On September 15, a man and a woman in a neighborhood in Beijing were walking their dogs without a leash, and a child was almost bitten by a puppy. When the child's parents came forward to ask why the dog owner did not apologize, not only did the dog owner The man raised his middle finger and insulted him, and was ridiculed by the dog-raising woman, "You deserve to be bitten." This incident has once again aroused public attention on regulating dog-raising behavior.
From Wuhan Xiao Ruirui’s earlobe bitten off by a dog to this year’s incident of a Tibetan mastiff injuring people in Dongguan, it is not difficult to find that incidents of domestic dogs injuring people have been common in recent years. With the development of social and economic levels, more and more people have the money and leisure to keep a pet dog. Inevitably, the number of domestic dogs attacking people has gradually increased, becoming a social problem that needs to be solved urgently. Therefore, it is very necessary to understand the social and historical causes of dog disease.
It is true that in every incident where a domestic dog injures someone, the dog owner bears the primary responsibility that cannot be shied away from, but it would be somewhat arbitrary to attribute it solely to individual moral deficiencies. In the process of rapid urbanization, the acquaintance society is gradually collapsing. In the past, in acquaintance societies or traditional work unit compounds, owners did not dare to allow dog trouble to occur because of their familiarity with each other, otherwise they would be morally condemned. But now, with the loss of acquaintance society, the binding force of morality has been greatly reduced. In today's social context of market-oriented community management, after a dog bites someone, the dog owner's punishment is no longer moral condemnation, but financial compensation. In a sense, this actually reduces the cost of making mistakes.
When moral constraints become no longer so strong, the law should step forward. Looking back at the current legal status of pet dog management in our country, we can see that there are many local laws and regulations, but in the specific implementation process, the results are not satisfactory. my country's local laws and regulations and normative documents related to dog breeding management have low legal effectiveness, too light penalties, low violation costs, insufficient law enforcement, and insufficient supporting facilities. They have no deterrent effect on illegal and uncivilized dog breeding behaviors. , cannot guide, restrict, and standardize civilized and legal dog-raising behavior.
Therefore, although local legislation plays an important role in regulating dog-raising behavior, it still has limitations. Unified legislative norms at the national level are necessary and imperative. On the one hand, we should start the legislative process as soon as possible, mobilize the health, public security, education and other departments to form legislative forces, and clarify the responsibilities of each department and the legal liability for violation of duties. Enable the corresponding functional departments to truly act, "there are laws to abide by, laws must be followed, law enforcement must be strict, and violations must be investigated" to safeguard the dignity of the law. On the other hand, the key to managing dog problems lies with the dog owner. We must clarify the legal responsibilities and behavioral boundaries of dog owners in national laws to form an effective deterrent that regulates dog owners.