Animal debates

People should not be allowed to keep very aggressive breeds of dog such as Rottweilers as pets.

PROs

Families should not be allowed to keep aggressive dog breeds as pets. The news confirms that aggressive dogs can cause harm to children. Indeed the dogs can confuse small children with prey and attack them.
People buy aggressive dogs and keep them in a garden or a courtyard to watch over their properties.  They train dogs to be aggressive to strangers. But I think that it isn't fair, because dogs can't replace men in doing jobs that require responsibility.

CONs

People should be allowed to keep any kind of dog in their house and in their gardens and even let dogs play with young children.
I think that it does not exist any kind of dog breed that are naturally aggressive or dangerous for men. When a dog attacks a man it is because of the dog's owner who is responsible for having made the dog aggressive.

In civilized society there is no place for entertainment which involve cruelty to animals

PROs

Animals are born to be free and to live in their natural habitat. Animals we see at the circus or the zoo suffer from a loss of their freedom. Captive animals live in cages that are far smaller than the habitats like forests and savannas where they would roam freely.
The animals that live at the circus are subject to physical abuse and torture. In fact the trainers use violence as means to make the animals perform degrading tricks.

CONs

Animals that live at the circus or the zoo are fed and are provided with a shelter to live and sleep. Animals living in the wild would naturally die because they become prey for their natural antagonists.
Circus animals are not subject to violence by the trainers. Trainers teach animals using food and caresses as a reward.