicken, or other terrified animal is dangled in front of them; or hang on with their jaws while dangling from a chain baited with meat. Many dogs are injected with steroids, and some dogfighters even sharpen their dogs' teeth, cut off their ears (to prevent another dog from latching on), and add roach poison to their food so that their fur might taste bad to other dogs.
Dogs who "win" fights are forced to fight again and again and are used to breed puppies for profit. One dog who was described as a particularly successful fighter generated $100,000 in stud fees in a single year. Female dogs are strapped down on "rape stands" to prevent fighting while males impregnate them. Many of the dogs who do not fight or who lose fights are used as "bait" animals.
So, what makes the people that do this to dogs, any different to our fictional Imam? Taking an innocent, impressionable dog and turning it into a vicious killer, or nothing more than target practice for bigger stronger dogs. If I stood in a public and said “all Muslims should be arrested as they stand the biggest chance of becoming a suicide bomber”, you would and should find this offensive. Well, I think the same when someone says, “All [insert breed here] should be destroyed because they are vicious”.
Many professional trainers think the same way that I do. Take what “Dog Whisperer” Cesar Millan has to say:
http://www.cesarsway.com/dogbehavior/basics/How-Did-Pit-Bulls-Get-a-Bad-Rap
Yet it only takes a brief look at the history of pit bulls to realize that the dogs are not the problem; the humans who misuse them are. For over a hundred years, holding the owners personally responsible was enough to prevent attacks, and the breed was perceived as very child-friendly. With outreach and education, it may be possible to restore that image and rehabilitate the pit bull’s reputation, restoring an iconic American dog to its rightful place among mankind’s best friends.
The problem is, and I will admit that this is simple speculation on my part; it is simply cheaper to destroy the animals that these types of people favour instead of doing some proper police work and prosecuting and punishing them. The RSPCA are no better.
http://rspcanotwhattheyseem.blogspot.co.uk/
Revealed: RSPCA destroys HALF of the animals that it rescues - yet thousands are completely healthy
- Shock figures reveal 3,400 animals put down for 'non-medical reasons'
- Whistle-blower claims she shot healthy dogs 'because there was no room'
- Statistics show 10,000 fewer animals were rehomed in 2011
- But charity's prosecutions of rogue pet owners leap 20 per cent
- Countryside Alliance says charity should lose right to call itself Royal
The RSPCA destroys nearly half the animals it ‘rescues’ each year, with thousands being put down for non-medical reasons, shocking figures obtained by The Mail on Sunday reveal.
The animal-welfare charity destroyed 53,000 animals last year – 44 per cent of those it took in - leading critics to claim that the organisation spends too much time on prosecuting cases of neglect and cruelty and not enough on finding new homes for animals.
The charity insists the vast majority of the animals were put down to end their suffering, but it admits that last year alone 3,400 animals were destroyed for ‘non-medical’ reasons, such as the lack of space in kennels and catteries.
The above is from just one website, but there are many more places online that you can find just how the RSPCA “care” for the animals they “rescue”. They simply think that killing innocent animals is the easiest and cheapest solution, and are staunch followers and advocates of B.S.L or Breed Specific Legislation. The Dangerous Dogs Act 1997 is explained here:
http://www.endangereddogs.com/Dangerous%20Dogs%20Act.htm
The Dangerous Dogs Act (DDA) 1991 is breed specific legislation (BSL) – Section 1 (1) of the legislation refers to four types of dog:
- The Pit Bull Terrier
- The Japanese Tosa
- The Dogo Argentino
- The Fila Braziliero
Under section 1(3) it is illegal to keep any of the above types of dog, unless the dog is registered on the Index of Exempted Dogs and certain conditions of exemption are strictly adhered to.
It is a criminal offence for a dog owner to be in possession or custody of any of the listed dogs, unless a certificate of exemption is in force.
Section 1(2) of the Dangerous Dogs Act prohibits the breeding; sale, exchange, advertising, or gift of any dog listed in section 1(1)-prohibited dogs. It also prohibits these dogs from being in a public place with being muzzled and kept on a lead. Abandoning or allowing to stray is also prohibited under this section of the law.
When the law was originally introduced – dog owners had to fulfil certain requirements within a very short space of time in order to bring their dog within the law. There was a deadline given after which time the Index closed and those dogs not fully exempted became illegal.
There were originally 8,200 dogs notified to the Index of Exempted Dogs, by the end of 1992 a total of only 4,821 dogs were on the register and 'legally held'. This figure had dropped to 2,841 when the Act was amended in 1997.
It saddens me so much that loving, loyal and well-mannered family pets are being taken away and killed because of narrow-minded, short-sighted policy makers. I believe, and I am not alone, that there is a better way to deal with this problem, I believe in it so much that I put it as the title to this piece: “Punish the deed, not the breed”. If a family can raise a friendly, loving dog no matter what type it may be, then why should they not be allowed to do so? I love my dog, and if he were to be taken away from me it would break my heart. I do everything I can to make sure that he is a well-mannered, well-adjusted animal, I do not do the things that I outlined earlier; if I did I should be blamed for my dog’s behavior not him.