feenix

Read, contemplate, try to comprehend. Specific adj particular, definate. Specifically adv Specification n detailed description of something to made or done. Specify v refer to or state specifically. If this actually gets through, tell where any other breed is mentioned in the BSL except for the banned or restricted breeds. If the BSL is anything, it is specific.

Probably with the import ban on GSDs in 1928. I would have to do research to see if this was the first. ETA in Australia Even if you were right, which your not. The law requiring greyhounds to be muzzled when off their owners property, as in being walked or racing, was introduced in 1927.As previously requested....do your homework before you jump in. Yarracully Wikipedia is a contributor driven site....not unlike D.O.L. Did you read where in another thread where the general consesus was you can't educate fools? Don't be included. Read the link I previously provided. You'll be informed....for a change You asked when BSL was introduced and I see you use the example of Greyhounds being muzzled as BSL. Yet in an earlier post when I mentioned the muzzling of greyhounds you stated that this was not Breed Specific Legislation. In fact you made a similar statement in an earlier post yet they were required to wear muzzles long before the Dangerous Dogs legislation was introduced. And yet even earlier again Now make up your mind, either muzzling of greyhounds is or is not BSL. Muzzling a grey has nothing to do with banning it or restricting the breeding. Whatever you decide doesn't matter IT IS BSL by definition I have read your links and one of them is by definition BSL as it identifies a specific breed. That being greyhounds and only greyhounds are specified. As for wikipedia since the definition has been there since 2009 and no-one has edited or altered it it must be a correct definition according to the masses. Same one used by the following: Animal Legal and Historical Centre-A branch of Michigan State University of Law ASPCA RSPCA There are more but I really couldn't be bothered going through the 1 140 000 responses that google found. As for trying to educate fools, your right, but at least I tried. Obviously you are the type that doesn't respond to the wisdom of others being shared. And once more I apologise to all other D.O.L users that this has absolutely nothing to do with the original topic. I don't apologise. All falsehoods need to be challenged. Otherwise they are perpetuated. You are a prime example of the perpetuation problem. The BSL wasn't enacted until the end of the last century, early this century (?) The muzzling of greyhounds is not only not BSL, it is not even breed specific. Any dogs declared to be dangerous to the public or other animals are required to be muzzled in public, whether they are a recognised pure breedbreed or not. Unlike BSL affected breeds, greyhounds are only required to be muzzled when they are racing or in public. Except of course the greenhounds which are allowed to be muzzle free. Greys don't have be kept under any specified conditions, unlike the breeds affected by BSL. BSL affected breeds are required to be muzzled at all times when they are outside their specifically built childproof enclosures. Even in the yared. Even in the house. Read the BSL legislation. See for youself. It can't be that hared surely. It is specifically to do with banned & restricted breeds. Even more specifically it was designed to completely eradicate APBT & their declared "types" from our society. The GSD's were banned from being imported for a while because of the fear they would mate with the dingo & create a super canine that would wreak havoc on livestock. There was an import ban. There were no breed specific requirements of the GSD's already here. No BSL.

Probably with the import ban on GSDs in 1928. I would have to do research to see if this was the first. ETA in Australia Even if you were right, which your not. The law requiring greyhounds to be muzzled when off their owners property, as in being walked or racing, was introduced in 1927. As previously requested....do your homework before you jump in. Yarracully Wikipedia is a contributor driven site....not unlike D.O.L. Did you read where in another thread where the general consesus was you can't educate fools? Don't be included. Read the link I previously provided. You'll be informed....for a change

Crap. BSL means exactly what it says and is any legislation that is breed specific regardless of the breed. Of course those the owners of non banned dogs can't possibly worry about it ever applying to them (need the rolly eye man) In the words of the immortal Eric Morcombe. ROOBISH. For instance. When was BSL legislation introduced?

Doesn't say much for you & your band of numbies when a sock puppet has to keep correcting your ingrained misinformation.

It's only "silly" if you think a breed's country of origin should lose the ability to control what the breed standard is. No, it's silly because the KC made the amendments without consultation with the SBT clubs & despite their protests. Among others, they added "desirable" to the height & now dogs bloody near as big as AST's are being titled here. That's why it's silly. But of course it doesn't matter to anyone who has no affiliation or affection for the breed. And isn't affected by BSL. Silly to think you would give a damn anyhow, now that was really silly. Your breed is no more affected by BSL than mine are. What SBTs and BSL have to do with this thread sure beats me. How are whippets at risk from the BSL? I think you will find the point is ANY breed is at risk of BSL. However this is a bit of the topic and probably should be elsewhere. An example is the law requiring greyhounds to wear a muzzle in public. This is a breed specific legislation as it relates to a specific breed. Give me an honest opinion. What do you consider are the chances of the whippet ever being affected by a BSL anywhere in the Universe? Racing Greyhounds are required to wear muzzles because they are trained to chase & kill small furry animals. They were, & some probably still are, trained to do this by using live small furry animals. It's called "blooding" Yes but the law doesn't say racing greyhounds. It says all greyhounds. Either way it is a law that is specific to the breed. Hence BSL. BSL refers to banned & restricted breeds. Do some homework.

Not just racing greyhounds are required to wear muzzles. Greys aren't required to wear muzzles at conformation shows. & Greys wearing muzzles is more a requirement under the "dangerous dog" legislation than BSL. You can still breed,sell, trade,swap & give greys away. Brush up on the laws before you start discussing them. Show greyhounds are required to wear muzzles when in public and not on private property or competing in an event. I.E. if they are walking down the street, they are required to be muzzled and on lead. BSL is breed specific legislation, I have no idea how you can argue that the laws pertaining to greyhounds being muzzled is not exactly that. Maybe you should read the breed specific laws & find out. Maybe you should brush up on all the greyhound stuff before mention BSL. It can't be "breed specific if the entire breed isn't affected. Boom boom. http://www.gapnsw.org.au/content/view/17/33/ Edit. Basic, but it says it as it is. http://bslaustralia.org/breed-specific-legislation/

Not just racing greyhounds are required to wear muzzles. Greys aren't required to wear muzzles at conformation shows. & Greys wearing muzzles is more a requirement under the "dangerous dog" legislation than BSL. You can still breed,sell, trade,swap & give greys away.

It's only "silly" if you think a breed's country of origin should lose the ability to control what the breed standard is. No, it's silly because the KC made the amendments without consultation with the SBT clubs & despite their protests. Among others, they added "desirable" to the height & now dogs bloody near as big as AST's are being titled here. That's why it's silly. But of course it doesn't matter to anyone who has no affiliation or affection for the breed. And isn't affected by BSL. Silly to think you would give a damn anyhow, now that was really silly. Your breed is no more affected by BSL than mine are. What SBTs and BSL have to do with this thread sure beats me. How are whippets at risk from the BSL? I think you will find the point is ANY breed is at risk of BSL. However this is a bit of the topic and probably should be elsewhere. An example is the law requiring greyhounds to wear a muzzle in public. This is a breed specific legislation as it relates to a specific breed. Give me an honest opinion. What do you consider are the chances of the whippet ever being affected by a BSL anywhere in the Universe? Racing Greyhounds are required to wear muzzles because they are trained to chase & kill small furry animals. They were, & some probably still are, trained to do this by using live small furry animals. It's called "blooding" You can start here: http://tnpetlawnews.blogspot.com.au/2010/08/memphistn-targets-dachshunds-whippets.html That isn't a BSL per se. That is an attempt to restrict the numbers of dogs available. Not such a bad idea when you get right down to it. A real BSL is the attempt to eradicate a specific breed by prohibiting the breeding, selling, buying swapping, trading or giving away memebers of that breed. People should at least understand the subject before they attempt to discuss it.

It's only "silly" if you think a breed's country of origin should lose the ability to control what the breed standard is. No, it's silly because the KC made the amendments without consultation with the SBT clubs & despite their protests. Among others, they added "desirable" to the height & now dogs bloody near as big as AST's are being titled here. That's why it's silly. But of course it doesn't matter to anyone who has no affiliation or affection for the breed. And isn't affected by BSL. Silly to think you would give a damn anyhow, now that was really silly. Your breed is no more affected by BSL than mine are. What SBTs and BSL have to do with this thread sure beats me. How are whippets at risk from the BSL? I think you will find the point is ANY breed is at risk of BSL. However this is a bit of the topic and probably should be elsewhere. An example is the law requiring greyhounds to wear a muzzle in public. This is a breed specific legislation as it relates to a specific breed. Give me an honest opinion. What do you consider are the chances of the whippet ever being affected by a BSL anywhere in the Universe? Racing Greyhounds are required to wear muzzles because they are trained to chase & kill small furry animals. They were, & some probably still are, trained to do this by using live small furry animals. It's called "blooding"

It's only "silly" if you think a breed's country of origin should lose the ability to control what the breed standard is. Actually, for my breed, I think it should. There are many countries of origin (COO) but only one has FCI affiliation. Expansionists would also include Morocco, I would only include Bahrain when it comes to COO. It is not a surprise that predominantly Muslim countries don't go for canine sports. And I am unconvinced that the FCI has the corner on breed wisdom. Their standard was certainly not the first. Our country of development is England. The English breed clubs are attempting to fix problems with the registry by changing the standard. Whatever you think of the standard or the registry problems, this is a bit of a fraught escapade. Their standard has also watered down some of the fundamental working characteristics of the breed. In Australia we have the 1923, I think of all the standards it is the best, and should remain unchanged. So control questions become a bit redundant. Agree, the breed clubs should be the only bodies able to effect standard amendments & only then after much consultation, debate & unamimous agreements. Not some shiny bum bureaucrat who may or may not have any connection with the breed at all. Funny how people unconnect with a breed always seem to bray the loudest.

It's only "silly" if you think a breed's country of origin should lose the ability to control what the breed standard is. No, it's silly because the KC made the amendments without consultation with the SBT clubs & despite their protests. Among others, they added "desirable" to the height & now dogs bloody near as big as AST's are being titled here. That's why it's silly. But of course it doesn't matter to anyone who has no affiliation or affection for the breed. And isn't affected by BSL. Silly to think you would give a damn anyhow, now that was really silly. Your breed is no more affected by BSL than mine are. What SBTs and BSL have to do with this thread sure beats me. How are whippets at risk from the BSL?