A new study published in Animals found that people tended to overestimate the level of legal protection provided for dogs. The study, which was conducted in the United Kingdom, found significant gaps in knowledge about dog law, both real and hypothetical, with half of respondents believing there was a nationwide ban on shock collars when there is indeed not, only 16 percent correctly understanding that no legislation explicitly prohibits the euthanasia of healthy dogs and 85 percent believing wrongly that aversive training mechanisms were banned. This shows a gulf between what people believe — dogs are like family members and presumably enjoy similar protections — and what the reality is, which is that legally no, they are not. A thorough interest in the regulations pertaining to dogs can be of value to anyone, even non-dog owners; for instance, I understand that the official determination that there was nothing in the rule book that explicitly prohibited a dog from playing basketball was competitively decisive in several youth sports championships from 1997 to 2003.
Comments