> Insurance is not going to make the victim whole and restore a child's face that was bitten off. That's not the intention. The intent is prevention, not justi

> Insurance is not going to make the victim whole and restore a child's face that was bitten off. That's not the intention. The intent is prevention, not justice. > People who are irresponsible enough to have a dangerous, untrained pitbull as a pet, are probably also not responsible enough to have insurance or insure properly. People already drive without "mandatory" car insurance. Which is why I specified that breeders should be required to certify that insurers have been informed. It's easier to shut down ten bad breeders than fine a hundred dog owners. > They may also not have the money to pay the fines If I get fined for not having insurance and I don't pay the fine, I go to jail. Is that controversial? > "Require breeders" to do anything is hopeless due to the amount of unlicensed breeders and puppy mills that don't care about the law. I'll ignore the fact that in many cases you don't need a license to breed dogs. The government does an awfully good job of making sure there aren't unlicensed [insert your favorite regulated profession here]. If you regulate it and enforce it, you can effectively achieve success, even if you don't get to 100%.