<p style="text-align: left;">Shall I start then? I'm very concerned by the trend for huge staff/pitt/xl dogs and want them controlled.... gone. Not convinced the legislation will work though.</p>
Who has the popcorn maker?
The problem isn't the dogs, But a knee jerk reaction gets more press and gammon votes than going deep enough to actually start looking at to root cause of the issue.
Start clamping down on unruly owner and back yard breeders would be a good start.
How about treating the owners of dogs that do attack in the same way we treat perpetrators of knife crime. People might think twice about controlling their dogs then.
Don't get me started on the social failings in this country that lead to people feeling like that need large dogs for protection.
What happens to the dogs that already exist?
whislt I agree they shouldn’t be bred, and you shouldn’t be allowed to obtain one if you don’t already have one, I’m dead against killing those that are already under ownership
rather they should be kept muzzled in public, not allowed off the lead, and perhaps require some form of dog license
i don’t have one, but I am a dog owner. And I’d happily go to prison before I gave her up to be put down
I’d happily go to prison before I gave her up to be put down
As a dog owner too, I have a completely different opinion to you – if it turned out that the breed of dog we have was dangerous, I'd be all for having it put down. There's no place for dangerous dogs being kept as pets, either muzzled or not in public. There have been several incidences of dangerous dogs attacking / killing people at home – it's not just in public where they become unsafe.
Dog licence and that should involve training and testing perhaps? Actually have something to test that owners can and do care for, and control the dog....I guess that's an owners licence isn't it, not a dogs. Perhaps like a drivers licence it should be categorised.
Cat A - toy poodle
Up to cat D for 'dangerous dogs'
My understanding, which I gained from reading the Internet somewhere this morning so it must be true, is that existing dogs will have to be neutered not euthanized.
Which, of course, will make intact dogs both highly desirable and highly lucrative to exactly the sort of people who shouldn't have them.
All dogs have the capacity to be dangerous. Where do you draw the line? Treating them like babies, wolves or accessories is the issue in my opinion. It should be much harder to own a dog than it is and there should be mandatory training. I’ve had lots of dogs over the years and I’d be mortified if any of them acted like the majority of those I see out and about.
Oh, and anyone that uses an extender lead with their dog should be strangled to death with it.
they could fix it immediately by insisting on muzzles, and then take some time to make a considered decision about what to do next.
existing ones - neuter them. then let them die out.
i have a labrador, and i love him. id never own a fighting style dog, the thought fills me with dread. it is extremely stressful when i meet an xl bully when out walking him, when the owner can barely hang on to it and it looks like it wants to rip my dogs throat out. theres no need for them.
i agree is it the owner, squarely their responsibility. however in this case i think it is the dog too. ive seen many many more angry tiny dogs, but the owner just picks them up and walks off.
editted due to my terrible spelling and worse eyesight.
The problem isn’t the dogs,
This.
I may be hyperbolic here but I think that the abuse of dogs is normalised in our society.
People who are normally responsible think that it's ok to own an animal and only exercise it when it's not raining while living in a shoebox, not put it into kennels when they are away for a few days but rely on someone to pop in once a day, allow their thousands of pounds worth dogs loose on shared use paths, etc. If that's what normal people do, then how do we expect the scummiest dog-owners to behave?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_Kingdom
Single digit figures per year. Some evidence of an increasing trend.
The problem isn’t the dogs,
It's not just the dogs.
I know someone with three dogs, well, two now as one died recently. Two bulldog type things and a chihuahua (cross?). All had the same upbringing, the bulldogs are(/were) soft as muck and the chihuahua is a nasty little yappy-snappy bastard. She works with dogs for a living and knows what she's doing, it's just innately horrible.
Properly licensed breeders only?
Dogs chipped at birth and traceable back to breeder. You could then see if there is a pattern of inappropriate breeding?
XL Bullies are just the latest craze in 'dangerous dogs' though. Back in the 80's Dobermans were the dangerous dog everyone wanted (popularised in many films at the time).
This ban will have zero effect on attacks on people, or the those who chose to own aggressive dogs.
Whilst I agree "owners=the problem" some dog breeds have been developed for their aggression and wiliness to fight.
Why that is needed in society I don't know (well I do - its an arms race, its for protection). Same way as its not the guns its the owners. But do you really need to be able to own a AK47 or whatever.
So I'm happy with a 2 pronged approach. Licence the owners (like me) and ban the fighting breeds.
To Cougar's point. Excitable chihuahua's make big docile dogs aggressive in the right circumstances. Talk to a gated community South African about dogs and they will keep a mixture of dogs to protect their property, the little ones kick off when there is a noise outside and it gets the big ones in to protect the pack mode.
I am always most nervous biking when someone has a mixture of dog breeds and sizes off the lead.
Oh, and anyone that uses an extender lead with their dog should be strangled to death with it.
Oh yes!
There needs to be some form of regulation for all dogs and breeders. Probably a price cap aswell so those who have licences to breed don't take the piss.
My dog* is a freakin nightmare, like my bloody shadow. She does my head in but I love her loads. Shes very energetic and will bounce around all over people but theres a HUGE difference between if she started having a go at someone and an XL bully type. I'd be absolutely mortified if my dog did have a go at anyone but would do what needs to be done if it ever did happen. I'd be gutted, but I'd do it.
*Small Labradoodle, about the size of a cocker spaniel 10kgs in weight.
The problem is the dogs though. Because if I have an aggressive dachshund, I simply pick him up and smack him on the nose telling me to behave. And if one attacked me I’d give it a boot and it would leave me alone
where as if 12 stone of lean muscle with huge teeth came at me, I’d probably be a bit goosed
by all accounts if one of these bully dogs attack you, you don’t have a chance. So banning them makes sense as any dog can be unpredictable regardless of previous good nature.
if it turned out the breed of dog we have was dangerous
What do you mean ‘if it turned out’? Any idiot would surely know before they acquired one of those things, if it attacked anyone, it would be dangerous. It’s not as if this ban is coming in off the back of some unexpected revelation that a dog, bred for strength and fighting, is surprisingly capable of ripping your throat out.
I personally wouldn’t go near one, and definitely wouldn’t have one as a pet if I had kids. I don’t agree with killing them however.
What do you mean ‘if it turned out’? Any idiot would surely know before they acquired one of those things, if it attacked anyone, it would be dangerous.
It's not as simple as that.
There have been x5 boxers in our family over the years. 4 of them you could do anything with and they were as soft as shit. My mother-in-laws last boxer - I never trusted that. It just wasn't like the others and I wouldn't have left it alone with small children.
Staffies have a bad rep but are great family dogs if bought up properly.
This is why I like our cat, he's a dickhead but far less likely to murder my kids.
Banning another breed is just the easiest response to recent events and doesn't really address the patterns of dangerous dog ownership as a "lifestyle choice" or wider prevention of inappropriate people owning dogs.
I think registration and chipping isn't a bad idea, I think breeder licencing and then keeping track of their bred and sold animals outcomes is also potentially useful, and maybe owner 'licencing' but more on the basis that they undertake some basic mandatory course (could be online) answer some basic safety questions correctly and sign a pledge WRT understanding their responsibilities and duties of care to both the dog and other members of the public. Then any breeder needs to confirm that a purchaser holds a licence.
None of that really prevents the issues directly but it's adds extra barriers for people getting an woofing accessory on a whim and might help the police when prosecuting if the primary offence is 'unlicenced dog ownership/breeding/trading' ...
Trouble is these sort of things all require administration and thought, and well for "dog people" that's not generally their strongest area 😉
The problem isn’t the dogs,
that’s a bit like the argument for responsible gun ownership
but what can you do about the people who want to own a dangerous dog because it’s dangerous?
I think registration and chipping isn’t a bad idea, I think breeder licencing and then keeping track of their bred and sold animals outcomes is also potentially useful, and maybe owner ‘licencing’ but more on the basis that they undertake some basic mandatory course (could be online) answer some basic safety questions correctly and sign a pledge WRT understanding their responsibilities and duties of care to both the dog and other members of the public. Then any breeder needs to confirm that a purchaser holds a licence.
It can be done - and the basic system is already there in farming.
Livestock has to have a 'passport' that is fully traceable.
Even my wifes horse has a passport and it's illegal to transport the horse without it.
I couldn't put it more eloquently than this that I have copied from another forum. The current dangerous dogs act is a very badly written piece of law that has been ineffective. Much more responsibility must go upon those who breed status type dogs and upon owners whose dogs cause a problem. Sadly in lots of cases it is family members who suffer from attacks.
The fact is that different breeds were developed for different reasons. We have all different types of dogs known for a variety of different things. We have herding breeds, guarding breeds, gun dogs, sight hounds, our scent hounds, companion dogs etc etc. All of the dogs within these groups were bred for a purpose. Whether that be our Cavalier King Charles Spaniel which was bred to be lap dog and is of course a companion dog or our German Shepherd Dog which belongs to our guarding group and was bred to herd and guard livestock, their breeds were developed specifically for a reason.
Now let’s look at the breed that is hot topic at the moment. The XL Bully. After yet another vicious attack on a child by an XL Bully, there is call for the breed to be banned. I say ‘breed’ very loosely because they are actually traditionally a mix of the already banned Pitbull Terrier, the American Bulldog and the English Bulldog but the XL Bullies of late are made up of lord knows what. Commonly there is Presa Canario (guarding) and Cane Corso (guard dog, war dog and skilled hunter) also thrown in the mix to create these huge, imposing, genetic disasters that we (in the UK) now know as the XL Bully.
The people that are breeding these dogs generally are not at all interested in the health or temperament of the dogs they’re producing since it is size and colour that sells. Therefore these dogs are just thrown together without a second thought for the outcome. The outcome very often is completely unbalanced, genetically modified dog that has been bred simply to be the biggest they can be with no onus put on their health, their joints are also f*cked meaning they often live in pain making them bombs literally waiting to go off. These are the dogs that are the issue.
And then we come to the people that own them. If you are looking specifically for the meanest, biggest, baddest looking dog and you’re not bothered about the health or the temperament of said dog then you’re just as much of a d1ck as the people that are breeding them.
So you take these dogs that have the potential to be completely unhinged and you put them in the hands of someone who simply wants a status symbol and you might as well have just handed them an AK47 because they won’t take the time to research and understand the dog they’ve got. They will regularly spout that it is in how you raise them, they will have no boundaries and they will walk these dogs off lead completely ignoring the fact that they have a dog that is GENETICALLY pre disposed to aggression.
You wouldn’t take a border collie and walk it through a field of sheep and then wonder why it is herding them. You know that they are doing it because regardless of whether they’ve ever seen a sheep before in their lives it is inherent. It is in their genes and this is no different.
The XL Bully in the wrong hands is a weapon and until we start cracking down on the breeders and putting consequences on the owners who allow these dogs to go out and attack innocent people there will be no end to it.
If they ban the Bully, another breed will come along, and another and another. If you want to own a large and potentially dangerous dog you must be held accountable when things go wrong. Handle them with care, put the time in to them, undertake specialist training, give them an outlet, learn how to own one safely and you’ve nothing to fear and you’ll end up with a really lovely dog. Be a dick and ignore your dogs breed traits, show them no respect, don’t take any special measures when nurturing them then you might as well just take your AK47 and open fire basically.
I think lockdown has a good deal to answer for here.
It seems to me (conformation bias alert) that lots of owners and dogs are new, haven't socialised (or didn't have access to training) their dogs, that were in this very weird environment with their owners that's now changed radically. I did read that there was a massive surge in dog ownership over Covid lockdown as well.
I agree that dog ownership should be perhaps more expensive (licencing? And forced training courses?) I'm pretty much OK with most dogs, but I've got admit I'm a little uneasy around those Bully XL; if nothing else, they just look mega-aggressive and scary.
Only one in our village is owned by the King Ned / Alpha Scrote.
Deemed unfit to have unsupervised access to their kids, but apparently competent to own a hell hound.
It’s not as simple as that
well obviously if you buy a dog that isn’t known to be aggressive as a breed, then it turns out it rips your babies face off, then I’d be getting rid of it as well
my point was that if I had one of these bully dogs, and it had never been aggressive towards anyone in its life, then suddenly it’s banned..it would be a bit off of me to turn round and say ‘sorry Brutus, turns out you are a dangerous breed so I’m taking you to the vets first thing to be put down’
It doesn’t suddenly turn out to be dangerous just because the government wants to score an easy win with voters by banning them.
XL Bullies are a massive issue around here.
Sold as part of a pyramid selling scheme, often interlinked with drug dealing. Pups were selling for £5k each - none of it declared.
Parents are afraid to let their children play in the local park - two small dogs were savaged to near-death last summer (48 stitches required by one elderly dog).
The ban can't come soon enough.
Hopefully Belgian Mallanois will be banned too.
All dogs have the capacity to be dangerous.
Some dogs are bred to be aggressive, others to be intelligent working dogs. If I could have a pet dog, I'd look at working dogs bred to be safe near sheep and cattle - they're smart and not aggressive so they're safe with children and strangers. Yes, they will fight to protect their pack but they are smart and not easily provoked so they don't chew the faces off the children they live with.
Other breeds have been selectively bred for aggressiveness. They are inherently dangerous, that's why we have regular news stories about children getting their faces eaten by the family pet.
Bully dogs are mostly owned as status symbols by dickheads across our country. I’d happily see the back of them…the dickheads that is, not the dogs. Owning a bully should automatically mean the owner should be neutered, not the animal. All tongue in cheek obviously but I’m more concerned that these dogs are bred to look mean and what that entails for such breeds. They’re getting bigger and uglier all the time to suit the needs of the owners. Can’t imagine how by f’ing around with genetics is ruining their quality of life, no wonder they’re so bloody angry. I’ll lump into that all manufactured cross breeds like cockapoos etc, sacrifcing long dog hairs on your sofa for a (short) lifetime of vets bills. It’s us that need to stop meddling into doggy breeding.
I'm not saying to know the solution, but what I do know is that dog attacks are becoming a bit like shootings in the USA.. They are becoming really common, and they are 9/10 times one of these pit bull type attack dogs that are bred exclusively to be violent and unpredictable.
The problem is easy to understand, but the solution is more complicated.
I'd at least start charging the owners as criminals as if they had shot or stabbed someone, attempted murder, grevious bodily harm etc.
It's the same as the gun ownership argument in america, the the gun isn't the issue it's the owner.
If we accept that some dogs hurt or kill people and that it's the owners fault not the dog, then why not legalise handguns here again and apply the same logic?
It's even worse actually, because at least gun owners who kill in america are charged with it, whereas if your dog eats a child here you get off without punishment.
Is this based on Rishi wanting to bad XL Bullies but doesn’t know what one is yet? So how can they say they’re inherently dangerous if they can’t even say what one is?
It’s even worse actually, because at least gun owners who kill in america are charged with it, whereas if your dog eats a child here you get off without punishment.
Without punishment? It’s a criminal offence, wasn’t someone recently charged with man slaughter following an attack?
The problem isn’t the dogs,
This is far too over simplistic. The problem may well be worse with shit owners. But clearly there's a reason is usually the same dog breeds and that because some breeds are more aggressive than others. There's a reason Labs are used as guide dogs not guard dogs and why German and Belgian Sheppard's are used as police dogs.
Breed specific traits are very really. Do t get me wrong I expect it is possible to train a lurcher not to chase rabbits but it would take a **** load of work and a **** load of time and expertise.
I’d at least start charging the owners as criminals as if they had shot or stabbed someone, attempted murder, grevious bodily harm etc.
think it have to be manslaughter, as proving intention without a witness to the owner commanding the dog to kill would be a tad tricky.
how can they say they’re inherently dangerous if they can’t even say what one is?
Legally it's an interesting point, as bully XL's are not a recognised breed as such. It's widley accepted they are some sort of pit bull/ staffie cross and therefore in the UK are not a 'banned breed' as pit bulls are.
Realisticaly it's a huge issue, as we see lots of attacks in the news, and it's almost exclusivley these hell hounds. You can say they are inherently dangerous on that alone. The statistics speak for themselves.
@BRUK +1
The current legislation doesn't work.
As an example of an "American Bulldog mix" that really wasn't dangerous have a look at "The Dog House" S4E4 on All4. He was still growing and already an absolute unit of a dog. Yet the closest he'd ever come to harming anyone was when he leapt up on the lady during the meet and she fell back into the set! He was an absolute cuddle/snacking monster.
And rehoming centers always struggle to re-home Staffies, Bullies and anything with a reputation regardless of the dogs temprament.
My understanding, which I gained from reading the Internet somewhere this morning so it must be true, is that existing dogs will have to be neutered not euthanized.
Yes, they have to go through a behavioral assessment with the police, and they also tattoo the ear to identify the dog. It's a sensible compromise. A friend accidentally ended up with an Argentine Dogo and is honestly was one of the the softest dogs ever.
As a dog owner too, I have a completely different opinion to you – if it turned out that the breed of dog we have was dangerous, I’d be all for having it put down.
It would be an utterly pointless waste of life though. And as above, isn't how the process works anyway.
How do you define dangerous? Has the breed ever killed anyone? I'm sure with enough research you could find an bad example of every breed. Especially ending in -doodle or terrier or anything smaller than a cat. I love dogs, but I'd not own a boarder collie for example because every 'pet' one I've ever met has been an ***hole (mostly because they were working line dogs), and the working ones are 33/33/33 a**holes / obedient a**holes / actually nice dogs.
XL Bullies are a massive issue around here.
I honestly don't think I have ever seen one. Is this a very localised problem. I mean I live in Burton which is hardly the wilderness but all the dogs I see are labs, spaniels, I think 1 staff and a the normal mix of terriers and cross breeds.
Hopefully Belgian Mallanois will be banned too.
Heh? If you mean Belgian Malinois, that look similar to an Alsatian, they are lovely dogs. Dont understand that.
Staffy owner here. Mine is number 18 (of 19 in the family) so far. All ours have all been lovely family dogs. No issues in 60 years. Think its how they are socialised and raised. I do worry about the bigger more muscly "breeds" though. There is a big difference between my 18kg dog and these 60-70kg dogs. I would agree with a ban sadly.
Not sure about owner licences. How does that work for homeless people and those not so well off with mental health issues where a dog is a crucial part of their life?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/may/07/met-stands-by-officers-man-tasered-two-dogs-shot-dead-london This seemed terribly sad?
All dog breeds have the potential to be completely unhinged, it’s just if you’ve bred it for size and musculature then it’s much more dangerous if it is unhinged.
The problem with banning a particular breed, is that there will always be a desire amongst certain people to own a strong powerful dog either as a status symbol, or so that they can feel powerful themselves by controlling it. At the same time, there will always be unscrupulous breeders willing to work around any rules in order to satisfy this demand.
A few years ago, a woman was killed by her own dog. The family complained about the breeders having misrepresented it to her. I believe that the breeder’s company name was Gangsta Bullies XL or similar. I did wonder how a company with such a name could possibly misrepresent a dog that turned out to be dangerous?
Realisticaly it’s a huge issue, as we see lots of attacks in the news, and it’s almost exclusivley these hell hounds.
It’s as is there is some form of bias.
I’ve seen one absolutely gorgeous it was, huge mind but very friendly.
There’s a reason Labs are used as guide dogs not guard dogs and why German and Belgian Sheppard’s are used as police dogs.
Is this a very localised problem
It's a problem throughout Stirling certainly.
And from the attacks reported in the news, also throughout the country.
I've got a one-year old daughter and live in a nice part of a fairly quiet town - we don't see XL Bully dogs all that often. These XL Bully dogs scare the living shit out of my for the safety of my dog, child and family.
I love dogs, have always had dogs (Spaniels, Greyhounds and Labradors) and understand the differences in the dog breed and nature. Our old Greyhound (RIP Clyde) was a complete sweetie in the house and with people, but a total axe murder to anything smaller and fluffier than him. As responsible owners, we kept him muzzled and on lead all the time. When off lead at the local dog park, we'd go at quiet times and flag his presence to other dog walkers when we were exercising him off lead - 35kg at 40+mph could do a lot of damage. We did our research, we put measure in place to stop any issues we hadn't considered and we were disciplined in making sure these measures were in place.
Current dog is a Yellow Labrador and the same story ensued. We did the research, we make sure her mental and physical stimulation needs are met and she's a dream of a dog. I still wont leave her unattended with our one-year old daughter though - no matter how much they adore each other.
Now, we know that most of the time these dogs are owned as status dogs. I am a big believer that there needs to be more education and, possibly, licensing for ALL dog owners (with different licences for different breed groups) which means that any potentially dangerous dogs can be managed properly. Caught without a license? Dog is taken off you until you do the training and get the license.
I saw an XL bully attack a spaniel a few weeks ago. Knuckle dragger owner.
My niece has a pocket bully. I wonder if these will get banned too. It's a smaller version, but still strong with a massive head/jaws.
honestly don’t think I have ever seen one.
there a couple I see semi-regularly. One has a muzzle on it, and I've only ever seen it on a very short leash, so at least the owner's aware. The other one just wags it's very short tail/bum at everything, so the owners probably either massively relieved or very pissed off. 🤣
Licencing of dogs? Who enforces it? Wardens stopping people out with dogs - nobody carries licence, then what?
Not going to happen - it would be huge cost and most people wouldn't bother.
There isn't an easy solution - this issue has been rumbling on in one form or another since I was a kid - German shepherds, rottweiler, doberman, mastiffs, akita, pitbulls now XL bullies. The dogs do seem to be getting bigger and meaner though
Banning does help to some extent then someone breeds a variant and off we go again
Licencing of dogs? Who enforces it? Wardens stopping people out with dogs – nobody carries licence, then what?
Nah; breeders. Much easier to trace as there's fewer of them. Make them keep records of who they sells dogs to, register with a vet, regular inspections, and not allowed to breed certain dogs make sure they're licensed, and fund RSPCA/vets to enforce it
That attack yesterday sounded terrible. Given the ongoing coverage recently I am not surprised that they've banned them.
Don't know why anyone would want one for a pet other than some silly chav status symbol thing. Even the owners that say that their dogs are lovely etc, why have you got one!?
There's a few local to us, new town being built, the XLs usually in the social housing element. All have seemed friendly so far, although one bloke who owns 2 openly says if they do go he stands no chance of stopping them. So pretty much everyone avoids him all the time.
They aren't a natural breed, so perhaps the humans should stop making them, much the same as we should stop breeding flat faced dogs.
The denial is strong with the doggists. These things are literally bred to be weapons, they’re selected for size and aggression. Their very purpose is take those innate characteristics and use them to intimidate people and fight other dogs. Napalm the ****ing things. Want a dog? Get a Labrador.
It is the owners at fault, but I dont trust any dog I cant pin the floor, ever since being attacked by a GS dog about 30 years ago whilst mining my own business.
I have an old grumpy Border Collie of 14 years. We have spent her whole life warning people and having to have eyes in the back of your head from idiots sending their kids across 'to go and stroke that dog!'
Most people are amazing, some are idiots, IQ test for dog ownership?
Chav scum owners, see also Surrons. Thankfully you never see them at 6 o'clock in the morning or on the hills so me and my doggo are okay.
I feel sorry for the dogs - they'll have a shit short life of neglect then end up in a rescue centre or put down.
Seen a few round my way mainly at country parks on sunny days, owners are exactly as you would expect. Low IQ chav morons.
Also had the misfortune to meet one and it's owner at the local vet.
Vet was running behind as per usual and the knuckle dragger was being rude to the desk staff, pacing about and generally being a dick. Thankfully he left the massive ball of muscle and teeth in the lowered, bean can exhaust chav mobile because "ee dun't like ovver dogs innit".
Willing to go out on a limb and say this "ban" will do the square root of eff all. Dodgy back yard breeders will just be slightly less open about it. Realistically the under staffed dog wardens and under resourced police won't do a great deal either.
Bully XL is a shite name isn't it. For some reason it makes me think of Boris Johnson - it must be the Bullingdon clubs notorious chant of "Bully Bully Bully" and him being a XL sized bellend.
The whole current ban system is just an example of crap legislation - wait for a problem with lots of publicity and then react. A sort of populist contortion of the facts. So then every country has different dog breeds banned because of different incidents that made the press in that country and every none inclusion in a different country lessens the argument it's needed here. Chow Chows are legal here but not in much of the USA - same dog, different opinion - go figure.
Why does it take until now to decide a ban needs to be put in place - just look at the sodding things - that's not been bred for fetch! And it's not exactly like there was a shortage of big hairy arsed monster dogs to choose from already.
Having said all that - if you had one that has never given you bother, no matter how unwise the choice was, it would be a heart wrenching walk to the vets to have them put to sleep when the ban came in. I'd think you a knob for owning it, but still feel for you.
Great news. Now ban the rest. Pointless yapping smelly shitting creatures.
Looking back at the old licencing system, it seems to be cheaper if you have a black and white one.
Seriously though, I agree with both the inate breed characteristics and idiot owner comments. I'd imagine there is a culture within the enthusiasts of the breed that you don't want a "soft" temperament, so they will actively try to produce a more aggressive, intimidating adult dog.
There’s a reason Labs are used as guide dogs not guard dogs and why German and Belgian Sheppard’s are used as police dogs.
https://www.guidedogs.org.uk/blog/negative-stereotyping-of-german-shepherds-is-affecting-guide-dog-owners/blockquote >
Yep, many German Shepherds are now too laid back for police hence more Belgian Shepherds being used. Breeding has made them like that......
Just whilst sitting on the loo I've come up with a genius idea.
Want a dog?
No problem but you the owner have to wear this irremovable high explosive inward exploding collar that is set to explode every week/2weeks/month * to be decided.
The key to reset the timer is chained to every trig point in the country hence guaranteed exercise for the dog and a bit more thought for the mouth breeder before they buy a dog.
Caught with a dog and no collar and you get one fitted with a shorter reset time.
Me resetting my collar - and walking the doggo.
[url= https://i.ibb.co/sbbZHgD/IMG-3537.jp g" target="_blank">https://i.ibb.co/sbbZHgD/IMG-3537.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= https://i.ibb.co/Y8GW5DM/IMG-3228.jp g" target="_blank">https://i.ibb.co/Y8GW5DM/IMG-3228.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= https://i.ibb.co/hCcVXjz/IMG-1453.jp g" target="_blank">https://i.ibb.co/hCcVXjz/IMG-1453.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
Banning another breed is just the easiest response to recent events and doesn’t really address the patterns of dangerous dog ownership as a “lifestyle choice” or wider prevention of inappropriate people owning dogs.
and
but what can you do about the people who want to own a dangerous dog because it’s dangerous?
This is the problem isn't it. Ultimately, criminals are going to crim and bellends are going to, uh, bell. Legislation may well prevent 'regular' people who are dense enough not to realise that cute little fluffy puppy is going to grow into Cerberus, but the backyard breeders won't give a ****. Because they're criminals.
There's one next door to where my mum lived. It's a monster of a thing, I've no idea what breed it is but there has to be some Great Dane in there. They've had it several years now and it's a puppy farm. Whenever it's in season they produce another one from somewhere (probably one of her previous puppies) and let them crack on until she's in pup again. It never gets walked, it lives in some ramshackle 'shed' that they've cobbled together. The yard's ankle deep in shite, it gets hosed down about once every six months when the dad puts in an appearance. I could go on. We've reported them to the RSPCA multiple times, they aren't interested unless we can take photos and if you think I'm hanging over that garden wall with a camera when one of the lads is a "gangsta" and the other the local drug dealer then you're one off. Do we suppose they're going to worrying about applying for dog licenses?
Interesting article if you can be bothered reading it https://news.liverpool.ac.uk/2023/08/15/dog-attacks-on-adults-are-rising-but-science-shows-its-wrong-to-blame-breeds/amp/
Bully XL is a shite name isn’t it.
I did wonder idly whether that was part of the problem. Perhaps they wouldn't be as attractive to Neanderthals if we renamed them Pink Bunnykins.
Is it dogs bread to be hugely powerful that's the problem, or the people who own them?
Honestly, I don't care. The solution is the same.
Don’t know why anyone would want one for a pet other than some silly chav status symbol thing. Even the owners that say that their dogs are lovely etc, why have you got one!?
They have one because they look hard as nails and scare the bejeezus out of most people, there's plenty of dog breeds to choose from, it's not like there are not many more options if you want a dog. There is literally no 'need' for breeders to breed 'dangerous' breeds beyond profiteering from a market of owners for whom the intimidation factor of the breed is important. This is a societal issue and banning one breed won't fix it, but I am in agreement that breeds bred for such purposes should be banned and subsequently any breeders taken to task.
I live in SW London so plenty of so called 'dodgy' areas nearby and often hear of dog 'issues'. In the last few weeks just down the road a dog was ripped apart by 2 Bullys (which by all accounts were on the lead but who can effectively control 2 60kg dogs?). I do genuinely worry about one of my kids walking our dog and having to negotiate their way past one, for both the dog and the kids.
I totally agree any dog breed can be unpredictable and aggressive, no matter how well trained they are, but with a large breed bred to be powerful and aggressive you bring down the odds. On the BBC website they quote an XL Bully owner who states the dog is a total softie and great with her child. That dog is 2 years old and the child 18 months, what lunatic ever through it a good idea to get a breed known for aggression at a time when she was wither pregnant or had a very young child, why take the risk?
Dog licence and that should involve training and testing perhaps?
As a cyclist, I'm fearful of that logic being extended
Bully XL is a shite name isn’t it
I got very confused when a colleague talked about their "Westie Max".
Had visions of an alsation sized West Highland terrier. Turned out to be a regular sized Westie named Max
I strongly believe that the type of person that wants or has a dog like an XL or anything remotely similar, should similarly be either castrated, or better still just shot, along with the dog, for the benefit of human kind.
It's Britain's equivalent to banjo playing morons in the middle and South of America having M16s and Uzis. Utterly not needed, and inverse to their intelligence.
Said as someone who absolutely adores NICE dogs like Retrievers, Spaniels, pointers, setters etc. Because I don't want anything like an XL, pit bull, or other fundamentally aggressive nasty dog OR their owners anywhere near me, my family, friends, or my Labrador.
Want a dog? Get a Labrador.
I witnessed a Labrador attack my brother when he was a toddler.
That dog is 2 years old and the child 18 months, what lunatic ever through it a good idea to get a breed known for aggression at a time when she was wither pregnant or had a very young child, why take the risk?
The Girl was trying for a child. They were unsuccessful so bought a child-replacement puppy. Almost immediately afterwards she discovered she was pregnant. Ages are exactly the same as you describe.
The dog is a Staffie. He's soft as owt but he's the size of a full-grown dog with a puppy brain, he has a head like a cannonball and with a bit of a run-up it's at just about the height of my bollocks. He's felled me more than once. What they're going to do when the kid is more of an independent toddler I do not know. I'm scared of German sausages, but no-one ever listens to me.
It doesn’t suddenly turn out to be dangerous just because the government wants to score an easy win with voters by banning them.
"Handgun owner two weeks after Dunblane" vibes.
XL Bullies are a massive issue around here.
I honestly don’t think I have ever seen one.
I'd never even heard of one until today, and I'm a surrogate dog operator.
Some right ignorant shite being spouted here, for a change.
Some right ignorant shite being spouted here, for a change.
Helpful, informative post.
banning the breed is an exercise in futility, they'll just cross it with another type call it something different and continue as if nothings changed. xl bully is derived from the banned pitbull after all.
banning the breed is an exercise in futility
Yes but it would literally be the only thing Rishi and co have done in the last year!!!!
I’m a surrogate dog operator.
A what?
Shame it’s lead to another dog breed being banned due to irresponsible owners, but I’m not sure what other solution would as effective.
Is it dogs bread to be hugely powerful that’s the problem, or the people who own them?
It's the perfect storm of both. This is the problem, and I think as a first step we need to ban more types of dogs, but also hold thier owners responsible if thier dog breaks the law as if it were the owner itself doing it.
If you shoot someone with a gun, or stab them, it's attempted murder, or actual murder. These particular types of dogs are lethal weapons and should be treated as such, the owners held on very serious criminal charges.
Sweet FA Will happen. We’re in era of either fashion or status dogs, idiots with dogs on training lead’s trying to walk their dogs causing chaos, rare colour BS being sold for silly money by amateur breeders at best or criminals! Dobermanns are gaining popularity, the amount I see that are illegally cropped & docked is shocking and nothing is done about it!
As someone who’s had dogs from childhood I’m finding it all very frustrating.
Rare, and in the many more cases when human death does not result...
I mean look at this..
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/mum-traumatised-after-beloved-yorkshire-30604946
Does this mean I have to carry a stun gun in-case some chav has an out of control staffie/pitbull whatever?
Can I carry an automatic assault rifle to protect my Shih-tzu? Seems fair enough to me.
