Wow this post got popular. I got called into work and didnt see the replies, sorry ladies and gentlemen! Trying to catch up tonight.

  • OskarAxolotl@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    You only allow people who already own a banned dog to keep it. After a few years it will become obvious that anybody who owns a young illegal dog must have purchased it after the ban.

    • dan@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I get the concept but the downside of banning sales without banning ownership is it will have zero immediate effect, risks creating a black market in the short term. It may even increase the demand for those dogs (see the increase in gun sales in the US when there’s a threat of legislation).

      So I can’t imagine any reasonable government supporting that approach.

      • OskarAxolotl@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think there is a proper short term solution to this problem. At least dogs don’t live forever. A gun bought now can still be used to shoot somebody in a hundred years, a pitbull, on the other hand, has an average life expectancy of 12-14 years.