I feel the same way sometimes. If I owned an insurance company, I honestly would not want to insure pit bulls, rotts, chows, etc., even though I own a Rott - and know how great they are.Originally posted by Logan
I don't like "lists" either. But I have finally determined that there are some breeds who are more likely to be involved in attacks, and obviously, their worst experiences have been with the breeds they have listed. I don't work for an insurance company, for the record, in case anyone thinks I'm playing salesman. But I have friends who do work in claims and it is a huge problem for them. I absolutely hate it because many of the breeds on that list are represented on Pet Talk, and you, the responsible owners, are having to pay for the poor ownership of others.
A somewhat realistic solution would be to require all dogs of "dangerous" breeds to undergo some kind of test. Like a CGC test maybe.
On another note, I do think it's rather pathetic that they can't even get the breed names right. There is no such thing as a "Staffordshire Terrier".![]()
Bookmarks