Seems heavy handed but I get where they're coming from. Pitbulls have always gotten a bad rep by the media even when it is the owners who are the source of the issue.
Unfortunately, a few bad apples can ruin it for a collective group. They should be targeting owners and perhaps implementing way more stringent requirements for those who want to own pitbulls but I am sure they've thought of that before passing this law.
While I understand that dogs are often members of the family and are treated as such, they are also somewhat of a product as well and I don't mean that in a bad way. Much like vehicle licensing standards, different vehicles classes require different standards.
Some may contend that pitbulls are no different from any other dogs but the difference is that their capacity and potential for harm. A pitbull bite is not a chihuahua bite is not a cat scratch. The theme is that stereotypically certain breeds are used for certain functions.
IMO "dangerous" and "can be dangerous" are two very different things but often this gets diluted in conversations.
I hope that current pitbull owners can retain their furry lovables and that there is a more harmonious way to solve this than just banning them.
|