Draft talk:Dangerous dog

Scope and how to deal with possible overlap

Courtesy ping to Elli since you inspired me to even start this draft in the first place. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 15:36, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Think maybe it would make sense to scope this article around how localities detail with particular dangerous dogs (as many places do registries) while leaving most details of BSL out. However, not sure what level of academic sourcing there is? Because if dangerous dogs are discussed as a concept there that might also be worth including. But I haven't done any research on that yet. Elli (talk | contribs) 15:43, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

I haven't found any yet either but hopefully there is some academic sourcing out there. I think that some overlap is unavoidable given that certain dog breeds are inherently considered to be dangerous dogs by some jurisdictions while others only focus on individual behaviour. It's probably a delicate balance but the information should be included to some extent. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 16:08, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Possible sources

Starting a section for possibly usable sources for expansion (these are only news sources, hopefully I'll come across more scholarly sources later):

• Queensland
• Ontario
• New Brunswick
• Prince Edward Island
• South Korea
• Supreme Court of Canada case
• Montreal
• Egypt
• Alberta
• Texas

Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 16:48, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

I poked around google scholar a little for studies on effects of various dangerous dog legislation, here's what I've got:

• Report on the Potentially Dangerous Dog Program: Multnomah County, Oregon
• Spanish dangerous animals act: Effect on the epidemiology of dog bites
• Italian breed-specific legislation on potentially dangerous dogs (2003): assessment of its effects in the city of Florence (Italy)
• The effect of breed-specific dog legislation on hospital treated dog bites in Odense, Denmark—A time series intervention study

Rusalkii (talk) 18:51, 1 August 2024 (UTC)