http://www.canada.com/national/story.asp?id=FD9C70F9-0853-4CE7-9DBA-A4341B60A9DB

This tragic incident serves as a reminder that potentially dangerous breeds should be treated differently by society, than others. I feel that by regulating these breeds, and licensing their owners (which should include a mandatory educational course for any potential owners of these breeds) this type of horrific incident can be avoided.

I also believe that Vancouver needs to do what AAS has been asking, and ban the keeping of yard dogs. Two statements within the news article clearly tell me that these Rotties were unsocialized yard dogs that lived in a pen and were rarely let out, and now an innocent child has lost his life because of it. From the article:

"He said the owner of the dogs let them out of their pen before joining the father in the basement to help fix the electrical panel."

"Phyllis Galliland, who lives next door to the family, said the dogs were usually fenced in and were never seen roaming around."

For those who argue that regulating specific breeds is not fair to the breed itself or to responsible owners, then I ask you to consider whether killing these dogs after the fact is fair either? No animal should suffer by death because of human ignorance, and if that means regulating, then I would rather see that than the alternative. People who claim to love dogs are fully capable of loving any number of breeds, and there are hundreds of non-aggressive breeds to have as an alternative to the potentially dangerous ones. In my opinion, it is pure human selfishness that perpetuates the argument that "you can't regulate my favourite breed".

If Vancouver would regulate the keeping of these dangerous breeds and ban the keeping of yard dogs in general (all breeds), many of these problems would be eliminated without imposing a total breed ban.