Breed Bans: Inhumane and Ineffective

Breed-specific laws are being challenged across the country as ineffective and inhumane.

Scientific Evidence Lacks Bite

Despite widespread adoption, there is no evidence that breed-specific laws reduce dog bites or attacks on people. In fact, experts argue that these policies divert resources away from more effective animal control and public safety initiatives.

Leading animal welfare organizations, including the American Veterinary Medical Association, the National Animal Control Association, and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, all oppose breed-specific legislation.

Myths and Misinformation

Breed-based policies are rooted in myths and misinformation, rather than science or credible data. They often rely on stereotypes and misconceptions about certain breeds, leading to the unjust targeting of popular dogs like German shepherds and pit bull-types.

This has devastating consequences for the dogs affected, who are frequently forced out of homes and into shelters. Underfunded animal control agencies bear the burden of enforcing these laws, leading to costly legal battles between dog owners and local authorities.

A Shift Towards Breed-Neutral Policies

Fortunately, more people and their elected officials are recognizing the flaws in breed Bans. In recent years, 21 states have passed laws prohibiting breed-specific legislation at the local level, while over 100 municipalities have replaced BSL with breed-neutral policies.

Repealing breed-specific laws has not led to an increase in dog bites in these communities. In fact, Ohio saw a decrease in dog-related claims after repealing its statewide breed-based law.