What is BSL?
Breed-specific legislation (BSL) is legislation that targets specific breeds of dog (namely pit bulls and "pit bull types") because they are supposedly inherently dangerous and therefore deserving of prejudicial rules and regulations. BSL can be loosely divided into two types:

Type 1--Bans
Bans make it illegal to own, house, harbor, import, train, or breed any of the dogs listed in the legislation in a particular location. Dogs that already exist in the area of the ban are usually grandfathered in, but their owners have to comply with extensive laws in order to keep their animals. These laws typically require owners to take out expensive liability insurance on their dogs, muzzle the dogs in public, keep the animals confined in kennels, mandatory spay/neuter, etc.

Type 2--Ownership regulation
Regulation legislation doesn't ban a breed outright, but rather makes it extremely difficult to own a certain breed. Requirements such as liability insurance, mandatory spay/neuter, higher licensing costs, muzzling in public, etc. are typical of legislation like this. Ownership regulation also places age limits on who can own or handle certain breeds. Through this type of legislation, the government is basically deciding who is and who is not allowed to own certain dogs.
back to top

What's the point of BSL?
The supporters of BSL claim their goal is to put an end to dog attacks by targeting certain breeds of dog that are "inherently vicious/dangerous", and dogs that tend to appeal to people who are involved in criminal activity (i.e. drug dealers, dog fighters, gangbangers, etc).
back to top

Why BSL doesn’t work
Breed-specific laws fail because they do not take into consideration the reality that any dog, regardless of its physical characteristics, must be raised, trained and socialized properly to become a good pet and canine good citizen. Breed bans undermine responsible dog ownership by diverting attention from the real issue, which is the need for dog owners to educate themselves about their dogs' behavioral needs and to provide socialization and training consistent with those needs. Dog owners who understand this produce good dogs regardless of the breed or mix.

A five year study published in the Cincinnati Law Review in 1982, vol. 53, pg 1077, which specifically considered both Rottweilers and "pit bulls", concluded in part that: “...statistics did not support the assertion that any one breed was dangerous... when legislation is focused on the type of dog it fails, because it is... unenforceable, confusing, and costly... focusing legislation on dogs that are "vicious" distracts attention from the real problem, which is irresponsible owners.”

If pit bulls and similar breeds are outlawed or severely restricted, one of two things happen: criminals and irresponsible owners will continue to obtain the dogs by simply ignoring the law, or they will turn to other breeds to suit their purposes.

Breed specific legislation is not a practical approach to the regulation of dogs. BSL is generally upheld only when it refers to named breeds of dogs and the standards set by recognized breed clubs. Proving that a particular dog falls within the ordinance usually requires expert testimony. Application of BSL to mixed breed dogs presents difficulties both legally and practically. Whether or not an expert can accurately identify a mixed breed dog is itself the subject of controversy.
back to top

Alternatives to Breed Specific Legislation:
Instead of passing unfair, ineffective laws, NLOL advocates developing animal control programs that encourage dog owners to properly socialize, train, and care for their dogs so that they can become good canine citizens and remain prominent members of the cultural landscape. Legislation defining prohibited dog behavior is a more practical approach than BSL. Properly drafted, it has a stronger legal and evidentiary basis. Specificity aids enforcement and understanding of what is necessary to comply.

Specific Alternatives to BSL include:
1) Enforcement of generic dangerous dog laws -- laws that hold owners accountable for the actions of their dogs regardless of breed.
2) Enforcement of leash laws -- fine owners who let their dogs run loose or fail to keep them in secure enclosures. Use the money collected from these fines to fund community dog safety and responsible ownership programs.
3) Significant penalties for those involved in any inhumane or irresponsible activity with animals.
4) Actively pursue legislation that focuses on responsible pet ownership and would render owners liable for the actions of their pets, such as a good non-breed specific dangerous dog law.

We suggest that the appropriate policy should be "blame the owner, not the dog." Owners can and should take responsibility for their pets.
back to top

A Brief Summary From Ohio Valley Dog Owners, Inc.
Breed-specific ordinances are short-sighted and ineffective because ...
1. Dog control problems are people problems and are not limited to a breed or mix. Singling out breeds of dogs as vicious or banning them outright merely shifts the responsibility from the dog owner (where it belongs) to the breed of dog and does not solve community dog problems.
2. Banning a breed or declaring it inherently vicious punishes those responsible dog owners who are the type of citizen that communities need to keep, not drive away.
3. Communities that have instituted such bans often find that the irresponsible owners and the criminals who use dogs for illegal purposes simply switch to another breed.
4. Banning a breed or particular mix of breeds punishes those dogs that are reliable community citizens, therapy dogs, assistance dogs for handicapped owners, search and rescue dogs, drug-sniffing dogs, police dogs, etc. and drives them out of the community. Some individual dogs have been corrupted by some ignorant breeders and owners, but the breeds themselves have a long and honorable history of serving man. To label all as vicious for the actions of a few ignores this history and the benefits of owning these dogs.
5. Breeds and mixes are often difficult to identify. The American Veterinary Medical Association and several state veterinary medical associations are on record as opposing breed-specific legislation for just this reason.
6. The “pit bull” is a type of dog bred for fighting, not a specific breed. Responsibly bred and owned, the American Staffordshire Terrier and Staffordshire Bull Terrier are not fighting dogs, and their breed names are not synonymous with the descriptive term applied to fighting dogs.
7. Passage of laws that are only enforced on complaint cause two problems: they create disrespect for the law if the authorities require compliance only upon complaint and they provide ammunition for neighborhood feuds.

Our alternatives to breed bans are:

1. Vigorously enforce dangerous dog laws. Untrained and unsupervised dogs of any breed or mix can cause community problems. Those who allow dogs to run loose or to menace the neighbors should be dealt with according to a tough at-large or dangerous dog law. Anyone who deliberately trains a dog to menace others or who uses a dog in commission of a crime should be charged with an additional offense.
2. Host education sessions for responsible dog ownership that includes safety information about dealing with dogs. 3. Protect the rights of all citizens with nuisance ordinances such as anti-barking and animal waste clean-up regulations.
4. Teach the children of the community about responsible dog ownership and care. The American Kennel Club has a free education program on dog care for elementary schools. It includes a video tape, teacher’s guide, and worksheets and can be supplemented with demonstrations of obedience training, grooming, and talks on veterinary care by local training clubs or veterinarians.
back to top

References
Harwelik, Mary. “The Real Pit Bull.”
2000. http://www.realpitbull.com/laws.html

Blackman, Diane. “PRACTICALITY OF BREED SPECIFIC LEGISLATION IN REDUCING OR ELIMINATING DOG ATTACKS ON HUMANS AND DOGS.”
1995. http://www.dog-play.com/pitbull.html

Anonymous. “OVDO Is Opposed to Breed Specific Bans.”
2003. http://www.canismajor.com/orgs/ovdo/bslho.html