XL Bully Dogs.........

Axe_meister

We should all get Beagles. Used in animal experiments because they won't go for the handlers. 

barnstorm

digitalscream said:

It won't take many "normal" people going to jail for 20 years to make people think twice before buying that cute puppy or that status dog.

The general public can't be trusted to be responsible and thoughtful  Agree, though re. prosecuting people more fully. And it should be dramatically more difficult (not expensive) to own any dog.

mikeyrob73

Chalky said:

digitalscream said:

Genetic changes have absolutely no effect in UK law, because the law doesn't decide the breed by genetics (in fact, as demonstrated by Belfast City Council, the law will actively dismiss DNA evidence of breed in favour of head measurements).

And...it's been demonstrated time and time again that even those exact same dogs bred and trained for fighting can be rehabilitated. See the dogs rescued from Michael Vick's fighting ring - not one had a bite incident for the rest of their lives after they were taken.

In the 80s, everybody was saying all of the exact same things about GSDs. In the 90s, it was Rottweilers. In the 2010s it was huskies, Malamutes and Akitas.

I still maintain that the solution is not whack-a-mole banning breeds here and there according to the media's whims; it's prosecuting the owners exactly as though they committed the crime.

So wait till the dog attacks a child, or mauls a child, or disfigures a child, or kills a child, and then prosecute the owners?  That's plain stupid.

Prosecute the owners up front?  They'll just boast about that as if it is a badge of courage.

Treat dangerous breeds like guns - ban them, do whatever you need to get them off the streets.

Couldnt disagree more

whats a " dangerous breed" ? if a cockapoo kills a child is that then a dangerous breed? more people are bit by collies every year than any bull breed , is that now a dangerous breed? its the OWNERS that need to be held responsible, any dog can be a twat, i have previously owned a staffie, 14 inches tall, 15kg, so not a big dog at all, the most placid, people loving dog i have ever met, yet i watched people cross the road because of his breed. 
The status that these little fuckwits get from owning these big bully/molloser types is why they own them, lets put a dog licence back in place, any dog has to be registered to its owner, and if that dog attacks someone the OWNER is responsible, not the dog. 

Sassafras

I love dogs but no-one needs one that can rip your throat out within seconds.
Certainly no breeder should be allowed to genetically create a hybrid monster.

Axe_meister

There should be breed classifications a bit like guns.
Anyone can own an air pistol (and they can hurt when hit at close quarters), with ever increasing regulation of guns the more powerful they get.

digitalscream

Chalky said:

digitalscream said:

Genetic changes have absolutely no effect in UK law, because the law doesn't decide the breed by genetics (in fact, as demonstrated by Belfast City Council, the law will actively dismiss DNA evidence of breed in favour of head measurements).

And...it's been demonstrated time and time again that even those exact same dogs bred and trained for fighting can be rehabilitated. See the dogs rescued from Michael Vick's fighting ring - not one had a bite incident for the rest of their lives after they were taken.

In the 80s, everybody was saying all of the exact same things about GSDs. In the 90s, it was Rottweilers. In the 2010s it was huskies, Malamutes and Akitas.

I still maintain that the solution is not whack-a-mole banning breeds here and there according to the media's whims; it's prosecuting the owners exactly as though they committed the crime.

So wait till the dog attacks a child, or mauls a child, or disfigures a child, or kills a child, and then prosecute the owners?  That's plain stupid.

Prosecute the owners up front?  They'll just boast about that as if it is a badge of courage.

Treat dangerous breeds like guns - ban them, do whatever you need to get them off the streets.

If you're talking about children, define "dangerous", then. If you're doing it by breed and fatal attacks, and just looking at the last 20 years, then that list includes spaniels, terriers, huskies and GSDs.

If you're doing it by bite frequency...you can add labradors, Shih Tzus, collies and retrievers to that list.

These are all breeds who've killed or disfigured children in the last 20 years.

The point is that banning breeds doesn't work because it's just whack-a-mole with an ever expanding list - if it did work, then we wouldn't have had any fatal attacks in the last 20-30 years. The cause of the problem is people wanting dogs who should never, ever be allowed to have them - licences don't work (that's proven), so the only deterrent available is being prosecuted after the fact.

And, if the market for those dogs dries up, then they'll never be bred in the first place. That is the preventative part, and it catches all present and future breeds.

Chalky

mikeyrob73 said:

Chalky said:

digitalscream said:

Genetic changes have absolutely no effect in UK law, because the law doesn't decide the breed by genetics (in fact, as demonstrated by Belfast City Council, the law will actively dismiss DNA evidence of breed in favour of head measurements).

And...it's been demonstrated time and time again that even those exact same dogs bred and trained for fighting can be rehabilitated. See the dogs rescued from Michael Vick's fighting ring - not one had a bite incident for the rest of their lives after they were taken.

In the 80s, everybody was saying all of the exact same things about GSDs. In the 90s, it was Rottweilers. In the 2010s it was huskies, Malamutes and Akitas.

I still maintain that the solution is not whack-a-mole banning breeds here and there according to the media's whims; it's prosecuting the owners exactly as though they committed the crime.

So wait till the dog attacks a child, or mauls a child, or disfigures a child, or kills a child, and then prosecute the owners?  That's plain stupid.

Prosecute the owners up front?  They'll just boast about that as if it is a badge of courage.

Treat dangerous breeds like guns - ban them, do whatever you need to get them off the streets.

Couldnt disagree more

whats a " dangerous breed" ? if a cockapoo kills a child is that then a dangerous breed? more people are bit by collies every year than any bull breed , is that now a dangerous breed? its the OWNERS that need to be held responsible, any dog can be a twat, i have previously owned a staffie, 14 inches tall, 15kg, so not a big dog at all, the most placid, people loving dog i have ever met, yet i watched people cross the road because of his breed. 
The status that these little fuckwits get from owning these big bully/molloser types is why they own them, lets put a fog licence back in place, any dog has to be registered to its owner, and if that dog attacks someone the OWNER is responsible, not the dog. 

Same stupidity as earlier - wait till someone kid gets attacked and THEN take action?  Protect the dog at all costs, sacrifice the victim instead?

And give up with "mine is so placid" nonsense.  Every owner says the same right up to the point where the dog attacks.  

PS Yes, I've owned dogs for decades, coming from a family of dog owners.

Dominic

Axe_meister said:

We should all get Beagles. Used in animal experiments because they won't go for the handlers. 

That's fine if you can afford to keep them in fags

euan

Statistically they are a massive outlier for attacks and deaths compared to the other “dangerous” dogs of the past. 

mikeyrob73

Chalky said:

mikeyrob73 said:

Chalky said:

digitalscream said:

Genetic changes have absolutely no effect in UK law, because the law doesn't decide the breed by genetics (in fact, as demonstrated by Belfast City Council, the law will actively dismiss DNA evidence of breed in favour of head measurements).

And...it's been demonstrated time and time again that even those exact same dogs bred and trained for fighting can be rehabilitated. See the dogs rescued from Michael Vick's fighting ring - not one had a bite incident for the rest of their lives after they were taken.

In the 80s, everybody was saying all of the exact same things about GSDs. In the 90s, it was Rottweilers. In the 2010s it was huskies, Malamutes and Akitas.

I still maintain that the solution is not whack-a-mole banning breeds here and there according to the media's whims; it's prosecuting the owners exactly as though they committed the crime.

So wait till the dog attacks a child, or mauls a child, or disfigures a child, or kills a child, and then prosecute the owners?  That's plain stupid.

Prosecute the owners up front?  They'll just boast about that as if it is a badge of courage.

Treat dangerous breeds like guns - ban them, do whatever you need to get them off the streets.

Couldnt disagree more

whats a " dangerous breed" ? if a cockapoo kills a child is that then a dangerous breed? more people are bit by collies every year than any bull breed , is that now a dangerous breed? its the OWNERS that need to be held responsible, any dog can be a twat, i have previously owned a staffie, 14 inches tall, 15kg, so not a big dog at all, the most placid, people loving dog i have ever met, yet i watched people cross the road because of his breed. 
The status that these little fuckwits get from owning these big bully/molloser types is why they own them, lets put a fog licence back in place, any dog has to be registered to its owner, and if that dog attacks someone the OWNER is responsible, not the dog. 

Same stupidity as earlier - wait till someone kid gets attacked and THEN take action?  Protect the dog at all costs, sacrifice the victim instead?

And give up with "mine is so placid" nonsense.  Every owner says the same right up to the point where the dog attacks.  

PS Yes, I've owned dogs for decades, coming from a family of dog owners.

And give up with "mine is so placid" nonsense.  Every owner says the same right up to the point where the dog attacks.  

absolute sensationalist horseshit your talking there @Chalky ;;
i knew that dog better than my own family, i had 100% recall with him and trusted him , and if we were ever in a situation where there was any danger , to him or any other dog , i would remove him from that situation straight away. 

your classing every dog of a certain type as a killer, and that is just fucking ridiculous. Dogs, probably more than any other animal are a product of their environment, teach them well, bring them up to respect and behave in the way you expect them to and you will have a good loyal friend for life, teach them to be twats and they will be , specially these Bully breeds, who are generally in my experience , more people dogs than dog dogs.

Hence why hold the owner responsible, not the dog, and certainly not the BREED of the dog.  

oh and this is my current dog
100% recall at 9 month old, walks to heel and listens to every word i say, because i have put the time and effort in to make her that way

CHRISB50

I saw someone with 2 of them a few weeks ago in Sutton High Street.

They were more  like small cattle than a dog.

Couldn't believe the size of them and how muscly they were. I wouldn't want to piss one off.

Hurling_Fruitmig

Sassafras said:

I love dogs but no-one needs one that can rip your throat out within seconds.
Certainly no breeder should be allowed to genetically create a hybrid monster.

In this case I'd say that it's the 'breeders' who are the monsters.

Offset

Well we love our old girl. She's a rescue as I have pointed out here previously and we had her DNA tested when we got her. Some breeds in there you wouldn't go out to acquire. She's a lovely dog BUT as much as we love her and as gentle as she is with us, she never goes off the lead and we're wary of her with dogs and people we and she don't know. Other owners are not so mindful however - only  a couple of weeks ago a guy allowed his staffie to come racing up to us and snap and snarl at Pickle, who ignored it on the first two occasions. The third time however it got within striking distance and she managed to grab it.  She didn't do it any real damage but Mrs O was holding her at the time and was very upset.  

It's the owners not the dogs. Never 100% trust your pet and act accordingly. If your dog doesn't have 100% recall  or isn't well-mannered with other dogs, keep it on a lead.

That said these bullies aren't pets - they're status symbols for druggie chavs.

digitalscream

Chalky said:

mikeyrob73 said:

Chalky said:

digitalscream said:

Genetic changes have absolutely no effect in UK law, because the law doesn't decide the breed by genetics (in fact, as demonstrated by Belfast City Council, the law will actively dismiss DNA evidence of breed in favour of head measurements).

And...it's been demonstrated time and time again that even those exact same dogs bred and trained for fighting can be rehabilitated. See the dogs rescued from Michael Vick's fighting ring - not one had a bite incident for the rest of their lives after they were taken.

In the 80s, everybody was saying all of the exact same things about GSDs. In the 90s, it was Rottweilers. In the 2010s it was huskies, Malamutes and Akitas.

I still maintain that the solution is not whack-a-mole banning breeds here and there according to the media's whims; it's prosecuting the owners exactly as though they committed the crime.

So wait till the dog attacks a child, or mauls a child, or disfigures a child, or kills a child, and then prosecute the owners?  That's plain stupid.

Prosecute the owners up front?  They'll just boast about that as if it is a badge of courage.

Treat dangerous breeds like guns - ban them, do whatever you need to get them off the streets.

Couldnt disagree more

whats a " dangerous breed" ? if a cockapoo kills a child is that then a dangerous breed? more people are bit by collies every year than any bull breed , is that now a dangerous breed? its the OWNERS that need to be held responsible, any dog can be a twat, i have previously owned a staffie, 14 inches tall, 15kg, so not a big dog at all, the most placid, people loving dog i have ever met, yet i watched people cross the road because of his breed. 
The status that these little fuckwits get from owning these big bully/molloser types is why they own them, lets put a fog licence back in place, any dog has to be registered to its owner, and if that dog attacks someone the OWNER is responsible, not the dog. 

Same stupidity as earlier - wait till someone kid gets attacked and THEN take action?  Protect the dog at all costs, sacrifice the victim instead?

And give up with "mine is so placid" nonsense.  Every owner says the same right up to the point where the dog attacks.  

PS Yes, I've owned dogs for decades, coming from a family of dog owners.

The law is, almost exclusively, reactive.

However, ask yourself this: how successful has banning dog breeds been in the 30-odd years since breed-specific legislation was introduced?

Even better, look up the statistics. In those three decades, there has either been no statistically significant change, or an increase.

Wouldn't that suggest that a different approach might be required?

Jonathangus

I'd not heard of these until the discussion on the Today programme this morning (skip to 2h 40m 30s):

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001qdlm

The second speaker is quite clear that they are, to coin a phrase, a breed apart.

(EDIT: I'm not suggesting that it's nothing to do with the owners.)

Alvin

They have been bred to get around the pit bull ban , that in itself should ring enough alarm bells .

Penn

We had one of these bully things go for one of our dogs. It was off the lead and running around the park freely. Probably 9 months old, it wasn’t a full grown adult dog. 

Our dog was on a lead as there were children around in the park. My Mrs grabbed our dog away as this thing decided to try to kill our dog. Ours is a Westie and she’s soft to say the least.  Our dog was panicking like mental. In the process our dog cut my Mrs Ps face with its claw which left her with a really nasty cut. The bully thing was completely out of control. 

The owner of the bully decided the best course of action was to grab his dog and beat the living daylight out of it. He had young children with him. Luckily he got it before it did any more damage to my other half. 

I guess the bully’s takeaway lesson was that it needs to run faster next time it wants to kill something or someone. 

My Mrs should have phoned the police. 

Dog breeds were created for various purposes. Terriers for vermin control, sheepdogs to herd, retrievers to bring stuff back etc. then there’s dogs breed for fighting and nothing more. 

I think there needs to be serious repercussions for people who have dangerous dog and I really think Bully type dogs need to be banned. 

You can’t trust any dog 100% but when they are big enough to do serious damage then they are a public safety issue. A pissed off Yorkie will give you a nasty bite. It’s physically unlikely to kill someone. Bullies  less so. It’s more like having a tame pet lion. 

digitalscream

Alvin said:

They have been bred to get around the pit bull ban , that in itself should ring enough alarm bells .

Yes, and it shows the fallacy of breed-specific legislation - if the 2000s have taught us anything, it's that if you make any law too specific then it's trivial for humans to game the system.

Get rid of the BSL, make it illegal to breed any dog without a licence with no exceptions, and transfer all the liability to the dogs' owners. The market for these dogs and any like them will disappear within 5 years of the first manslaughter/murder prosecution and will never come back.

Unlike banning specific breeds, it's a permanent solution.

mikeyrob73

digitalscream said:

Alvin said:

They have been bred to get around the pit bull ban , that in itself should ring enough alarm bells .

Yes, and it shows the fallacy of breed-specific legislation - if the 2000s have taught us anything, it's that if you make any law too specific then it's trivial for humans to game the system.

Get rid of the BSL, make it illegal to breed any dog without a licence with no exceptions, and transfer all the liability to the dogs' owners. The market for these dogs and any like them will disappear within 5 years of the first manslaughter/murder prosecution and will never come back.

Unlike banning specific breeds, it's a permanent solution.

This 100%

the type of people that want to own these dogs will never socialise them, never train them, they are status symbols and as such they don,t actually give a fuck about the dog. Make the owner responsible for any damage done by the dog they own and suddenly owning one doesn't seem like such a good idea. if the dog has to be registered to the owner, chipped and registered, which will have a cost these fuckwits will suddenly think twice. 
Any dog can be taught to be a well behaved companion, they take time and effort and work though, most of these twats do not want , or are incapable , of putting that work into the animal. 

a blanket ban on breed will not work. 
 

EricTheWeary

mikeyrob73 said:

Chalky said:

mikeyrob73 said:

Chalky said:

digitalscream said:

Genetic changes have absolutely no effect in UK law, because the law doesn't decide the breed by genetics (in fact, as demonstrated by Belfast City Council, the law will actively dismiss DNA evidence of breed in favour of head measurements).

And...it's been demonstrated time and time again that even those exact same dogs bred and trained for fighting can be rehabilitated. See the dogs rescued from Michael Vick's fighting ring - not one had a bite incident for the rest of their lives after they were taken.

In the 80s, everybody was saying all of the exact same things about GSDs. In the 90s, it was Rottweilers. In the 2010s it was huskies, Malamutes and Akitas.

I still maintain that the solution is not whack-a-mole banning breeds here and there according to the media's whims; it's prosecuting the owners exactly as though they committed the crime.

So wait till the dog attacks a child, or mauls a child, or disfigures a child, or kills a child, and then prosecute the owners?  That's plain stupid.

Prosecute the owners up front?  They'll just boast about that as if it is a badge of courage.

Treat dangerous breeds like guns - ban them, do whatever you need to get them off the streets.

Couldnt disagree more

whats a " dangerous breed" ? if a cockapoo kills a child is that then a dangerous breed? more people are bit by collies every year than any bull breed , is that now a dangerous breed? its the OWNERS that need to be held responsible, any dog can be a twat, i have previously owned a staffie, 14 inches tall, 15kg, so not a big dog at all, the most placid, people loving dog i have ever met, yet i watched people cross the road because of his breed. 
The status that these little fuckwits get from owning these big bully/molloser types is why they own them, lets put a fog licence back in place, any dog has to be registered to its owner, and if that dog attacks someone the OWNER is responsible, not the dog. 

Same stupidity as earlier - wait till someone kid gets attacked and THEN take action?  Protect the dog at all costs, sacrifice the victim instead?

And give up with "mine is so placid" nonsense.  Every owner says the same right up to the point where the dog attacks.  

PS Yes, I've owned dogs for decades, coming from a family of dog owners.

And give up with "mine is so placid" nonsense.  Every owner says the same right up to the point where the dog attacks.  

absolute sensationalist horseshit your talking there @Chalky ;;
i knew that dog better than my own family, i had 100% recall with him and trusted him , and if we were ever in a situation where there was any danger , to him or any other dog , i would remove him from that situation straight away. 

your classing every dog of a certain type as a killer, and that is just fucking ridiculous. Dogs, probably more than any other animal are a product of their environment, teach them well, bring them up to respect and behave in the way you expect them to and you will have a good loyal friend for life, teach them to be twats and they will be , specially these Bully breeds, who are generally in my experience , more people dogs than dog dogs.

Hence why hold the owner responsible, not the dog, and certainly not the BREED of the dog.  

oh and this is my current dog
100% recall at 9 month old, walks to heel and listens to every word i say, because i have put the time and effort in to make her that way

We were in Le Treport on the French coast in June and got talking to an English family after their French Bulldog and Cheddar started sniffing each other's butts. The woman told me how surprised she had been to see French Bulldogs there. I didn't know what to say. 

See a few Belgian Malinois around now and in the shelters. I don't think anyone is buying those for a cuddle on the sofa.
 And I hate those Instagram pictures of babies with dogs 'look how gentle our pit bull is with our baby.' 

In Spain they have Potentially Dangerous Dogs legislation which is more about characteristics than breeds, I've no idea if it's more successful than the UK legislation. In France they list quite a lot of breeds under their act but they just seem to move onto the next big breed to snarl at every passer by and protect their maison.