The Arguments Against

On October 22 and 29, dog-owners gathered to discuss breed-specific laws, that is, laws singling out specific breeds of dog (e.g. pit bulls) to be regulated or (in the extreme) banned. The consensus was that rather than breed-specific laws, there should be owner-specific laws, regulating the behavior of owners. However, this is against accepted opinion, which holds that some breeds of dogs are inherently vicious. To rebut this accepted opinion, opponents of breed-specific laws (“AGAINST”) had to explain why the accepted opinion is unfounded. Those defending the laws (“FOR”), in turn, had to explain why the explanations were not adequate. So the discussion went along on a zig-zag pattern, one argument being followed by another argument in answer:

FOR: Certain breeds (pit bulls, mainly) should be restricted, because they are aggressive by nature, as shown by the high incidence of bites reported in the media and some statistical studies.

AGAINST: The attacks are explained by the fact that the owners made the dogs aggressive, whether by intention, neglect or ignorance. The dogs’ nature was not at fault. Therefore it should be the owners who are regulated, not the dogs.

FOR: But there may be bad owners for any breed of dog, so blaming the owners doesn’t explain why certain breeds (pit bulls for example) are more aggressive than other breeds.

AGAINST: The higher incidence of aggressiveness in certain breeds is explained by the fact that certain undesirable people (drug dealers etc.) choose to own these dogs and train them to be aggressive. Therefore (again) the fault lies with these owners, not the dogs.

FOR: But these owners wouldn’t choose these dogs unless they thought they could be well trained to be aggressive. Therefore there must be a natural tendency in these dogs to be aggressive.

AGAINST: If these owners (or anyone else) considers these breeds to be aggressive, it is because of the bad publicity they have received. (It was pointed out that aggressive reputations go in cycles. Some years ago, it was doberman pinschers that were thought to be vicious, but we seldom hear of them now.) In addition, the configuration of pit bulls – the square jaw etc. – makes them appear to be tough, and contributes to their being chosen by people looking for tough dogs.

AGAINST: In addition, a counter-argument: If we were to ban or greatly restrict the breeds of dogs we have, then people looking for aggressive dogs would turn to other breeds, such as some from Eastern Europe, whose potential for harm is much greater.