No, it's a fine example to use, this is just your mental hangup that if something doesn't work 100% effectively you want to toss it all out.
A fine example? No, it's a **** example.
It's one thing if some proles don't obey new laws, but pretty abysmal when the lawmakers themselves (including the Prime Minister) flagrantly ignore them.
As pointed out, people weren't following the laws
because it was law.
OK so give an example of a where this magical psychological approach you're advocating for works?
The Designated Driver or DES scheme.
The Gurkha Justice Campaign.
Live Aid.
The ALS challenge.
All examples of successful causes supported by celebrity/influencer persuasion and driven by the peer pressures of social norms.
Tell me how you can get the Bad Boy Chiller Crew and goldie lookin chain etc etc to change their social views around these animals and how you are going to get them to promote safe and friendly animals when it does not fit that world?
You said you will use these celebrities to change the society view, so how are you going to get through to these people and get them to promote it on a safety side of things and get them to downgrade their street credit.
Sounds silly, but this is the reality.
From what little I can tell:
BBCC - They have an older manager and a deal with a record company, both of whom will have a controlling influence. Also at least one of them is a father and one other has a dog (that isn't a status type). So either financial incentive or emotional appeal.
GLC - Not at all familiar with. But I imagine it's the same as the above, and with most other celebs, really.
But most artists on these levels, rappers in particular, are big into social commentary, and if XLBs killing people (especially children) are THAT much of a problem then they should have no worries highlighting what sort of a **** you'd have to be to own one. Plenty of alternate angles by which to convey that message too, whether it be another government failing to protect people from such dangerous issues, or whatever.
Street credit is defined, essentially, by how the urban youth relate to you and how well they accept you.
If dogs like this are a problem then they, and more importantly their friends and families, will have expressed the same concerns anyway.
To be fair, my suggestion isn't just to ban BullyXLs, it's also to do the following things:
- Add the BXL to the banned breeds list
- Have mandatory dog licenses,
- Have mandatory insurance for all, or certain breeds
- Anyone breeding dogs MUST have a special breeding license
- Crossing random breeds to make other or new breeds without it being sanctioned, is prohibited
- Perhaps mandatory training for owners too - to compliment the insurance, but I'm not sure - might be too much.
To me those things are all tangible ideas which I think would certainly help, and aren't that complicated to understand or imagine in practise..
Breeders already do need a licence.
Dog licences and insurance require a lot of active policing to be effective. Licences failed in the past because they were more of a tax-generating measure than anything else, so they need to actually be effective this time.
Insurance for all dogs would also need to be sensibly priced, otherwise you will kill off law-abiding dog ownership over the inevitable money-gouging, generate more profit for illegal breeders, and push illegal/irresponsible ownership further in the direction from which we want to move away.
Outlawing crossing random breeds to specifically make new breeds is sensible, but should not impact mongrels, nor any natural conception that might happen. Mongrels are generally less susceptible to diseases, harmful mutations (insert Pug image) and other medical issues than purebreds (or inbreds, as is sometimes joked), often live longer and tend to have more moderate temperaments.
Mandatory training is actually pretty easy and probably the most effective suggestion on the list.
Every dog must be chipped and registerd by law. The Kennel Club already has the training, examination and certification systems set up.
It'd be very little trouble to tie the dog's certification of training tied to their microchip record.
I'm still not convinced this will inhibit the problem outliers, since they're the ones who should be targeted the most intensely by any approach, as the ones least likely to comply.
