Are dogs being used as scapegoats for Germany's social problems?
(article based on various items of correspondence)

Many have drawn comparisons between what happened in Nazi Germany and what is happening today with what has been dubbed the "German Dog Holocaust". Admittedly, these comparisons are over the top, but there may be a grain of truth somewhere.

For example:

DON'T BELIEVE THAT YOUR BREEDS WILL ALWAYS BE SAFE. REMEMBER:

"At first, we didn't pay any attention to the repression because it was use on strange people, on marginal types.  Later it reached closer groups. Then later, to our own neighbours. When we finally decided to pay attention, the
repression was directly on top of us and it was too late".  
    It is not my intention to compare the Jews with dogs, that is absurd and illogical.  What I am trying to point out is the method, that it is still the same.
    In free Europe, Germany was until now the example of a consolidated democracy, strong and stable, where the rights and freedoms of the individual were guaranteed. But with the actual extermination of canine breeds, doubts could arise over
weather the spirit of the III Reich has come back to life. (extract & picture supplied by: http://members.es.tripod.de/wishstar - Jose - a dog lover, Spain, 22/7/00)

Many of the breeds under attack in Germany are owned by the immigrant population. Immigrants have been a political "hot-potato" in Germany for several years. It has been suggested that because the German Government can not be seen to be directly attacking this section of the community it is doing so indirectly by having a go at its dogs. Further evidence for this comes from the fact that breeds of dogs which originate in Germany such as the German Shepherd and Boxer have not been included on "Banned" lists - perhaps because they are popular with German Nationals. The German "Media Circus" is playing along in much the same way as the UK media emphasised links between the "Yob-Element" and the "Dangerous Dog" over a decade ago. In the UK, the Police couldn't catch the criminals directly, so they arrested them for owning dogs instead!!

The whole Dog Holocaust situation brings up echoes of Germany's past.  For example, people can now be legally evicted from their rented flats if they own one of the relevant dogs. In fact, the national Tenants' Association recommends that its members sue their landlords to have dog-owning neighbours removed and the National railways and urban transport systems will no longer carry these dogs, even if muzzled.
Encouraging neighbours to spy on each other!
Excluding certain members of the community from public amenities!
This behaviour seems to be very reminiscent of times past!
However, let us not forget - the situation was not much better for dog owners in the UK in 1990/91. One of my own dogs (a Staffordshire Bull Terrier) was attacked whilst out walking (on a lead) in a London park. For me this is proof that the "Nazi mentality" is not just a German thing. (comment by S.L.Hemstock, UK)

Another view of the situation:

In one way the vicious dog is largely a "foreign" problem; but then again, it isn't.

Pimps, drug dealers and other underworld figures have discovered the value of the Pitbull both as a weapon and as a method of keeping the police at bay. This underworld is dominated by ethnic cliques, although you could not say that only the foreign crooks have dogs. Anyway, gangland strife does not really worry the public at large, as long as it is confined to "those" areas.

Unfortunately, the dog as a weapon was taken up as a status symbol among the young immigrant population in our cities, mainly by those of Turkish, Albanian or Yugoslav origin. The guy with the most vicious dog is the king of the neighbourhood. In the Hamburg incident, both the victim and the dog owner were Turks.

As the problem dogs started to appear in the residential areas, they scared the hell out of the local population, German and immigrant alike. The only open spaces in these areas tend to be children's playgrounds or school yards, and that is where the dogs are "trained". (It is suspected that in some cases attacks were caused by dogs which regarded the playgrounds as their territory, which they defended.) Popular resentment and fear grew to the point where politicians had to react. Since they appear to be unwilling to act against the owners, they went for the dogs. (You are probably aware that the Hamburg owner had 18 previous convictions - even for dog-fighting - and had already been served a leash-and muzzle order for that particular dog after a previous incident, which he ignored).

I have colleagues, nice people otherwise, who live in the middle of Frankfurt and strongly support this legislation. They resent having to cross the street every time one of these swaggering figures comes down the sidewalk, they resent having to fear for their children's safety every time they go out to play. They do vaguely understand that the owner is at fault and not the dog, but they just want the dog off the street - you know the American argument "guns don't kill people, people kill people", which is quite true, but we still banned the guns.

In summary, while the fighting-dog owners are predominantly foreign, you cannot consider this an ethnic issue. Turkish "civilians" want the dogs off the street as much the Germans do, and they want the dogs taken away from Turkish youths as well as from German skinheads and neo-Nazis, who are only just beginning to appreciate the Pitbull's qualities as a police deterrent.

Incidentally, I hear contradictory things from Frankfurt: I hear that the dogs have disappeared off the streets, and nobody knows if they are in cellars and attics, if they are outside the country, or if they have been buried in the parks. Other people report that the heavies are still parading their dogs around without a muzzle.

Another statistic: at our recent rural information evening, 160-odd people signed the attendance register - two of which were Turks. The politicians may yet be surprised to discover that those with real voting rights own Pitbulls.

To the breeds:
The favoured animals are Pitbulls, American Staffordshires, and increasingly Kangals. They are bred well outside the FCI ambit in eastern Europe, and are trained to fight and kill from an early age. These dogs ARE dangerous, even experienced handlers at animal shelters often have no choice but to put them down. There are rumours that the East Europeans are now trying to produce the ultimate fighting dog by crossing their existing breeds with wolves. Nutty tabloid stuff, I hope.

The fact that all the indicted breeds are foreign is coincidence. In the rush to legislate before the summer recess, everybody just copied the Bavarian 1992 legislation, and nobody quite knows how that list originated. The German Shepherd as a cultural icon is exempt, of course, but some states have already added Rottweiler and Dobermann. More will follow. (comments by Mr. M. Krohn, Germany)

Want more on this subject? Then link to: Washington Times article

Save Our Bull Breeds