I wish that I knew the answer.

I like my blog to generally be a place of light-hearted fun,

maybe some inspiration of the crafting variety

and perhaps something here and there to make you think.

But I woke up this morning to another child's death from a dog attack.

This morning, as a mother to a 4 year old daughter,

not as a vet,

 not as an educated person having a rational thought process,

I said "I wish someone would ban those bloody pit-bulls"

My husband,

as a vet,

as an educated person having a considered opinion,

perhaps not speaking as the father of a 4 year old daughter,

said that is not the solution.

I have seen pit bulls during my career as a vet.

At least two.

Neither were anything more than friendly, non-threatening dogs.

I have been threatened at work by any individual of any breed that you could name...

Beagles, Labradors, Chihuahuas, Blue Heelers, Dobermans,

Staffordshire Bull Terriers, Poodles, cross breeds, Daschunds, White Highland Whites, Dalmations,
Cocker Spaniels.
Get the idea?

I could go on and on.

You name a breed

and you can find someone, somewhere, who has come across a nasty individual.

We are the owners of our second Staffordshire bull terrier.

We constantly defend our breed choice to people who consider Staffies to be dangerous dogs.

Neither our children nor anyone else has ever been threatened by her.

But my comment as a vet to an owner was always that

no individual dog can or should ever be trusted completely.

It doesn't matter what their track record is.

There could be some provocation that could make a dog hurt a person,

either accidently or on purpose.

You can find reports that state the higher incidence of some breeds' involvement in attacks.

While I believe this to be true,

then the question comes- do we ban all these breeds?

Do we get rid of German Shepherds? Rottweilers? Heelers? Bull terriers?

Where is the cut off point?

Where do you draw the line in the sand?

How many (reported) attacks need to occur before a breed is considered

inappropriate for location around people, around families?

And what consolation is it to you if you or one of your family members

are attacked by a dog that isn't considered a dangerous breed?

If you want to own a dog, be responsible.

Have common sense, chose appropriate breeds for your family and living situation,

desex and train your dog,

be aware and be proactive if you have problems.

Fighting dogs were bred to fight other dogs.
As good as our Staffy is with people,

we know that she doesn't get along with other dogs

so we never put her or ourselves in the situation where that is a problem.

Make dog owners aware of the consequences to them, the owners,

as a result of their dogs' actions and the decisions that they make as an owner.

Make them face the law.

Hold them accountable for their decision to own that animal.

Thinking about manslaughter charges might make ownership of that cool but dangerous dog breed

not quite so attractive.

No-one could tell the mother or family of that little girl a single thing right now

that could offer any consolation.

Even if that dog owner did everything he or she was asked to do,

it didn't protect her child.

Negligent dog owner or not, she has lost her child.

So the debate has started yet again about dangerous dog breeds

and responsible dog ownership.

As a mum or a vet or a person debating the issue,

I don't know what the right answer is

because I know how I would be feeling if my family

was threatened or hurt by one of these dogs

that shouldn't be anything but locked up securely on their property in the first place.

So I find myself asking if it should be there at all.