Californian law change means pet shops can sell only rescued animals
California is set to become the first state in the US to ban the sale of non-rescue animals in pet shops.
The new law, known as AB 485, takes effect on 1 January. Any businesses violating it face a $500 (£400) fine.
The change means cats, dogs and rabbits sold by retailers cannot be sourced from breeders, only from animal shelters.
Animal rights groups have heralded it as a step forward against so-called "kitten factories" and "puppy mills".
Previously: California Commercial Pet Breeding Law Passed, Signed
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 31 2018, @04:10PM (5 children)
That doesn't happen with the vast majority of pit bulls. You're looking at statistics and seeing lots of pit bull bites, but what you're not seeing is what overall percentage of pit bulls actually do such things.
Also, most of the time, pit bulls can't even be properly identified, skewing the statistics even further. This is all just media fearmongering, same as what happened to several other breeds of dogs in the past. It's unbelievable that people buy into it.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 31 2018, @04:18PM (4 children)
Russian roulette is still Russian roulette even when you increase the number of empty chambers. The problem is that when pit bulls decide to attack, it's catastrophic.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 31 2018, @04:25PM (3 children)
You're still worried about a nearly nonexistent possibility compared to all the other unnecessary risks you happily take. And, again, proper pitbull identification remains a problem.
Well, in the end, people can get whatever dogs they like, but it's the fearmongering breed-specific legislation that results from this attitude that is the real problem.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 31 2018, @07:20PM (1 child)
So sayeth the lover of dangerous dogs. There is no question that some breeds are more aggressive than others. Pit bulls are one of those breeds. As I said before, the real issue is that when they go on the attack their breed characteristics make them more likely to harm or kill than, say - a Yorkshire Terrier. You can apologize all you like for the statistically insignificant attacks, but that doesn't make them disappear.
I personally would be happy if owners of such dogs bore the brunt of criminality as though they committed the acts themselves. If Rover gets away from you and mauls someone, it's felony assault and battery. If it kills, you go to jail for manslaughter. If the dog was reported for being vicious beforehand, it's premeditated. If you want to harbor dangerous animals, be prepared to go to prison if you guess wrong on your little precious fluffball's demeanor.
As for identification, I'll take the Supreme Court standard definition. I'll know it if I see it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01 2019, @06:44AM
I've never owned a pit bull in my life. I just don't buy into nonsensical, irrational media hype and faulty statistics which wouldn't be intimidating even if they were true.
You won't, but okay.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Sulla on Monday December 31 2018, @09:43PM
German shepherds which are known to be aggressive made up 5.4% of the dog population in 2016, compare this to the pit bill population of 4.9% for that year. The percentage of pit bulls increases each year. Between 2005 and 2017 the known to be aggressive german shepherds made up 4.6% of all fatal dog attacks, in the same time period pit bulls made up 65.5%.
https://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-multi-year-fatality-report-2005-2017.php [dogsbite.org]
https://www.animals24-7.org/2016/07/29/2016-survey-list-of-top-5-u-s-dog-breed-types-ousts-pit-bulls/ [animals24-7.org]
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam