I think you'll find when the original ban came into force it was John Major and the conservative government that were responsible for it

Suppose it defines whats a stupid law, someone say its a stupid law that you cant pee behind a bush in the public place, someone else may think its a stupid law you cant hit someone over the head in a disagreement.

If we all have our own take on what law is to be upheld and what is not, then we would have overflowing prisons...Oops, we have that already,

Yes, I think this is correct however I suspect BSL has enticed more teenagers into status dog ownership than would otherwise have been the case and the negative media stereotypes has certainly excerbated numbers of staffie surrenders while reducing available homes.

I think BSL is stupid whatever country it is in.

Your opinion, not every one agree with you

I guess this may be a case of finding statistics to meet your cause however it demonstrates a little when the 1st report I read states "several animal welfare organisations, veterinary professionals and local authorities joined forces to push a new Dog Control Bill in the UK that would repeal three existing dangerous dogs acts (including 2 that ban four breeds of dogs).
The organizations note that over the past five years, dog bites are up 43% nationally and 79% in London. The nation has spent roughly £17 million over the past 3 years trying to enforce the unenforcable law." this was written on 6th July 2010.

I guess any law can be considered stupid, but I wonder how many people would openly admit to breakin a law they considered stupid? Drinking underage, breaking the speed limit, watching a pirate movie etc all of those are illegal and I don't condone any of them but I don't condone owning a Pit either in the UK.

Incidentally in April this year the Scottish government introduced a bill moving away from breed and focussing on deed, who knows where that will lead, we may end up like Republic of Ireland, with the banned breeds allowed North of the border and also over the sea. And yet still attacks will happen and still dogs will be aggressive and still they will end up in rescues until people are educated and penalised for unacceptable behaviour regardless of what breed of dog they own. It is the humans that are dangerous

wow this thread has got nasty.

The fact is BSL has not worked.

It would not negativly effect the amount of dogs in rescue but may change the breed mostly seen in rescue at worst.

Why do i think this?
There is evidence to suggest there are farmore pitbull "types" in the country than in 91 when the ban was introduced.

Nobody should own an american pitbull terrier in the uk but there are many crosses of legal breed that under BSL can be killed. do you think this is fair?

BSL has protected nobody, it is timethere was a change in the law to protect the people the law is here to serve.

errr...i did mention war crimes

On the subject Bsl I believe it promotes a certain type of dog as being hard/aggressive/tough ect. This attracts a certain owner. Counter productive imo.

Adam

a large majority of dogs on our books are of these 'types'.. not only are the owners unaware of the possibility of their dogs being taken away,they do not believe them to be hard,yes thay want them to fit an image(i have noticed most of them dont really like dogs,its like a mobile phone or car etc)...but jump out of their skin if my csv even looks at them (the owner)...also,most of them wouldnt entertain biting one of us...unlike some other fluffies

You see thats my point, the dogs are fine. The owners only have them because they are ''hard'' dogs.

Adam