Profiles and Precautions

Cries of "prejudice" and "profiling" tend to fall on deaf ears at a certain point, which is what has happened with airlines as brachycephalic breeds have predictably expired from respiratory distress, and as certain large game-bred and fighting breeds have destroyed plastic pet kennels and broken loose at airports.

With dogs dying and biting, some airlines have moved to ban certain breeds entirely, while others are fencing up to ban certain breeds from flying in hot weather, or to require special reinforced kennel boxes.

United Airlines, for  example, initially banned 9 breeds of dogs from flying, but now allows their transportation provided they are placed in large specially reinforced carriers.

The breeds that had previously been banned from United Airlines transportation, but which can now fly in the new reinforced carriers are: Pit Bulls Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier (aka AKC registered American Pit Bull Terrier), Ca de Bou, Cane Corso, Dogo Argentino, Fila Brasileiro, Perro de Presa Canario, Presa Canario, and Tosa (or Tosa Ken).

All but the last dog -- the Tosa -- is a butcher's dog directly descended from, or related to, dogs bred to grab pigs and cattle by the face so they can be altered. The Tosa is a pure fighting dog, though it should be said that Pit Bulls and several of the other named breeds here are often used to fight as well.

So are bans, limits and carrier restrictions  profiling and prejudice?  Or are these common sense steps reflecting the fact that not all dogs are the the same and that different dogs come with different internal codes as well as different health issues?  Should someone's theory and philosophy trump the actual experience of companies that transport dogs?  And if those companies are having those actual experiences with specific breeds of dogs, what does that actually mean?
.