In September 2011 the Victorian government decided that the legislation on dangerous dogs were not tough enough after the fatal attack of ayon chol. Dogs considered dangerous are American pit bulls, Fila Brasileiro, Japanese Tosa, Dogo Argentino and Presa Canario as listed on the government website although only the pit bull terriers and one Dogo Argentino are actually living in Victoria. These laws are discriminatory and futile.
The laws that target the 'dangerous dogs' are the governments fruitless attempt to stop all the dog attacks made by the target breeds. But these laws also could contribute to the supposed problem of aggression in the targeted breeds. The laws require the animals to 'be in a secure enclosure on the persons premies and when out of the enclosure they are to be on a leashed and muzzled', this means that the animal is basically going to be trapped in some way all day without much freedom. How would you feel if you had stay in the same area every day and even when being let out you still are restricted and denied of the freedoms that others have? Being sentenced to jail even before even committing a crime. The problem with this is that the lack of freedom and the pretty much constant restraint could cause the dog to become easily agitated and aggressive. The Victorian government aren't the first government to come up with the idea of laws against 'restricted breeds' already in england , holland, belgium and italy have enforced these laws and the laws have been unsuccessful to stopping a lot of the dog attacks. The dog attacks still happen as not only the 'restriced breeds' or 'dangerous dogs' that attack.
The new laws might reduce attacks by the 'dangerous dogs' but that doesn't eliminate dog attacks completely. Dog attacks still happen even with the laws against the 'dangerous dogs' as all breeds of dogs can be dangerous. When I was younger I remember riding my bike when a chiaua, yes the miniture dog often seen in handbags, came out...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document