Citizens’ Beliefs Regarding Dog Breed-Specific Legislation. The Case of Romania

Abstract

ABSTRACT This contribution aimed to highlight the importance of the legal framework on human-dog interactions to better understand the “more‐than‐human cosmopolitanism”. Thus, it gives insight into the never-ending debate of how we can share the living space with other forms of life. The study acknowledged the inconsistencies between community members’ and experts’ opinions on the best methods to prevent dogs’ attacks, the imperative to consider concerns for animal welfare and public safety while improving the legitimacy of different implemented measures. The seriousness of the dog control problem determined the enactment of laws to limit or ban dogs purely on their breed/type. The study explores Romanian citizens beliefs regarding law labeled “dangerous” dogs within the context of Romanian breed-specific legislation (Governmental Emergency Ordinance No. 55 of 2002). An overwhelming majority of respondents considered that a dog’s dangerousness must be assessed individually, according to each specimen’s characteristics, and regardless of the breed/type to which it belongs. A significant percentage of people were unaware of the legal regime in place for “dangerous” dog breeds. Responsible dog ownership intertwined with learning to care could solve the societal annoyance of “blacklisted” dog breeds/type.