Don’t Sacrifice Healthy Dogs Under Discriminatory Ban

Target: Rishi Sunak, Prime Minister of United Kingdom

Goal: Revise announced ban on American bullies to better protect the breed.

The American bully XL—a large breed of dog that is a cross between an American pit bull terrier and an American Staffordshire terrier—will soon join four other breeds banned under the Dangerous Dogs Act in the United Kingdom (UK). The law states that individuals in the affected regions will be prohibited from selling or gifting dogs “to be bred for fighting or to have the characteristics of a type bred for that purpose.” The new prohibition is a reaction to a few reported incidents of American bullies attacking humans. But critics claim the biggest victims of this law will become the dogs themselves.

While current owners of the breed will be able to keep their dogs provided certain conditions are met, the many animal charities who specialize in rehoming animals may not be so lucky. Several charities have voiced concern that once the ban is enacted they will be overburdened with abandoned bullies who will be difficult to place due to the stigma attached, if the charities are even allowed to rehome the animals at all. As one charity spokesperson expressed the situation, rehoming facilities that are already understaffed and under-sourced could be forced to put down “happy and healthy” animals not only of the bully breed but of adjacent breeds as well. Other animal welfare organizations have taken aim at the bans themselves, citing their ineffectiveness and their demonization of breeds that are in most circumstances gentle family pets.

Sign the petition below to demand reforms to the Dangerous Dogs Act that will address the most urgent concerns.


Dear Prime Minister Sunak,

Gentle, loving, kind, and affectionate are just some of the words used to describe the temperament of the American bully breed by both dog owners and animal welfare organizations like the Kennel Club. The Dangerous Dogs Act will soon put the future of a breed into question that, like many dog breeds, is largely a design of human intervention. They did not ask to be created, but now they will by and large pay the price for unscrupulous breeders and traffickers.

The Dangerous Dogs Act may have the best of intentions, but its vagueness and its execution are generating rather than solving problems. For one, the inclusion of breeds with similar “characteristics” to the targeted banned breed ensnares far too many dogs that have no association with the perceived dangers of the banned breed. And the so-called “amnesty” for certain bullies already under ownership does nothing to address the large number of healthy strays and abandoned animals who desperately need a new home. Will these animals be the sacrifices and the cull-by-any-other-name to an ineffective law?

Please revisit the Dangerous Dogs Act and correct the deficiencies that are costing rather than saving innocent lives.


[Your Name Here]

Photo Credit: Diexus


  1. It is not the breed that is bad. It is the owner. Ban the owners.

  2. True … C K !!! The breed is not the problem. It is the owner. Why? People get the breed but then don’t bother to train the dog. Do they bother to train their kids? Hopefully.Dogs and kids are similar. You train them and they grow up to be fine individuals. It’s either good people or criminals.
    People make excuses but there are no excuses. And then … many good dogs are killed. Again I repeat, it is not the breed but the people!!!

  3. these dogs always get a bum rap. it is the breeders and owners that train these dogs who should be euthanized, not the dog.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


1200 Signatures

  • Mary & Roger Stephens
  • Krystin Todd
  • Taylor Reese
  • Donald H Tustin
  • Astrid Van Steen
  • victoria fabian
  • Lisa Norton
  • Lynne Cooper
  • Lynne Cooper
  • Judy Swinney
1 of 120123...120
Skip to toolbar