I Would Like to Add My Support to the Case for Rescinding Breed Specific Legislation in the State of Victoria. As Well As the Us
Submission 199 I would like to add my support to the case for rescinding Breed Specific Legislation in the State of Victoria. As well as the usual objections, including that the scientific literature does not support BSL, that it is ineffective as well as inhumane, and that it blames a breed rather than a deed, I would like to draw attention to two perhaps unintended consequences of BSL that have a detrimental effect on society at large. • The requirement for restricted breed dogs to wear muzzles and collars identifying them as ‘dangerous’ whenever outside their property creates unwarranted fear in members of the public When encountering a dog that is muzzled, the natural assumption to make is that the dog is wearing the muzzle for a good reason, and to feel some degree of wariness. This reaction would be reinforced if the dog is also wearing a collar designed to warn people of potential danger. However, if the dog wearing these identifiers of risk has no history of aggression, then the requirement for it to wear these items whenever in public creates anxiety in members of the public who encounter it that serves no valid purpose whatsoever. This requirement to publicly label restricted breed dogs as indiscriminately threatening not only creates unjustified fear for the community, but also psychologically primes people to anticipate acts of aggression, which puts restricted breed dogs and their owners at risk. Say, for example, that a dog (of any breed) out on-leash with its owners is startled by a cyclist passing them at speed from behind without giving a warning of his/her approach, and reacts defensively by barking and/or lunging at the cyclist.
[Show full text]