Breed Bans

“End Breed Bans” – a bumper sticker I saw today with a stylized puppy logo.

There are certain breeds of dogs that have been historically engineered (bred) for aggression and winning-in-a-fight. They’re quick to anger, their jaws lock on when they bite, requiring some real effort to separate them. Kids have been savaged by these dog breeds. Individually, I’m sure every one of these dogs is a fine upstanding puppy, and I certainly have met a few real sweeties.

But I don’t think you can be for breed bans and against gun bans (or vice-versa).

There are certain types of guns that are engineered for winning-in-a-fight. Just like dogs.

It’s not the gun or the dog that’s the problem. It’s the owner. You take certain steps when you have a dangerous thing in the house, whether it’s a dog (solid training, training for people around the dog) or a gun (gun safe, ammo safe, ammo safe not in the gun safe, training for people around the guns, whatever other training you get for guns because I’m not trained for them). You take these steps because you acknowledge that what you have is dangerous and its scope for danger is much higher than other objects in its class (the dog is not necessarily more likely to bite when it gets angry but the bite could do more damage, or maybe it is more likely to bite because this breed is quick to anger. the gun is not more likely to go off, but uses bigger bullets that can really rip up a body). A responsible human recognizes extra dangers and takes steps to mitigate them.

The problem is that we’re not all responsible owners. And I can’t trust each one of you to be a responsible owner, whether of an especially dangerous gun type or of a fight winning dog breed.

I don’t think this is a reductio ad absurdum argument. Both things are subsets of a bigger group, and within that group, each class I’ve listed is engineered to be more dangerous than other items in that group. Each dangerous class requires special caution. I don’t think this is a strawman argument. I think there are people out there who are against puppy-bans and are pro gun-bans.

I’m just saying you should be consistent.

Personally, I’m against breed bans. But I’m more likely to worry if Miss K is over at a friends house and they have a (fighting dog breed) as opposed to a (non fighting dog breed) because I don’t trust the owners. I also think you should have whatever gun makes you happy, as long as you’re being safe with it. However, I’m not arguing for or against dogs or guns. I’m just saying that you should be consistent. Oh, also realistic. I don’t think we’re going to get the guns back into Pandora’s box.

Published by

rustifer

I'm a fairly typical stressed-out dad. I'm outnumbered three to one by the women of my household, but I still manage to hold my own.

One thought on “Breed Bans”

  1. The center of your argument is, “The problem is that we’re not all responsible owners.”

    We wouldn’t need police if we were all law-abiding citizens. We wouldn’t even need laws, because we would all do the right thing all the time. But we all know that we are not all law-abiding citizens.

    The only time we need to control people is when they interfere with the rights of others.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>