Pit/Rott Legislation

We have laws in place that would be sufficient to protect us and our pets in most situations, if only they were enforced. Most places have a leash law, as well as "generic" dangerous dog laws.... something like if a dog has shown aggression or bitten someone, they're considered dangerous and have to follow dangerous dog guidelines, muzzles, kennels, the whole nine yards. These would effectively prevent the majority of dog bites by roaming or at large dogs, and dogs known to be aggressive (like the ones that killed the woman in colorado, and the ones that killed the woman in SF). Sure, they're not perfect, but nothing is, and what's the sense in passing new laws if we don't/can't even enforce the ones in place now? The only other law I feel could be a useful addition to current laws would be mandatory microchipping, so when a dog bites someone it can be traced back to its owners, dog is repeatedly left roaming, it can be traced back, etc. Of course, not everyone would get that done, but if dogs picked up by AC were required to be chipped before leaving again, that would catch a lot of irresponsible owners. If done correctly, such a law could be a help in identifying problem dogs (as individuals, not breeds) and owners.

As an owner of a pair of pit bulls, as well as several smaller "foo foos", I can say that I've seen both sides of the fence. Both the smaller dogs and the pit bulls have been endangered by other dogs roaming, or not under their owners' control, and likewise, both of the pit bulls and one of the smaller dogs are dog aggressive in some form or other, and require extra attention to situations when out in public. None of our dogs, pit bull or otherwise cause problems.... that's because we're aware of our dogs individual quirks, and take whatever precautions are necessary to prevent problems for others, as well as ourselves. On the other hand, the dogs we've had problems with in our neighborhood have one thing in common.... owners who don't care that their dogs cause problems, and think it's "normal", or even "funny". These people would (and do) do this, regardless of what type of dog they own.

We have numerous dogs that run loose in our area, quite a few of which will threaten people, other dogs, or both if given half a chance... only one of the dogs is a dog that could possibly be classified as a pit bull, only one other a rotty. The rest are primarily labs, lab mixes, and other "family dog" type breeds. I feel no less afraid for my dogs when a lab mix runs up to us in full threat display than I do when the Sharpei next door does the same.... an aggressive dog is going to cause damage if it wants, no matter the breed. Sure, if pit bulls and rottweilers were restricted, and these two dogs in my areas' owners complied (which I doubt they would, they don't seem to care much about what their dogs do, nor about what others have to say), that'd be two less dogs to worry about, but it'd leave about a dozen more dogs not of those breeds to contend with, and those dogs' owners to continue to shirk their responsibilities. That's not fair to anyone, nor is it effective.

The "dog bite problem" is like someone bleeding to death... slapping a bandaid (like breed restrictions) on it isn't going to keep them from dying, you have to actually find the source of the problem and take care of it there-in this case, the source is bad owners. Lawmakers need to place the responsibility where it belongs, on dog owners.