A fourteen year old girl has been killed...

(438 Posts)
JustGiveMeFiveMinutes Wed 27-Mar-13 10:42:02

...mauled to death by four dogs.

RIP

TotemPole Wed 27-Mar-13 11:51:00

I just read about it.

It's horrific. the poor girl.

HarrietSchulenberg Wed 27-Mar-13 12:06:46

Horrific as it is, it's just going to stir up the dangerous dogs debate again. When will people realise it's not the dogs it's the bloody owners.
Poor girl and poor family.

seeker Wed 27-Mar-13 12:08:35

Sometimes it's the dogs........

Nancy66 Wed 27-Mar-13 12:08:41

horrible. what a way to die.

CogitoErgoSometimes Wed 27-Mar-13 12:12:20

'It's not the dogs' is no defence. It looks as though the dogs killed the girl, not the owner. The owner should be prosecuted for whatever version of manslaughter is applicable and the dogs should be destroyed if they haven't been already. Poor kid. She must have been terrified.

Callisto Wed 27-Mar-13 12:45:52

It absolutely was the dogs. Two staffie types and two bull mastiffs. And while I do think that you get the dog you deserve, this would not have happened if these dogs had been greyhounds or jack russels for example. No doubt someone will wheel out the old staffies = nanny dogs rubbish again soon.

I actually think the owner of these dogs should be prosecuted for murder.

HeySoulSister Wed 27-Mar-13 12:47:41

Wasn't much in the news this morning. How do dogs just turn in this way? 5 dogs, 4 destroye

Horrific for that poor girl. RIP Jade

The owners without doubt should be prosecuted, 5 quite big dogs in a fairly small house, its just wrong isnt it really.

Nancy66 Wed 27-Mar-13 12:55:35

it is wrong but, sadly, the sort of people who own dogs like this aren't usually blessed with a lot of common sense

bubbles1231 Wed 27-Mar-13 13:05:02

There'll be lots of factors at play here which culminated in this tragedy
genetics of the dogs,
the owner,
the type of training they have or havent received,
the conditions in which they were kept,
the possible lack of a proper stimulating environment,
their feeding
and also why someone thought it was a responsible thing to do leaving a child alone with what was essentially a pack of dogs, while she was eating.

LIZS Wed 27-Mar-13 13:07:51

Dreadful - time that certain breeds are only permitted under specific conditions.

cleangreens Wed 27-Mar-13 13:10:27

They were 2 bull mastiffs and 2 staffordshire bull terriers.

I could be wrong but if it had been a golden retriever, a black lab, a dalmatian and a beagle I doubt it would have gone the same way.

That said it is the type of people that are drawn to this type of dog which can lead to a potentially disastrous scenario. They possibly weren't trained properly (if at all) socialised, exercised, fed properly etc.

Absolutely horrific poor girl sad.

Lizzylou Wed 27-Mar-13 13:11:58

Absolutely horrific.
I read that the dog's owner had sold puppies from 2 of the dogs last year, so the cycle continues.
Agree with Callisto and Nancy's posts.

duchesse Wed 27-Mar-13 13:12:04

What horrifies me most is that will be mawkish displays of sentimentality from people all over the country who actually still bloody own dogs like these. They are bred for fighting and nothing can overcome that, no amount of gentle handling - they will always be fighting dogs no matter what you do.

Poor child.

DeepRedBetty Wed 27-Mar-13 13:14:02

Wasn't a child killed by a Jack Russell a while ago?

And I've seen a beautiful cute Golden Retreiver ripping into an adult - needed hospital treatment.

It's owners, not dogs - but any dog can be aggressive in some circumstances.

lockets Wed 27-Mar-13 13:14:19

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MyOtherNameIsFunnier Wed 27-Mar-13 13:15:36

I give this thread about two minutes before the dog lot turn up in force to protect their poor much maligned dog breeds.

When's the last time you read about someone's King Charles Spaniel or Westie ripping a child to shreds? Thought not.

TheNebulousBoojum Wed 27-Mar-13 13:16:42

Bull mastiffs are huge though. I was out walking once and I heard a gallumphing noise, so I turned round.
The dog stood up on his hind legs, paws on my shoulders and licked my face.
Huge.

Sparklingbrook Wed 27-Mar-13 13:17:30

Who needs to own 5 dogs? Really? In a normal house. It's just unbelievable.

MyOtherNameIsFunnier Wed 27-Mar-13 13:18:16

Jack Russels are bred for hunting and will go after small prey.

Having seen a pack of them tear a cat to pieces, they're another breed I dont' think anyone with half a brain would leave unattended around children.

duchesse Wed 27-Mar-13 13:19:10

I own a 13yo labrador and a 2 yo bernese mountain dog, both very gentle, lovely tempered creatures, but I still never, ever leave my 3 year old alone with them. It's just not worth the risk. If I have to go upstairs I shut them in the hall if DD is in the sitting room.

duchesse Wed 27-Mar-13 13:19:53

Have to say I would never have expected a 14 year to be killed though. sad

TheDegglyDonkey Wed 27-Mar-13 13:21:03

I think the locking jaw thing is a myth.
However, I do agree that generally, these horrific attacks are carried out by certain breeds. Whether this is down to training and socialisation (or lack of), or breed characteristics, or sheer bad luck, I don't know.

Sparklingbrook Wed 27-Mar-13 13:21:10

I think it is the age of the child that is most shocking. To think that a 14 year old was so overwhelmed by the dogs she couldn't save herself.

TheNebulousBoojum Wed 27-Mar-13 13:23:52

Here's a lovely picture of bull mastiffs. Fancy your chances against two?
www.bodaciousbullmastiffs.co.nz/Photos/Bodacious%20Bullmastiff%20Team%20September%202009.jpg

Owllady Wed 27-Mar-13 13:25:45

I think anyone would have been overwhelmed by them though if they were that aggressive and out of control

In an ideal world it would be far more difficult to breed or acquire a dog, compulsory micro chipping and training classes and the like, but it just seems to me like nothing ever changes

Owllady Wed 27-Mar-13 13:26:05

and sorry, I meant to say that poor girl sad

duchesse Wed 27-Mar-13 13:26:32
5eggstremelychocaletymadeggs Wed 27-Mar-13 13:28:42

I saw this on the news, she must have been terrified sad

Awful. And I don't think many people would stand a chance against four dogs attacking in a pack like that.

Poor girl, RIP Jade xx

ItsAllGoingToBeFine Wed 27-Mar-13 13:40:47

That is good article and I tend to agree.

With some exceptions I think I this mostly that some breeds attract a certain sort of owner, as opposed to some breeds being intrinsically vicious.

I also agree with the article in that it is ridiculous that the dangerous dogs act does not cover attacks on private land.

That's an excellent and measured article, duchesse.

The majority of Mastiff and Staffie owners I know are responsible - training their dogs to a high standard and very far from the 'status dog' owners who give us all a bad name, whatever breed we have.

I would not be comfortable around the dogs belonging to an irresponsible owner.

Cheddars Wed 27-Mar-13 13:47:33

It's worrying that Pit bulls are unknowingly being passed off as Staffies. I'm considering a rescue dog at some point and that would definitely put me off a Staffie. sad

Branleuse Wed 27-Mar-13 13:53:42

Its both owners AND dogs

Why the fuck anyone would want or need FOUR dogs. Thats a pack.

I do have a beautiful 13 year old staffie who is WELL TRAINED and the gentlest best behaved dog i have ever known, and regularly get comments on how good she is.

I know other staffies who are a menace by stupid owners, who with the best of intentions, are shit owners. its not always malice, its just not realising how much goes into having a good dog. A staffie who gets walked in the park by a nice enough guy who loves his dog, kills squirrels, tried to maul a smaller dog and actually properly raped my friends border collie male puppy.
He muzzles it now, but it has zero recall and as far as im concerned, is a terrible accident waiting to happen. Other dogs in the park just seem nuts. Really crazy.
Stick to bloody guinea pigs or kittens if you havent got it in you to put effort into training dogs

Its not the breed of dog, its the fucking idots who can just buy a dog like its an object.

wannaBe Wed 27-Mar-13 13:55:03

"and also why someone thought it was a responsible thing to do leaving a child alone with what was essentially a pack of dogs, while she was eating." I don't think you can class a fourteen year old as a child in those terms in the same way you wouldn't leave a toddler alone with dogs iyswim. As I see it, on the whole one of the reasons why it isn't recommended to leave young children alone with dogs is because children can be just as unpredictable. For dogs to turn without warning is in fact incredibly rare, and I would have no qualms about leaving my ten yo in the same room as my two dogs (lab retriever crosses), but I might not have when he was say four, because if he had tormented one of the dogs and been bitten thenit would be something that could have been prevented iyswim.

But four dogs who are that powerful would be able to kill an adult. Esp mastiffs are incredibly powerful dogs and could do quite a bit of damage. I imagine only time will tell what really happened, whether the dogs were known to be agressive, whether they were familliar with the child (was it the family home?) or whether she was staying with friends/family where dogs didn't know her, etc etc.

It is tragic when anything like this happens, however I do think that we need some perspective. According to a woman on the news just now there have been seven deaths in the past eight years. In fact one of the reasons why this story is headline news is because deaths from dog attacks are so incredibly rare. And yet when a dog kills someone we get the knee jerk calls for banning of certain breeds/revisiting the dangerous dogs act/dog licencing to be re-introduced etc etc. Any deth is one too many, but deaths are in fact incredibly rare in the scheme of things.

In fact more people are bitten by golden retrievers than any other breed, are there calls for those to be banned? no of course not.

I don't like mastiffs or staffies and I was bitten by a mastiff when I was a child. But I do think the calls for them to be banned etc is a bit hysterical. Far more children are killed in and by cars than dogs. And yet we don't get this hysteria when a child is killed by a car, why is that? oh yes, it's because children being killed by cars are no longer newsworthy becauseit happens so regularly.

If this family knowingly kept agressive dogs then they should have been brought to account, equally any dog that bites should be destroyed. but I'm not sure that individual cases warrant the public hysteria that follows - each incident should be dealt with individually

Callisto Wed 27-Mar-13 13:56:35

Agree Owllady - bring back dog licensing coupled with compulsory microchipping and enforce it.

Callisto Wed 27-Mar-13 14:00:19

Branleuse - killing squirrels is a positive surely?

higgle Wed 27-Mar-13 14:04:14

This is so very , very sad. No one in their right mind would leave a 3 year old with an dog, but a girl of 14 is the size of an adult. There were 3 dogs pictured in the press today and one was an American Bulldog, one was a Bull Masstiff and the other was said to be a Staffie, but certainly did not look 100% Staffie to me.

I am particularly saddened as I own a Staffie, one of the many older dogs left without a home for a very long time because no one wants them, and he is a lovely gentle dog. We have owned 5 dogs at different times, a Collie Cross, a Dachshund, a PBGV and 2 Staffies, the 2 Staffies are the only ones never to have bitten any of us.

We are now back to the situation where people will cross the road when they see us out on a walk, already today I have had a funy look at work when a vistor asked what sort of dog I had ( after admiring her border terrier) .

This case seems to bear some similarities to the one of the lady who died in Morden a few months back when she had gone to feed her daughter's 4 dogs.
I think a pack of bull breeds needs very careful handling and is inadvisable.

JustGiveMeFiveMinutes Wed 27-Mar-13 14:05:00

wannabe

Yes, deaths are rare and as you said, one death is one too many. However, attacks on people and other dogs are not rare. That's why these dogs have to be banned. I don't think it's hysterical or knee-jerk to suggest that. I don't think it's fair to dismiss this girls death in such a casual fashion.

It's ironic that the town where Jade died is also the home of the regional centre for Guide Dog training. The attacks on guide dogs, many of which involve bull breeds is terrifying.

As far as I know, there have been no attacks by labradors on staffies and bull mastiffs.

Well, only a tiny, tiny proportion of dog on dog attacks are reported, JustGive, so I don't think anyone can reliably say there are no Labs out there attacking Staffies.

Really, really tough legislation is what's needed. A dog licence large enough to be meaningful, absolutely no breeding whatsoever without a specialised licence (including welfare checks on a regular basis and details of who each puppy has been sold on to), compulsory microchipping and training.

GetOeuf Wed 27-Mar-13 14:11:37

That poor dear girl. I can't imagine how terrifying that must have been for her. It is a horrible thing to have happened.

Yes the dogs are a problem but the big problem is having thick, aggressive morons who own them and delight in geeing them up to behave in a territorial manner.

I agree that the owner should be charged with manslaughter. You can't do anything with the dogs (thankfully they have been killed) but people should understand that there are consequences for having dogs like this and treating them so they behave in such a way.

HarrietSchulenberg Wed 27-Mar-13 14:14:38

ACtually it IS the owners. Someone has chosen to breed and keep 5 dogs who are capable of killing a person in one house.

HeySoulSister Wed 27-Mar-13 14:16:02

Do theses dogs sort of fall into step together then? How does a 'pack' operate? It's chilling to think it was coordinated/organised between all the dogs.... Do they communicate? This might sound silly of me but we watched 'the grey' at the weekend and it stayed with me! Now this. Poor poor Jade.

GetOeuf Wed 27-Mar-13 14:16:29

Presumably those owners cannot be charged with anything under existing law. Which makes a hideous thing even worse - there are no consequences for keeping 5 dogs of such breeds and enabling them to behave in this way, and there should be.

TheNebulousBoojum Wed 27-Mar-13 14:18:14

But they could just as easily be happy, loved family pets. Not evil devil dogs.
That's the problem, the potential is always there and death is more likely an outcome if the dog is large, or if more than one dog takes part.

Floristneedsaname Wed 27-Mar-13 14:20:32

The owner should be hung out to dry.

If there was an effective licence system, with a hefty cost of purchase, it could be designed to ensure that no one kept what in this case is a pack of dogs.

It'd be super easy to whistle blow on the dickhead element that buy these breeds, specifically to look right hard hmm.

SnuffleTheDog Wed 27-Mar-13 14:22:22

Poor girl, twatty owners and I hope they get charged. Sad for the dogs aswell having owners like that and they turned out how they did.

OP a Lab bit my SBT quite badly. My dog just cowered on the floor while the owner laughed his head off as his dog chewed on my dogs thigh, until I booted his dog that is and then he decided I was the one who was unreasonable and my dog must have provoked his because mine is a SBT, wanker.

It's down to the owner to realise the potential and take steps to keep themselves and visitors/family members safe.

When I was a teenager I babysat for a little boy whose Dad bred and rescued a large breed dog. Lovely, well-behaved dogs who i'd seen doing agility and training etc. He still shut them in the kennel area when I went round as they didn't know me that well. He knew the breed and was sensible about how they might view an occasional visitor to the house alone with the DS.

Cheddars Wed 27-Mar-13 14:23:08

I wonder why there's so little information in the news?

maisiejoe123 Wed 27-Mar-13 14:23:34

I have a large dog and a large house. When she isnt around the house DOES seem smaller. What on earth is anyone doing in a small house with so many dogs. We need really tough laws around the sort of people having dogs like this. Dont have any real answers i.e do they require a license, a test to pass for certain breeds....

SecretLindtBunny Wed 27-Mar-13 14:36:11

It is the owners fault. For not being there. For keeping 4 very powerful dogs and one unknown in a very small space.

That's not to say the dogs were totally blameless, but we don't actually know what happened.

What of she had been ripping it apart to hand feed the dogs and one got territorial over the food? Saw her as an interloper if she took a mouthful? I know a couple of people who have been bitten when doing exactly that.
What of she was doing the even stupider thing I have seen whereby idiot human puts food in mouth and shakes their head?

We just don't know.

It is a tragedy, but doesn't anyone else want to know what breed the fifth dog is? Also why it wasn't put down?

nethunsreject Wed 27-Mar-13 14:38:27

I wouldn't trust any dog, tbh. And I'm a 6ft tall adult.

Poor girl sad That is horrific

SnuffleTheDog Wed 27-Mar-13 14:44:00

Secret the cynic in me is thinking the 5th dog was a breed that wont get people frothing so isnt worth mentioning.

scarlettsmummy2 Wed 27-Mar-13 14:44:06

They should be banned. Why anyone would want to have this sort of dog as a pet is beyond me. I don't give a shit about it being the way they are handled, it is insanity to insist on keeping these working dogs as pets when there are many other soft mouthed breeds available.

Owllady Wed 27-Mar-13 14:44:13

cheddars, it does say they have reassured the community there will be a heavy police presence, so I imagine it's something to do with that (whoever owns the dogs/house or more etc)

SecretLindtBunny Wed 27-Mar-13 14:44:45

I also think it's a lab or a shih tzu or bichon.

Owllady Wed 27-Mar-13 14:46:24

I don't want to be all bust lifting les dawson here, but as it hasn't been destroyed one would assume it was neither aggressive or dangerous?

JustGiveMeFiveMinutes Wed 27-Mar-13 14:46:59

I've never heard of an attack by a lab on a staffie, either in the newspaper or by word of mouth. That was the point I was making.

The fact is the idiot owners are NEVER going to change. That's why these breeds should be outlawed. Prohibit them from being bred.

We laugh at the Americans when they saw a gun never killed a person. A person killed another person. Simple solution the Americans can't face up to is guns need to be banned. Same principle here, only with dogs. No more children will be killed then.

CalamityKate Wed 27-Mar-13 14:47:12

It's a combination of factors isn't it.

I'd be willing to bet that these dogs were not bred for good temperament. I read (don't know how true it is) that the owner breeds and advertises her dogs as "aggressive" on Facebook. No matter how well treated and brought up a dog is, if its ill bred it MAY be more predisposed to aggressive behaviour. Some things ARE genetic.

Combine that with the - alleged - fact that these dogs were kept in a small yard and therefore under exercised AND probably ill trained/controlled, and that there were a lot of them AND that food was involved and it really is a recipe for disaster.

I don't subscribe to the pack theory at all but there's no doubt that when you've got a group of dogs as in this case, if one kicks off they all set each other off. A bit like a horde of over excited children; as a group they are more likely to get OTT and out of control than as individuals. Especially if food is involved.

Absolutely tragic. Poor girl.

SnuffleTheDog Wed 27-Mar-13 14:47:45

Scarletts, banning them wont do a thing, it puts the real problem in a nice little 'lalala fingers in ears' box that gets put away and forgotten about.

The owners are the issue and need sorting out, thats the root cause of the problem, not the breed.

JustGiveMeFiveMinutes Wed 27-Mar-13 14:49:17

Snuffle

Please do not demean the death of a child by referring to people 'frothing.'

I know the area where this girl lived very well. The community is in pieces. They are mourning and seraching for answers, not 'frothing.' hmm

expatinscotland Wed 27-Mar-13 14:49:41

There is probably not a lot of info out because the authorities are still conducting the post mortem.

JustGiveMeFiveMinutes Wed 27-Mar-13 14:51:02

Snuffle

How do you think the problem should be sorted. Please note that if you say 'education' you are spectacularly missing the point why some people own these dogs in the first place hmm

This sort of dog? Do you mean staffies?

Well I have 2. And a foster. And I have these dogs because people but then because they think they are evil fighting dogs. When it turns out they are not born wanting to kill people, they abandon them into rescues.

And then someone like me comes along and has to train and socialise them.

Not everyone who has a staffie is an idiot looking for a status dog.
The people who do buy these dogs for that reason are the ones who do not bother to train them. And that is when tragedy like this happens.

Not because of the breed of dog. Because of the owner.

scarlettsmummy2 Wed 27-Mar-13 14:51:25

You ban them, then you actually DO prosecute with custodial sentences for anyone that continues to breed or purchase these animals. As I said- I really don't think nurture can over rule nature with animals.

Hulababy Wed 27-Mar-13 14:51:51

According the the news:

Apparently the 5th dog was in a locked room and not involved in the incident, hence why it was not shot at the scene.
I think the dogs were still very aggressive when police turned up and that was probably the reason they were killed immediately.

The girl was also not an unknown. She was a friend and had been there several times before.

And apparently the dogs were known for being a nuisance, aggressive barking, etc.

Maryz Cote D'Ivoire Wed 27-Mar-13 14:51:59

That telegraph article is very good.

And I don't see how banning the breeds will actually help. Because it is the fashion among some parts of society to have aggressive dogs, and pitbulls/mastiffs/staffies are bred and encouraged to be aggressive.

If you ban these breeds, the people won't just start having cuddly poodles. Another breed will become fashionable, and all the local hard men will go around with a German Shepherd, or a Rottie with a studded collar.

And then if you ban them, they will simply move to another breed, and any breed of dog if encouraged to be aggressive can do a lot of harm.

So it is the owners.

Licensing laws should be much stricter. I think a limit on the number of dogs per house would help as owners are often unable to control or exercise large numbers of dogs.

SnuffleTheDog Wed 27-Mar-13 14:52:50

JustGive - well now you have heard of one by word of mouth. My dog still has the scars, and hopefully the Lab still walks with a limp.

But banning breeds just ignores the problem and passes it on, the idiots who dont just ignore the banning will just start on another breed, and then another, and then another.

Callisto <<Killing squirrels is a positive, surely?>>

Er no, not if you can't teach your Jack Russell the difference between a squirrel and someone's pussy cat. Which I can't, so have to be very careful to stop him chasing anything except a ball. The fact that he might go for a cat terrifies me. And anyway, since when has random killing of wildlife been OK?

SecretLindtBunny Wed 27-Mar-13 14:54:17

I've seen a collie and a terrier cross attack a staffie who was playing fetch.

I also know that they have tried to take a bite out of my neighbours lurcher when he was on a lead.

IF the owner does indeed breed these animal using more temperamental animals then they are most definitely to blame and need to be jailed. So again, that simply reinforces the position that the owner is an idiot.

And FWIW my BigDog has been attacked by a lab, a jack Russell, a boxer and another staffy. He has been attacked quite badly because he doesn't fight back. He lays on the floor.

But it's always his fault apparently because of his breed.

SnuffleTheDog Wed 27-Mar-13 14:56:06

Tougher punishments for irresponsible owners would be a start, instead of just brushing the problem off on to another breed.

SecretLindtBunny Wed 27-Mar-13 14:56:08

Hula- I read the report as the fifth dog was at the scene but was contained without lethal force?

The bbc report states that she was found alone with five dogs

scarlettsmummy you obviously know nothing about the breed or have any real experience of them.
So it's all based on what you "think" you know.

It's not facts. And banning staffies won't stop dickhead owners finding another dog.

SecretLindtBunny Wed 27-Mar-13 14:57:25

MaryZ- it's only been 15 years or so when Rotties, GSD and Dobermans were the "Hard Man" dog of choice.

JustGiveMeFiveMinutes Wed 27-Mar-13 14:57:51

Snuffle

If you are saying that labradors, as a breed, are more aggressive than sbt you live in a parallel universe to me.

higgle Wed 27-Mar-13 14:58:34

The Daily Mail is now saying that the dog owner bred a litter of Staffie puppies last year and sold them on Facebook - pretty clear she was a very irresponsible dog owner from that alone.

D0oinMeCleanin Wed 27-Mar-13 14:59:03

You ban them, then they move onto to other breeds, as they did when the pitbull, tosa, fila etc were banned, they're already moving onto more northern breeds in most parts of the country in a misguided attempt to more closely emulate a wolf. These breeds will start making headlines soon. They will be the next staffy.

So, you ban the northern breeds too.

They'll buy rottys. Ban them.

They'll buy GSDs. Ban them.

They'll buy Dobes. Ban them.

They'll buy Leonbergers. Ban them.

At some point you will have to start looking at the other end of the lead.

moonabove Wed 27-Mar-13 15:00:01

Agree Miranda - ridiculous comment about killing squirrels.

Banning certain breeds isn't going to help, any dog has the potential to be aggressive if mishandled or trained to be so which is probably what happened with these dogs.

Whoever is responsible for these dogs should definitely be charged with manslaughter.

SnuffleTheDog Wed 27-Mar-13 15:00:20

dont worry OP, that wasn't what I was saying. hmm

JustGiveMeFiveMinutes Wed 27-Mar-13 15:02:21

It's always the same though. A staffie or a mastiff kills a child and somebody comes on here banging on about how dangerous labradors are. It's ridiculous.

MooMooSkit Wed 27-Mar-13 15:04:25

Oh great, a another article to make people hate staffies. I've had a staffie and she was the soppiest sod in the whole world. We had two ferrets and she was scared of them and jumped at cats. But she was loving and an affectionate dog. Any dog has the potential to turn nasty. There's more reported bites from labs apparentely than any other dog. hmm Just dogs like pitbulls and staffs and sought out by a lot of shitty dog owners who see these sort of stories and want an aggressive dog. Banning them will not solve anything. RIP to the girl.

SnuffleTheDog Wed 27-Mar-13 15:05:37

If you mean me OP, I haven't said that, or even hinted at it.

You said you had never heard of a lab attacking a SBT. I have you an example, that is all. No mention of how dangerous Labs in general are (because they aren't, neither are SBTs, Mastiffs, JRTs etc ) confused

What is ridiculous is suggesting that staffys be banned as they are dangerous dogs.
By people who have no experience, no real, personal experience of the breed.

SecretLindtBunny Wed 27-Mar-13 15:07:48

You are missing the point spectacularly.

It is idiots who give these dogs these fearsome reputations instead of looking at the indisputable fact that all dogs can bite and all dogs are capable of inflicting grevious bodily injury.

And it's idiots who call for breed specific legislation that make them more sodding desirable.

Yes, they are powerful breeds. But saying they are all aggressive and should all be banned is the canine equivelent of saying all Palestinians are terrorists.

TheOriginalSteamingNit Wed 27-Mar-13 15:07:55

Oh great, a another article to make people hate staffies

Yes, that's the real pity of this story, isn't it. My heart just sank for all the staffie owners when I heard about this. hmm

Maryz Cote D'Ivoire Wed 27-Mar-13 15:10:05

Yes Secret.

Here all the hard men in the centre of town have staffie-like dogs.

As you move out of town, they tend to have GS's.

The similarity is the studded collar and the aggression of the owners.

Maryz Cote D'Ivoire Wed 27-Mar-13 15:11:26

And by the way, my gentle goldie got very aggressive with small dogs towards the end of his life, and had to be kept on-lead a lot. We didn't know, but he had a tumour in his jaw that must have been painful.

So any dog can be aggressive.

Only those with fuckwit owners are encouraged to be so. That's the difference.

Sparklingbrook Wed 27-Mar-13 15:13:25

From one of the reports it appears that the owner was selling puppies on FB a while ago. sad

Nancy66 Wed 27-Mar-13 15:13:30

the original bans haven't worked anyhow.

Where i live in south London i see plenty of dogs that are definitely a lot more American pitbull than they are SBT...

moonabove Wed 27-Mar-13 15:15:14

TheOriginalSteamingNit The real pity of this story is that a human being has been savaged to death.

HotCrossPun Wed 27-Mar-13 15:18:08

Firstly, none of the pictures of the dogs I have seen look like a SBT.

The kennel club only recommends 2 types of dog as being good with children. One of them is a staffie.

There were 5 big dogs kept in small house. No responsible dog owner would have that many.

As long as people keep on blaming a certain breed for these tragedies they will keep on happening.

SnuffleTheDog Wed 27-Mar-13 15:18:27

from what I can see its not even confirmed if the dogs were SBT or not.

Maybe they were SBT 'Type' (whatever breed that is)

TheNebulousBoojum Wed 27-Mar-13 15:18:28

I think that was the point TOSN was making, hence the hmm face.
It was a response.

moonabove Wed 27-Mar-13 15:20:40

Sorry TheOriginalSteamingNit - didn't notice the sarcasm face!

HotCrossPun Wed 27-Mar-13 15:22:19
curryeater Wed 27-Mar-13 15:22:24

FFS I am sick to death of the dog-apologia on this site.

Dogs are not moral beings. It is nonsense, literally meaningless, to talk about whether or not anything is a dog's "fault", or ascribe blame to a dog. This is not to say that we accord them the same status as a blameless human. they have NO status with respect to blame, because they are not human, and are not moral agents, and therefore when they are dangerous they do not have quasi-human rights, and should be killed.

RIP Jade Lomas-Anderson.

TheOriginalSteamingNit Wed 27-Mar-13 15:24:28

Yes, that was exactly the point I was making!

AThingInYourLife Wed 27-Mar-13 15:52:39

Aren't staffies really quite small? confused

Mastiffs are massive and terrifying but staffies are these adorable friendly things.

Have I got the wrong breed entirely?

From my (not a dog person) reading of this, 5 dogs were left alone in a house with a teenager they didn't know well.

I'm far from an expert, but I think breed doesn't even have to come into it for that to be a fucking stupid thing to do.

My friend has the 3 most well behaved dogs you could imagine (she is a trainer) but I don't like to be left on my own with them because they don't know me, and I'm not good at dogs.

As well-trained as they are, they are big and strong (GSD & collies) and could do me damage if they chose to.

AThingInYourLife Wed 27-Mar-13 15:54:52

" It is nonsense, literally meaningless, to talk about whether or not anything is a dog's "fault", or ascribe blame to a dog. This is not to say that we accord them the same status as a blameless human. they have NO status with respect to blame, because they are not human, and are not moral agents, and therefore when they are dangerous they do not have quasi-human rights, and should be killed."

Very well put, curry

maisiejoe123 Wed 27-Mar-13 16:00:21

I agree with a post that said ban this breed and then the next breed and so on but these mindless idiots would still find a breed they could 'toughen' up.

When we were considerering our rottie the breeder we brought her from wanted to visit our house and inspect it. It was fine with me as I had already brought some pictures of where we live so that he could see we had the room. Others might not be so keen. I do actually agree with some sort of cost/license for the bigger dogs if I am honest. And please dont lets get onto 'well if you are on benefits, you dont need to pay'. Everyone needs to seriously consider what it takes to own a dog. You then need to decide if you can afford it and take the responsibility for owning a bigger breed. And having 5 of these dogs in a house is totally totally irresponsible.

Perhaps you even need to prove that you are a responsible owner by applying to a committee. I know it sounds nonsense but until we stop these mindless idiots getting hold of big dogs, training them to be agressive and then having no consequences then they attack it will happen again.

If someone with a dog on a string and a studded collar couldnt prove a licence of some sort then the dog is immediately taken from them. I think we can all spot the suspicious owners a mile off.....

HotCrossPun Wed 27-Mar-13 16:03:22

AThingInYourLife - My staffie is quite small. People often try to pass off dogs banned under the Dangerous Dog Act as staffies and, as such, people often get the breeds confused.

Like I said in my previous post, none of the dogs in the photos look like true staffies to me. Mine is small (much smaller than a labrodor) and has quite a narrow face - nothing like the big boxy jaws you see on a pit bull!

And yes, they are adorable, friendly things smile

SnuffleTheDog Wed 27-Mar-13 16:05:41

my staffie is actually quite small, with a tiny pea head and brain

maisiejoe123 Wed 27-Mar-13 16:08:11

Staffies tend to waddle dont they and yes, they are quite small dogs.

I am also thinking - if you have a big breed then perhaps you need to attend a training course (at your cost!). If I was out walking our dog and I was stopped by police/dog wardens as I would probably be expected to I wouldnt have any issues at all proving my responsibilities and it wouldnt matter tbh how many times I was stopped.

I think it is down to personal responsibility and cost. If you have to pay and put some time aside to own a big dog then maybe you will think whether it is really something you want to do.

HotCrossPun Wed 27-Mar-13 16:10:07

maisiejoe123 I thought it was just mine that had a funny waddle! grin

maisiejoe123 Wed 27-Mar-13 16:12:19

Ironically when the police came around recently due to suspicious activity in the area by some young people the constable told us to get a dog as they are great at detering unwanted visitors.

When I told them I had one already he asked to see it, the rottie ambled around the corner and his face! She doesnt bark much and maybe she recognised that it was the police so that was OK.

maisiejoe123 Wed 27-Mar-13 16:16:12

My DS has one.... It is quite big though.

I have taken our dog out and people who know dogs always ask whether she is OK with strangers before the pet her. Lots of dogs arent but look cute.

Ocassionally a few people would make a rude comment saying 'that isnt a rottweiler is it, am I safe'. I just comment no - Chinese Lab - new breed just come into the country. Most people fell for it. They do have a Chinese look about them methinks and they arent much bigger than a lab....

maisiejoe123 Wed 27-Mar-13 16:18:11

Mu Ds allows her staffie on the sofa's and to sleep on their bed. TBH - I wouldnt. Our dog isnt allowed upstairs. I think you need to be really firm and definitely in charge in your dogs eyes and allowing them to sit and sleep where you are is not necessarily a good idea.

SnuffleTheDog Wed 27-Mar-13 16:18:53

TBH the reaction I get when I tell people I have a SBT sums it up for me:

"Gosh you dont look like a typical SBT owner"

Riiiiight.

duchesse Wed 27-Mar-13 16:22:12

Hear hear Maisie. Dogs should know their place. And their place, imo, is not in their owner's bed masquerading as a cuddly toy.

SnuffleTheDog Wed 27-Mar-13 16:30:56

they do make good feet warmers though when they stay at the bottom of the bed

Spero Wed 27-Mar-13 16:35:50

I heard about this in the park this morning when a fellow dog walker came up to commiserate with me for owning a staffy.

I agree with Dooin. It is not about banning a particular breed. It is about coming down HARD on the witless fuckwits who cannot look after dogs, who do not exercise them, train them or feed them properly. I hope the owner of those dogs is prosecuted, manslaughter at the very least. My bet is that they had been cooped up in the house for a long time and had not been fed.

I am so sad to hear how she died. It must have been terrifying.

But banning certain breeds will solve nothing - you would have to ban all dogs. The idiots will just move on from breed to breed. All dogs are capable of aggression if treated badly.

Spero Wed 27-Mar-13 16:38:46

Fwiw my staffy sleeps in my bed. She still knows I am boss. It is about early training and socialising. And yes, she has been attacked by a lab - when a 16 month old puppy and on a lead at my feet.

Spero Wed 27-Mar-13 16:39:10

16 week I mean.

SnuffleTheDog Wed 27-Mar-13 16:41:30

Ive had "bet you're thinking about getting rid of yours after this incident" today from a colleague.

confused

Erm....no actually. Just as I dont think about getting rid of DP when I hear about another crime committed against a female by her partner/husband

SnuffleTheDog Wed 27-Mar-13 16:42:33

<narrows eyes>

Spero are you me? My SBT was attacked by a lab when she was 15 months. On a lead. Sat next to me outside a shop.

tethersend Wed 27-Mar-13 16:43:27

Whether it is the owner's fault or not should have no bearing on whether or not the breed is banned.

There will always be feckless or malicious people- the law prevents them, and everybody else, from owning a gun; why can't certain breeds of dog be licensed in the same way?

maisiejoe123 Wed 27-Mar-13 16:49:25

Tether - I agree, fining them wont work. They will claim to have no money.

If they choose to have a big dog they will need to prove to society that they know what they are doing. Otherwise, YOU CANNOT HAVE ONE!

And if they are stopped lots of times to give their evidence well that's just tough. Maybe it will then deter them from having it in the first place. It will also allow people who are concerned about the dogs before any attack to report behaviour problems. I know, I know, not ideal but almost always after these sorts of incidents others come out saying the dogs were out of control etc etc but the police and authorities are almost powerless to do anything.

maisiejoe123 Wed 27-Mar-13 16:54:22

When I did some dog training at a very famous dog training centre known for their gentle ways they said it was actually the Golden Retrievers who were causing the most concern because they are big dogs and there was a strain of agression coming through that they were concerned about I love GR's (apart from the hair) .

Please I am not having a go at any owners/breeds at all. But I do think big dogs (and that is ALL of them) need to be looked at in a different way.

FWIW - I have been bitten by a cocker spaniel and a border collie when I was queuing for an ice cream in the cafe in the woods. Maybe it thought I was pushing in. I didnt report it tbh as the owner did seriously apologise.

Don't think that allowing the dog on the furniture or bed will mean their next move will be to plot world domination smile

Agree with Spero, early (and continued) training and tons of socialisation. Do you homework and choose a breeder very very carefully if you are not going for a rescue. Be prepared to be interviewed, visited and go on a waiting list. Our breeder is coming for a coffee next week to see how our puppy is getting on, he's nearly 6 months old!They bred to gain another dog and their bitch is already spayed, they are KC registered and all health checks are complete. Don't for gods sake buy from Facebook or Gumtree.

What you put into a dog is generally what you get out, bit like kids, although I do agree certain breeds have certain traits that others don't.

Our puppy has been a dream since we got him, we are first time owners. But, he is trained, loved, stimulated, exercised tons and has strict boundaries (not talking about the pack theory crap or dominance etc). I wouldn't contemplate owning a dog if we could give him that and it's a shame that people don't research and think very carefully before getting their bundle of fluff or whatever.

Perhaps SBT's will get a break soon, they seem to be moving onto Husky's round these parts [hmm). Another fantastic breed as a family pet hmm

I am so sorry for jade and her family and the community in general and sorry if that comes over as 'holier than thou' but maybe stuff like this wouldn't happen if people thought carefully.

ps - ours isn't allowed on sofas or upstairs but that's nothing to do with not having clear rules, just our choice (and the fact I am a clean freaksmile])

wannaBe Wed 27-Mar-13 17:01:45

I'm intrigued as to how exactly people think that any kind of licencing/enforcement laws would be administered. Who is going to administer the whole idea of the compulsory training/micro chipping/licencing? How are people going to ensure that random dog owners don't breed their dogs and give away the resultant puppies to other random dog owners? Who is going to enforce the certain number of dogs per household law that people are proposing? The fact is that none of these laws are workable because they are simply not enforceable. And to be frank, the government has enough real financial issues to deal with to be able to invest millions into an unworkable scheme to ensure that John Smith doesn't let his toy poodle have puppies.

A child is dead and that is a tragedy. But the only thing that could have prevented that from happening is if the owners hadn't been so irresponsible. No legislation would have prevented that from happening. People who want to keep agressive dogs will keep them regardless of the law because they are generally oblivious to it.

And whoever made the point that the town in question is where the local guide dogs branch is located I don't see how that is relevant. Yes, staffies are notoriously dog agressive, and as a guide dog owner I unfortunately have first hand experience. But there is in fact no corallation between dog agression and agression towards humans. A dog can be agressive towards other dogs while at the same time being totally soft with humans...

kiwigirl42 Wed 27-Mar-13 17:08:06

we have a chocolate labrador who is as soft as butter and has never put a foot wrong. would I leave her alone with a any baby/ toddler or non-family older child? Never. Not fair on her if something unexpected happens.

We had a Westie when DS was born and gave her to MIL as she was a rescue dog, a bit snappy (only usual terrier behaviour) and I felt she was a risk around a baby/ small child - not out of malice but because she reacted to surprise by snapping. I would NEVER have been able to turn my back on her and DS for a second.

MaidMiniEgg2012 Wed 27-Mar-13 17:43:56

This is a dreadful story, the poor girl must have been utterly terrified. My thoughts are with her family sad

A young lad across the road from me sees fit to own a red-nose pitbull. To be fair to the lad, it is looked after properly, walked and never ever not under control, ie, running loose. However why in the Hell do people need/want these bloody dogs? He should not even legally own it. He tells people it is a ridgeback cross. Time after times people are bitten, mauled and now a young girl has lost her life.

It is the owners fault. Come on, we've all seen people strutting around town centres and estates (I live on one) with these staffie/pitbull types and you know they are to look hard.

A friend of mine, a perfectly normal, decent woman with a very good job decided to get two pitbulls. The pair of them flipped out after she slipped in kitchen and savaged her lower leg. The dogs were subsequently destroyed.

There needs to be a serious overhaul of the law surrounding these dogs/owners otherwise I fear this poor girl will not be the last person killed.

maisiejoe123 Wed 27-Mar-13 17:48:11

Perhaps a dog licence of some sort for some dog breeds. And I would be affected by this. I am not suggesting for others - I have a rottie myself!

Something, anything that stops the feckless and stupid from having these dogs. At present (someone correct me if I am wrong) as the attack was at the owners home they cannot be charged with anything very much.

I am sure that they are really sorry but it is clear they are too stupid to think that having 5 big dogs in a small house is a sensible way forward.....

I am personally completely fed up with stupid people who think they can do what they want resulting in the death of a child. They absolutely knew these dogs were dangerous. Why wouldnt they - this isnt mild mannered dog turns.

I agree with another poster, the dogs might have been starving. Stupid, feckless owner not feeding.

Sorry, I am really angry that people like this are allowed to behave like this seemingly get away with a slapped wrist. What stops them replacing these dogs with 5 the same!

maisiejoe123 Wed 27-Mar-13 17:49:34

Pitbulls are illegal in this country Maid. Is suspect you are out of the UK. At least I hope you are.

Spero Wed 27-Mar-13 17:53:56

Hello snuffle. To be fair, the (extremely apologetic) owner told me his lab had been attacked by a staffy and hadn't been right since... But this dog was off lead, just came running up to mine, stopped dead then without growling or other warning just went for my dog. I ended up swinging my staffy round my head, still on her lead as I panicked.

I am lucky it didn't bite me. It was a very large dog. Ever since then it has been on a lead.

But the owner knew his dog was a problem and had it in a public park, off lead. So I don't blame the dog.

I agree that enforcement is going to be a massive problem. We allegedly have a dog warden round my way but I have never seen him. I can only suggest that we bring back licensing and put the money from that into some kind of enforcement, however skeletal. Or can the RSPCA have more of a role?

maisiejoe123 Wed 27-Mar-13 18:00:08

If the dog on a string brigade knew they had to prove ownership and responsibility even if it was just a £20 dog licence and a micro chip then that would be something. They would be stopped more than others precisely because it is these types of people who has these sorts of dogs.

I can spot a dodgy dog owner a mile off and so could community police officers and the like. Any reports of trouble would be reported to the police who would then pay a visit....

And for those of you who say there is no money. I had a visit from a community police officer when my number plate fell off! I said it wasnt necessary but they insisted it was the process when a 'crime' was reported.

DeepRedBetty Wed 27-Mar-13 18:00:15

I should like to see compulsory licencing and microchipping with fines for failing to update the database - like DVLA for cars - and the licence fee for entire dogs and bitches aged more than 15 months quadrupled.

DeepRedBetty Wed 27-Mar-13 18:02:34

Not sure RSPCA should be allowed more of a role Spero until they can restrain themselves from spending silly money fighting unwinnable court cases against the Huntin Shootin Fishing Brigade.

cleangreens Wed 27-Mar-13 18:11:17

Bloke just on BBC news saying how his Rottweiler/Akita cross can be aggressive sometimes so he always keeps it locked up and nowhere near children - why the f* has he got a dog like that?????!!!!! Sorry but he was your stereotypical gormless bloke in a hoodie standing on some run down estate grrrr.....

Passmethecrisps Wed 27-Mar-13 18:19:44

Can I derail this thread slightly?

Did anyone else watch the ITV coverage of this story this afternoon? They played a recording of the dogs being shot. It was recorded by a neighbour. It was utterely pointless - I could imagine what gun shots sounded like - and completely salacious.

AnAirOfHope Wed 27-Mar-13 18:20:12

I agree with dog lisencing, microchiping and compulsory nurtaring for all dogs. With specsial breeding centres and lisencing that have a watchdog or govening body to oversee the treatment and nuating of the pups and mothers.

I also think some breeds just are not ment as pets and should not be sold as such.

Moominsarehippos Wed 27-Mar-13 18:23:24

Dogs don't need to have any training whatsoever. Sadly the 'tough' breeds are the ones that are favoured by (some) neds. These are people who don't look like they can look after themselves, let alone discipline and train a dog. Yes, there are bad owners, but some breeds are more aggressive than others - they have been bred/are still being bred to fight.

Its not hard to train a dog - you just need to be arsed to do so. The people in this case seemed to have been breeding - and I can only assume they know little beyond 'boy dog + girl dog = £££.

PeachActiviaMinge Wed 27-Mar-13 18:24:35

There's a beautiful staffie lives around the corner from me, shes not the best treat dog
and shes of course owned by the typical owners but whenever she see's me or DD coming round the corner she throws herself at out feet and rolls over waiting for a belly rub and a cuddle. She runs like hell from people she doesn't know and other dogs terrify her she is probably the sweetest dog I have ever owned but I've heard her owner describe her as useless and a complete let down because she isn't aggressive enough for him. Training love and compassion works so much better with any dog than a stick and fear.

Punish the deed not breed smile

I'd be prepared to pay at least £500 per year for a licence that actually meant something more than the paper it was printed on.

Dog ownership is seen as far too much of a 'right' for anyone who fancies owning one and I don't believe everyone does have that right.

Spero Wed 27-Mar-13 18:46:33

I guess the easiest and quickest thing would be to change the law to make owners responsible for the behaviour of dogs in the home as opposed to just in public places.

Moominsarehippos Wed 27-Mar-13 18:53:44

If you tried to charge (excluding guide dogs, OAPs, hearing dogs, housebound-folks etc) then thickos would start screetching about their 'yeeeeooooman roights!' to keep a dog.

Make the feckless only able to get licences for miniature poodles or mexican hairless breeds.

ZZZenAgain Wed 27-Mar-13 18:57:24

I think if licensing will not work, the keeping of these breeds of dogs has to be banned. It works in other countries. People may not like it but tough.

Moominsarehippos Wed 27-Mar-13 19:00:38

Its not so black and white. Aren't some breeds banned here? People would just get around it by saying that its a cross breed (part lamb, part tazmanian devil). And the type of people I see around here with the mad muts on a lead, don't look like theyd give a shit about a ban.

Then that sort of owner will simply move to another breed that isn't yet banned.

It's interesting re the Dobermanns. When I was a teen they were the Bogey Dog Du Jour. Every would-be hardman had one. Then they fell out of favour and the ones I see now are rare but owned by responsible people who care about the breed. Pleasant, well-socialised and well-kept.

Unfortunately it's Huskies that are getting popular round here now. I know 2 that never get out of the house/garden like they should except to be paraded round by some strutting asshat and it infuriates me.

Moominsarehippos Wed 27-Mar-13 19:07:06

Why do the twats prefer dogs that are high mantenence? Huskies need hours of exercise every day or they go loopy.

EMUZ Wed 27-Mar-13 19:09:18

It's not the breed is it? My grandad bred pit bulls
He was adamant about a few things. Breed good to good - never breed from a dog with a bad or unknown temperament
Bring them up properly, train and handle them
Treat them like dogs - exercise them and feed them and continue training

The indiscriminate breeding means aggressive temperaments are being inbred. The lack of exercise and training means they run wild and do what they want
It's a combination for disaster. I don't believe the owner would have trained each dog and found the time to walk them properly for an hour plus a day

RIP

PeachActiviaMinge Wed 27-Mar-13 19:10:35

First, they came for the Pit Bulls,
but you didn't speak out because you don't have a Pit Bull.
Then they came for the German Shepherds,
but you didn't speak out because you don't have a German Shepherd.

Then they came for the Akitas,
but you didn't speak out because you don't have an Akita.

Then they came for the Boxers,
but you didn't speak out because you don't have a Boxer.

When they come for your dog,
will anyone speak out for you?

Also please read this so you can fully understand why banning breeds is such a bad idea. "There are over 150 breeds banned in different countries world wide. The lists include Pit Bulls, Boxer, German Shepherds, Rottweiliers, Corgis, Collies."

Dogs end up being killed just for looking wrong, it doesn't matter their temperment or how much someone loves them just because they look wrong. What happened to that young girl was a tragedy but it is rare and because it is so very very rare means we shouldn't be looking at banning breeds of dogs. We are the supposedly responsible ones after all.

We brought them into our lives we bred the wild out of them and made them rely on us they are our responsibility now.

ZZZenAgain Wed 27-Mar-13 19:12:34

if they are banned, enforcement is not a huge problem. It works in other countries and they don't have these problems with dc killed by dogs. Simple as that. Of course if you want that type of breed, that's your business. I don't and I don't want to live near one either. Fine with me if they are banned, I welcome it.

I don't know about that, ZZZen. My friend has a Dogo Argentino and he is like a big soppy Lab (not in this country). So it all comes back to responsible ownership for me, every time.
You can ban as many breeds as you like. Assholes will just go and find one that isn't yet banned. They don't care about the breed and they don't even care about their own particular dog if it's seized and killed.

Moominsarehippos Wed 27-Mar-13 19:19:51

Its not a matter of banning breeds. Its irresponsible/dangerous breeding of dogs through either ignorance or plain stupidity that is the problem.

Add to that feckless owners and you can easily have a bat-shit crazy dog with a temprament of Mike Tyson on steroids and an owner that has no control over them. Its like going out on a Saturday night into the town centre - there may be hundreds of folk there but you know there will be a handful of barmy buggers who have too much god knows what in their system just looking for a fight.

CalamityKate Wed 27-Mar-13 19:21:51

Can I just point out that if a breed is bred to fight other dogs (or bulls or wolves or whatever) it doesn't necessarily mean that it will be more aggressive to humans.

In fact if you watch rescue shows where they're often taking injured dogs who are not only bred to fight but actually used for fighting, it becomes pretty apparent that they are generally extremely UNaggressive to humans.

They have to be. Their owners have to be able to handle them when they (the dogs) are hyped up to the max and full of adrenaline. Often they have to perform patch ups of wounds received through fighting. They're not keen on taking these dogs to the vet for obvious reasons.

seeker Wed 27-Mar-13 19:27:53

Strange how all these Rottweilers, and Dobermans and GDSs and mastiffs and all the rest are always as soft as butter. hmm

Not all of them, seeker. As this tragedy shows.

Please don't wilfully misunderstand what I'm saying. It demonstrates the difference between a responsible owner with a genuine love for the breed they have and a knowledge of traits that breed may have that need careful training and the dozey shitheads who just like something big with teeth on the end of a lead.

Moominsarehippos Wed 27-Mar-13 19:47:01

Its not 'professional' breeders who go for the aggressive streak that are the main concern. Its all hard money/gambling to them. Its the feckless idiots who think that they can make money or look hard with an aggressive dog. They haven't a clue how to handle them and think that because they have had the dog since it was a puppy, they can handle it. If they have treated it badly or with agression, then yes, there is a chance that the dog will one day see the red mist or think the doggie eqiovalent of 'fuck this for a game of soldiers' and attack a human.

Yes, there are soppy mastiffs, as there are aggressive labradors (we had one as a rescue and he'd been badly beaten and trained to be aggressive) but arguing that the exception proves that some breeds are more aggressive my nature/breeding is like people who say 'smoking? My nan smokes 500 a day and lived to 102, when she fell off her hang glider'.

Spero Wed 27-Mar-13 19:47:22

I can only speak for my staffy. She is utterly soft. But I had her from a puppy and I trained her. She is asleep on the sofa on top of my 8 year old.

Maybe if someone else had her, didn't exercise her, didn't feed her properly, kicked her etc she would be a very different dog. I don't know.

I think dogs are just like people. There may be very few who are just innately evil and dangerous, like that from birth. But the majority who are dangerous are a product of their environment and how they were raised.

AmberLeaf Wed 27-Mar-13 20:42:16

Whenever dogs are discussed [on here and elsewhere], everyone is a responsible dog owner, doesn't encourage aggression and never leaves their dogs poo on the ground.

In reality I have to step over shit wherever I go, from London streets and parks to the tiny village some of my family live in and inbetween. But no one ever admits to it.

Everyones dogs are 'soft and wouldn't hurt a fly' yet thousands of people a year are bitten by dogs.

I don't believe that all that dog crap and dogs biting people is solely down to the 'feckless' type of owners dogs, some folk like that definitely are bad owners and encourage aggression etc, but similarly some people like that are sensible with their pets.

They are animals, sometimes animals revert from the unnatural domestication humans put on them, back to their natural state, even for a short time.

I don't believe that 'good ownership' is enough to stop that happening in every circumstance.

nancy66 yes, loooads of staffies where I live, except they aren't staffs, they are pitbulls. Some of them are nice enough dogs, but I wouldn't want them around my child [or any other dog if Im honest]

wannaBe Wed 27-Mar-13 20:43:53

more people in the UK are bitten by golden retrievers than any other breed. Where are the calls on this thread for golden retrievers to be banned under the dangerous dogs act? Or does it only count if the dog kills someone.

yes, family pet dogs doo bite for various reasons. But the majority of them are not the rottweillers and staffies that people are calling to be banned here, the majority of them are the golden retrievers that are held up as the ideal family pet. And in truth they probably are. And we don't know what causes all the dog bites in this country every year. the majority will not be unprovoked attacks, for a dog to turn and attack without reason is extremely rare.

But if you look at the deaths over the past few years none of those dogs were the victim's beloved and soft-as-butter family pet. Not one.

And the numbers are tiny - just seven deaths in the past eight years.

Now I don't remember names, but I do vaguely remember circs - there was that little girl in liverpool killed by the uncle's illegally owned and known-to-be agressive pitbul. There was the baby killed above a pub somewhere by two rottweillers kept as guard dogs. another two year old killed by a rottweiller in her cousin's garden (rottweiller was not allowed in the house). The baby killed by her grandmother's staffy and JRT which she kept as guard dogs. These are not your average dogs who lie on your bed every night these were dogs already known for and in some cases kept for their agression.

It is all very well to talk about this and that breed but you have to look at the circumstances, because otherwise it is just far too simplistic.

And if we start banning breeds i.e. staffies/rottweillers what do people propose? that all the staffies/rottweillers in the country be rounded up and destroyed? regardless of their temperament? Take away beloved family pets who have never and would never hurt anyone and destroy them to satisfy the need to be seen to be doing something? hmm

I agree that there are a lot of irresponsible dog owners out there and I agree that the penalties if your dog attacks someone should be much much harsher.

I also think that any death by any means is tragic.

But more children are killed by cars and parents and drugs every year than that have been killed by dogs over the past eight years. And yet we don't hear the hysteria about that. Why not? Perhaps because it's just easier to label dogs as being all evil even though the number of deaths from dog attacks is neglidgeable.

AmberLeaf Wed 27-Mar-13 20:48:05

but I wouldn't want them around my child [or any other dog if Im honest

I meant I wouldn't want any other dog around my child, not that I wouldn't want pitbulls around any other dog!

wannaBe Wed 27-Mar-13 20:54:43

that is entirely irational though amber.

Spero Wed 27-Mar-13 21:00:43

Amber I don't get your point. Are you saying the people who post here about being responsible dog owners are lying or that we don't recognise there are lots of irresponsible owners out there?

I encounter the same piles of shit as you do. That's why I pick up after my dog.

There are loads of people with dogs who should not be allowed to look after any animal - or child. But they often have loads of both. It is terrifying.

JustGiveMeFiveMinutes Wed 27-Mar-13 21:01:52

I hate, hate, hate how people use the Martin Niemoller speech in these arguments. I honestly believe that some people do not care that an innocent fourteen year old has died.

Spero Wed 27-Mar-13 21:03:50

If you really honestly think that people here don't care that a child has died. There is something very wrong with you.

But I think we are entitled to discuss a view that because a child has died we must round up our family pets and have them killed too.

JustGiveMeFiveMinutes Wed 27-Mar-13 21:07:33

Spero

Some posters have completely glossed over this girl's death. They much prefer to talk about their soppy staffies.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with me hmm I believe I have my priorities right.

seeker Wed 27-Mar-13 21:09:02

"Please don't wilfully misunderstand what I'm saying. It demonstrates the difference between a responsible owner with a genuine love for the breed they have and a knowledge of traits that breed may have that need careful training and the dozey shitheads who just like something big with teeth on the end of a lead."

All dogs need careful training. But I just find it bizarre that anyone would want to keep a breed that has "characteristics that need extra careful training. Any dog can bite. Any dog could attack. But some breeds have specific characteristics that make it more likely. Why would anyone want to keep one of those?

JustGiveMeFiveMinutes Wed 27-Mar-13 21:09:23

And for the record, I wouldn't support euthanasia of sbt and similar breeds. I would however ban them from being bred. That may be a start to solving this terrible problem we have.

Spero Wed 27-Mar-13 21:11:10

So because I talk about my staffy being soft, that means I don't feel sick and horrified about how Jade died?

Have a word with yourself and don't make offensive assumptions about others.

JustGiveMeFiveMinutes Wed 27-Mar-13 21:11:28

You are right seeker. I am a dog lover. I have a four year old dog that has never growled. Not once! She, like any dog, is capable of being aggressive but she is a safer bet that the dogs we encounter on walks that strain at the lease and growl, bark and snarl at her.

Spero Wed 27-Mar-13 21:13:22

Seeker - my dog is a staffy, known for being dog aggressive. But also known for a great temperament and one of few breeds recommended by Kennel Club around children.

So I dealt with dog aggression by lots of early socialisation. And have been rewarded with a loyal, loving, non aggressive dog who is enhancing my daughter's childhood and who brings great joy and companionship to me.

seeker Wed 27-Mar-13 21:16:05

"Seeker - my dog is a staffy, known for being dog aggressive. But also known for a great temperament and one of few breeds recommended by Kennel Club around children."

I thought that was a myth? Like the "nanny dog" thing?

JustGiveMeFiveMinutes Wed 27-Mar-13 21:16:44

If you support these breeds spero you are part of the problem, like Americans, who may be peace loving but who argue against the banning of firearms are also part of the US gun problem.

Therefore, why don't you have a word with yourself hmm

Spero Wed 27-Mar-13 21:19:19

Well if it is a myth it was one being widely spread at the Earls Court dog show I went to when considering getting a dog. Best check directly with Kennel Club. I thought I had read it on official websites.

Or maybe I have gone completely mad. But all I have seen with my dog, how she is with my child and any other child she meets supports that view. As another poster said, all she wants to do is roll over and have her tummy tickled.

MyOtherNameIsFunnier Wed 27-Mar-13 21:20:33

Some cunt on my FB is using a picture of Jade to promote his pro dog agenda.

Cunt.

AmberLeaf Wed 27-Mar-13 21:20:52

that is entirely irational though amber

Is it? They can't avoid them in day to day life, but I choose not to have one and don't particularly want to spend time with them.

I have been bitten by 2 dogs in the past [not badly] my son has been bitten when he was about 4 yrs old. not provoked, a dog was walking towards us with its owner and as we got closer it nipped my son on the face, he hadn't done anything to provoke it, he wasn't shrieking or waving his arms around, he was just walking along holding my hand.

Both times I was bitten the owner was present, this was in the street. Once when I was a child it was my fault apparently because I was skipping along and the dog 'thought I was running and wanted to chase me' I was about 7-8

2nd time I was an adult and a dog ran at me in the park growling and jumped at me, I put my arm across my chest in defence and it bit me.

So as much as I know of dogs I consider 'nice' that are owned by friends, Id rather avoid them 'socially'!

Don't see how that is irrational, I consider it a sensible choice.

Are you saying the people who post here about being responsible dog owners are lying or that we don't recognise there are lots of irresponsible owners out there?

As I said, its not just here, but if everyone was as good as they say they were there would be less dog poo on the ground. no one ever admits to leaving it there do they? but Ive seen people do it! and they walk away looking like butter wouldn't melt.

I think we do recognise there are lots of irresponsible owners out there, but its always 'someone else'

Spero Wed 27-Mar-13 21:21:04

I don't support 'breeds'. I don't give a shit about 'breeds'. Just a way to breed weakness and disease for human vanity.

I care about responsible dog ownership. Anyone who thinks dogs are the problem is missing the point. There has to be a way to stop these idiots who can't care for animals.

MajaBiene Wed 27-Mar-13 21:23:05

I don't think the problem is the breeds per se.

More that this woman choose to have 4/5 dogs from big, powerful breeds, in a small terraced house, where they were probably left crated half the time, under exercised and poorly trained (if at all).

Similar is happening all over the place with these husky and malamute times that are fashionable now - big, powerful dogs that need masses of exercise being overbred and then sold on Facebook to idiots in inner city flats.

AmberLeaf Wed 27-Mar-13 21:23:21

but Ive seen people do it!

Actually, Ive seen dogs do it! sorry

Spero Wed 27-Mar-13 21:23:33

Amber - but it is someone else. I pickup poo, spay, microchip etc, etc. so do lots of owners. I don't see why we should be damned because of the idiots. Why is the answer 'ban dogs' instead of properly enforcing responsible dog ownership? My life would be much poorer without my dog. I don't want to lose her.

TheOriginalSteamingNit Wed 27-Mar-13 21:25:17

wannaBe, sorry but this

more people in the UK are bitten by golden retrievers than any other breed. Where are the calls on this thread for golden retrievers to be banned under the dangerous dogs act? Or does it only count if the dog kills someone

Is ridiculous. Are you trying to say it's somehow hypocritical to think dogs killing people is worse than biting.

JustGiveMeFiveMinutes Wed 27-Mar-13 21:25:42

Spero

Don't you get it? You'll never be able to stop the idiots. If the dogs are available they'll have them. Therefore stop these dogs from being bred.

Spero Wed 27-Mar-13 21:27:25

So what breeds do you propose are banned? Everything apart from toy or miniature breeds? With exemptions for working farm, police and assistance dogs?

Sparklingbrook Wed 27-Mar-13 21:28:44

I was walking with DS2 in the buggy and Ds1 on the buggy board so this was about 10 years ago. A little yappy type dog came running out of a drive and clamped it's jaws round my ankle. I screamed and started trying to pull it off. The owners dashed out all apologetic. hmm My ankle was bleeding but I didn't want to hang around.

DS1 is 13 now, and is still very very wary of dogs. It isn't always the big breeds-they are all capable of it IMO. I would rather not be around dogs if possible.

JustGiveMeFiveMinutes Wed 27-Mar-13 21:30:00

Don't be utterly fucking ridiculous. All dogs expert veterinarians deem a high risk to humans and other dogs. I wouldn't call for them to be killed instantly. I would ban them from being bred.

JustGiveMeFiveMinutes Wed 27-Mar-13 21:30:35

That was to spero

Spero Wed 27-Mar-13 21:32:15

I am intrigued by what was 'utterly fucking ridiculous' about my post.

You may be upset to learn that staffys will probably fall outside your definition. But jack Russells might be in it.

AmberLeaf Wed 27-Mar-13 21:32:17

Amber - but it is someone else. I pickup poo, spay, microchip etc, etc. so do lots of owners. I don't see why we should be damned because of the idiots. Why is the answer 'ban dogs' instead of properly enforcing responsible dog ownership? My life would be much poorer without my dog. I don't want to lose her

Spero, I really don't think they should be banned. But I wish more could be done to enforce sensible ownership and harsh penalties for those who flout laws/'rules' etc.

I know lots of dogs make lots of people very happy and vice versa, but very little is done about dog nuisance so there is no incentive to be sensible or not force your pet on others.

jellybeans Wed 27-Mar-13 21:34:08

I think people should need checking before being allowed a dog, especially a more 'risky' type. And you shouldn't be allowed 4-5 big dogs in a small house! Kids lives are more important. I love dogs but think some of these breeds need more regulation. There are a few sets of scary dogs near me and it is scary just walking past. We shouldn't have to live in fear just because some people want 'guard dogs'.

JustGiveMeFiveMinutes Wed 27-Mar-13 21:37:01

If Jack Russell's are within the definition so be it. It's for experts to decide, in my view.

jellybeans Wed 27-Mar-13 21:37:19

Also I get put off going to certain parks because people let their vicious looking big dogs jump up at DC and us.

JustGiveMeFiveMinutes Wed 27-Mar-13 21:38:10

And spero I've had three boxers over the years. I've never had a problem with them but if it were dee

MintChocCh1p Wed 27-Mar-13 21:38:53

Peach Activia - I absolutely HATE that stupid ditty about dogs. How on earth can you even try and compare the death of god knows how many human beings with bloody dogs?

RIP to that poor girl.

Lizzylou Wed 27-Mar-13 21:39:35

I am sorry, but what is the betting that the woman who owned these Teenage girl killing dogs had said to anyone who came across her dogs "It's OK, they're just being friendly" or "They are soft as anything, they wouldn't hurt a fly".

Spero Wed 27-Mar-13 21:40:48

so if huskies or whatever are banned, i could just cross a husky with something else... is the resulting dog a husky? what proportion of husky DNA is sufficient? will every mongrel go before a vet for 'expert assessment'?

i just do not see how ops proposal is remotely feasible.

amber, i agree. i think we vring back dog licences and charge minimum £500 to fund dog wardens etc. anyone who says they cant afford that will need to explain how they propose to pay for food, training, neutering etc.

JustGiveMeFiveMinutes Wed 27-Mar-13 21:40:50

Posted too soon....

If it were deceived they were dangerous I think I'd have to take it on the chin, because as well as having rights, we also have responsibilities.

MajaBiene Wed 27-Mar-13 21:41:00

More regulation of dog ownership would be a good thing.

Requiring a license to breed, buy or sell dogs.
Limits on the number of dogs in residential properties
Much higher penalties for allowing dogs to roam
Muzzles in public places/only being allowed off lead in designated dog parks

JustGiveMeFiveMinutes Wed 27-Mar-13 21:41:09

'Decided'

Bartlebee Wed 27-Mar-13 21:41:31

I am wary of Staffies, I'm sorry - I am.

I am quite sure that with the right family, they are fabulous dogs.

But, on the estate in our town, Staffies are paraded as status dogs, complete with heavy studded collar and no lead and lunkhead owner.

We regularly see one on our local common, an area that is a dog-off-lead haven. The owner of this muzzled, on lead Staffie barks out 'Keep Away!' to anyone that goes near. It makes everyone very nervous.

I realise that Staffies have been stigmatised, but it can't be a coincidence that they are almost always the dogs responsible for attacks.

Spero Wed 27-Mar-13 21:46:14

the child killed nefore Jade was killed by a Jack Russell.

staffys are often implicated in attacks because they are owned by morons and the press likes the devil dog theme. but in terms of dogs that bite and attack, i think the highest umber of admissions to a and e are from golden retrievers or labs.

Lizzylou Wed 27-Mar-13 21:47:19

Peachactivia, go and recite your lovely poem to the family whose teenage daughter just got mauled to death by dogs, see what reception you get.

People who place dog's lives above children's and who make comparisons between dangerous dogs and the holocaust?

Not exactly worth trying to explain why that is so wrong really is it? Certainly not to you.

cleangreens Wed 27-Mar-13 21:51:59

I agree that it is unbelievably bad taste to use the Martin Niemoller statement and substitute communists, Catholics and Jews for a bunch of bloody dog breeds.

I say that as a dog owner and lover. It is in extremely poor taste.

CalamityKate Wed 27-Mar-13 22:04:28

I agree cleangreens.

seeker Wed 27-Mar-13 22:10:21

I agree. I have never heard that travesty before- and I hope I never hear it again.

Obviously no point trying to explain why it's so offensive- anybody who could post it in the first place couldn't possibly understand.

seeker Wed 27-Mar-13 22:12:10

Oh, and if there are more bites from labs and goldies it's a) because there are more of them and b) because people aren't wary of them.

Flojobunny Wed 27-Mar-13 22:14:44

Just drove past all the tributes. I live round the corner from this house. Whole community in shock. I suspect most people are. Such a terrible terrible thing. That poor girl.

MNetBlackpoolLE Wed 27-Mar-13 22:23:24

My dd knows this kid, she knows her friends and saw her very recently, its my original hometown and where my family live and my uncle teaches her sad.

I know lots of lovely staffies, I think the problem is that because of how they look idiots are more prone to get them, and the end result is untrained dogs owned by people who want to look macho. The thing is with staffies they have such a strong bite/jaws if they do attack.

PeachActiviaMinge Wed 27-Mar-13 22:24:25

I won't argue especially since my favourite goader has turned up to spread some more rubbish but some of us have the ability to feel compassion for more than just human beings. I may love animals doesn't mean I hate humans again I find it useless to defend myself to people who will make up their mind without truly knowing me.

Ignorance kills.

MintChocCh1p Wed 27-Mar-13 22:26:10

Well I know bugger all about you but if you insist on talking ' goading ' what the hell possessed you to make that poor taste comparison ?

Owllady Wed 27-Mar-13 22:30:18

even as a dog owner i feel the posts about dog shit rather repellent when we are talking about a child's life that has been lost
god knows what happened in that house, it makes me feel sick but it not exactly comparable to dog shit on the pavement or in the fucking park fgs

oh and I love my dogs but I do train them and don't enforce them on people--

threads like this get rather hysterical

AmberLeaf Wed 27-Mar-13 22:37:20

Of course it isn't comparable to dog shit on the pavement, who said it was?

Context please.

threads like this get rather hysterical

Umm, yeah, don't they just.

Owllady Wed 27-Mar-13 22:47:42

are you always so aggressive?

TheNebulousBoojum Wed 27-Mar-13 22:49:14

Step by step it will happen.
If the dog lovers and dog owners don't manage and control and train their animals. then the dog dislikers will make the laws increasingly stringent. I've said this several times before.
Instead of wasting time arguing with those of us who don't want dogs near us or our families, put your effort into sorting out those who own dogs that are a source of danger, pollution and disturbance.
Every time someone is killed or maimed, the case against random ownership gets stronger.
I hope to see dogs microchipped, licensed, insured, only available from certain outlets, visited at home yearly by inspectors, forced to be registered and checked by a vet yearly, on leads and muzzled when in public.... and I think I will see a lot of those changes in my lifetime.

In the same way that 50 years ago, one could own a leopard with few restrictions, and now it is illegal without a great deal of legislation.
No one needs to die as a consequence of being too close to a dog. It keeps happening.

HotCrossPun Wed 27-Mar-13 23:15:39

I am sorry, but what is the betting that the woman who owned these Teenage girl killing dogs had said to anyone who came across her dogs "It's OK, they're just being friendly" or "They are soft as anything, they wouldn't hurt a fly".

The owner of the dogs bred puppies. On her facebook profile where she was advertising them, she said about the bull mastiff- ''He's too protective though he doesn't like youngsters or screaming. He has gone to bite but had him castrated to calm him down.''

People from the estate have said how scared they were of the dogs.

These weren't well trained family dogs suddenly snapping.

AmberLeaf Wed 27-Mar-13 23:18:23

Owllady, I haven't been in the least bit aggressive and it was you swearing 'fucking park'

wannaBe Thu 28-Mar-13 00:05:21

peaches, you are a banned poster aren't you? what was the name of that agressive poster who was banned because of her postings on the doghouse? I've only ever seen her post that offensive shit before which is how I instantly knew. Except I can't for the life of me remember her name so can't report.

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 00:15:25

Do you mean Valhalla?

wannaBe Thu 28-Mar-13 00:18:41

yes that's the one. I'd seen her post that vile line about dog breeds before on some thread about a dog in ireland which was about to be euthanised, never seen it anywhere else.

MintChocCh1p Thu 28-Mar-13 00:41:11

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

CautionaryWhale Thu 28-Mar-13 01:03:14

I do not know if this has been posted before but there is an excellent article by Malcolm Gladwell (Outliers, tipping point) which looks at the issue of 'dangerous dogs'...

www.gladwell.com/2006/2006_02_06_a_pitbull.html

Peach isn't Valhalla. I'm rather disgusted that personal pops at posters no longer here to defend themselves are now being wheeled out on this thread.

I'm no big fan of the adaptation of that verse but let's get a bit of perspective eh? It's widely distributed on the internet and not the sole province of one particular person.

Perception of certain breeds does depend on the sort of owners you encounter where you live and the behaviour of their dogs. I'm semi-rural, so the Bull breeds I meet tend to be owned by responsible people. Further into the city it's a different story.

Amber, the demographic of this site is going to largely reflect the type of owner who does pick up after their dog and train them. I don't think any dog owners on here are lying about doing that. I like to think that's a representation of dog owners in general but I agree that might not seem to be the case when you're dodging dog shit on a daily basis or being hassled by a badly trained dog in a park.

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 07:15:45

Sorry Bee, I wasn't really thinking. I always rather admired Val, she was pure of purpose and took no prisoners. Honesty personified.

toffeelolly Thu 28-Mar-13 07:31:04

Do not understand why anybody would want to own these bloody dog"s (staff's, bull mastiff's they are bloodly bred for fighting and why anybody could own 5 in one house madness. Do not matter how you train these dog's i think they can still turn at any time, like any dog can only thing is with another dog cannot do as much damage you stand a chance. Also some owner's with these dog's install the fighting into them. Some time's i think with people they think it cool to be seeb with one of these dog"s some saw a young girl around 8 with one in lead no muzzle pulling and tugging at it lead the poor child could not control it ( staff) this poor little girl jade did not stand a chance with those dog's the owner's in my view have a lot to answer for and why can somebody be allowed to own 5 cannot believe it. Wonder when we will hear another sad story like this.

seeker Thu 28-Mar-13 07:51:55

Definitely not on to accuse a poster like that.That ghastly poem is all over Facebook- it's not the preserve of a single misguided person

toffeelolly Thu 28-Mar-13 08:01:55

Do not recall last time i heard a lab or retriever kill, everytime you hear dog killing or mauling are dog's such as staffies, pitbull's doberman's or rottwieller's.

Arcticbunny Thu 28-Mar-13 08:19:35

Dd 4yrs was attacked by a sbt 5 mths ago. It was entirely unprovoked as she was calmly walking by my side along the pavement. She was already wary of dogs so tucked herself into me as dog approached. Dog was on a lead but jumped and bit her. Only bottom jaws managed to make contact but I still had to use all my force to get dog off her. Top jaws were stuck in dd's coat. It left a hideous blood blister and bruise which is still visible 5 months on. Thank god it was winter and she was more protected by her clothing and it wasn't my toddler walking as it would have been his face. Dd has been left traumatised to the point there are days she is reluctant to leave the house.

This dog is owned by a responsible couple who were mortified by the attack. The dog came from a reputable breeder and was well socialised. I guess what I'm trying to say is no dog should be ever fully trusted regardless of its breed or upbringing. People in this village frequently let their dogs off the lead and do not call them back when they run up to me or my dc and it now terrifies me.They don't seem to believe their dogs are capable of such an act until it is too late.

The police seemed entirely unsurprised by the events and kept saying " this is what other people in your position do"... We're a small village but clearly the community police come across it frequently.

wannaBe Thu 28-Mar-13 08:28:23

"Do not recall last time i heard a lab or retriever kill, everytime you hear dog killing or mauling are dog's such as staffies, pitbull's doberman's or rottwiellers." and how often do we hear of these killings? that's right - seven times in the past eight years. How many dogs are there in the UK? I'm unaware of exact figures but suffice to say there are milllions. And in one of the seven cases one of the dogs was a jack russell. Just because a labrador doesn't kill someone doesn't mean it doesn't have the capasity to cause some serious damage. Just because there are more retrievers than staffies in the UK doesn't mean that the fact more of them bite people is that relevant - seven deaths in eight years is incredibly, incredibly rare.

A bit of perspective me thinks.

Moominsarehippos Thu 28-Mar-13 08:28:46

Do dogs attack females more? The horrific fatalities reported seem to be more often than not girls/women, do they not? I wonder why?

People don't 'need' dogs, nor are they entitled to keep them. I think you should have to show that you are sensible and capable of keeping one, caring for it and training it before you can have one

wannaBe Thu 28-Mar-13 08:29:42

and the reason why we hear of these deaths is because they are so incredibly rare...

AmberLeaf Thu 28-Mar-13 08:34:12

Amber, the demographic of this site is going to largely reflect the type of owner who does pick up after their dog and train them. I don't think any dog owners on here are lying about doing that. I like to think that's a representation of dog owners in general but I agree that might not seem to be the case when you're dodging dog shit on a daily basis or being hassled by a badly trained dog in a park

Well that's sort of my point, it is blamed on demographics as though only one 'sort' are bad owners, my experience tells me different

One of the worst culprits in my old local park, was a MC woman with 2 choc labs [very Mumsnetty!] dogs off leads in the wrong areas and no picking up of poo. so I don't think its fair to talk about demographics as though that determines what sort of owner you are.

Sorry, this is turning into a rant from me about class and that wasn't my intention or my point.

It just seems as though there is very little done to challenge/address issues of low level bad ownership.

I appreciate that it is impossible due to sheer numbers though.

wannaBe Thu 28-Mar-13 08:40:59

you can't compare people who don't pick up after their dogs to people who own and breed dogs for their agression though, people who knowingly keep agressive dogs - the cases in the past eight years where people have been killed all of the dogs concerned were known for being agressive. that's not a coincidence. In none of those cases was it the beloved family pet with just slightly irresponsible owner. Why are people refusing to see the difference here?

Spero Thu 28-Mar-13 08:46:08

I don't think it is impossible. I think it will be hard but doable. The message given out by the law is very important, think of car seat belt laws. Lots of scoffing at the time but now it is well and truly ingrained in public consciousness. If even a few middle class types got slapped with massive fine there could be a shift in thinking.

Spero Thu 28-Mar-13 08:49:15

Wannabe - I think it is similar to the 'broken windows' theory of crime - people who commit low level crimes of littering and vandalism are more likely to commit more serious crimes. So I think the ones who just let their dogs crap everywhere and run about are more likely to be back yard breeders, and just general crap owners.

So if we came down hard on every example of irresponsibility I think it could help with a general shift in attitudes. You will always have idiots I accept but hopefully less of them, or more willingness/ability by the authorities to prosecute them and stop them keeping any animal.

Moominsarehippos Thu 28-Mar-13 08:50:50

I don't know. How many people use the phone while driving?

Lizzylou Thu 28-Mar-13 08:57:00

Articbunny, how awful for you and your DD.
That is my worst nightmare and exactly why I get so annoyed about posters posting ridiculous poems etc and still blithely banging on about owners/breeds "I've got a staffy and it is soft as shit" etc

I don't give a flying fuck.

Spero Thu 28-Mar-13 08:57:35

Anyone who uses a phone whilst driving is an irresponsible, criminal fool - as the law reflects because it will imprison you for it. I would bet those who regularly use their phone whilst driving are arrogant and irresponsible in many other ways.

Cautionary whale - that is a brilliant article and says it all. But shows that to deal with dangerous dogs you need to deal with dangerous owners and it is always the easy knee jerk reaction to 'ban the breed'.

Nancy66 Thu 28-Mar-13 09:37:57

I wish people would stop going on about labradors.

I don't particularly like any dog but I've never read a story about labradors owned by a bunch of lowlife ripping a child to shreds in their filthy council house....and let's be honest that's what the dog attacks like the ones that happened to Jade always are.

Moominsarehippos Thu 28-Mar-13 09:44:11

Labradors are lovely! We had a rescue one and he was extremely aggressive and bit anyone that went near him. We didn't keep him long and the dog handler said that he had been chained up as a guard dog and really badly treated. We just couldn't handle him but the poloce hanbdler actually took him on aaN alkthoiugh he was not suitable to be aroiund kids, he could handle him.

Generally people keep the 'toughy' breeds as guard dogs, dogs to scare/untimidate others with, or because they love the breed. Sadly, its just the last group that actually give a monkeys about the dog. Technically, you could 'bree out' aggression in such dogs but there will alkways be people who want aggressive, fighting dogs.

People keep saying 'only XX deaths over XX years...'. That's not really relevant - how many serious attacks, kids with ears and fingers bitten off?

claig Germany Thu 28-Mar-13 09:44:39

Just googled labradors and unfortunately there are some horrific cases.

duchesse Thu 28-Mar-13 09:46:14

If anything I would speculate that there's a certain amount of under-reporting of bites by dangerous dogs. After all, the people most likely to be bitten are the owners and owners' families. If the bite were relatively minor and you knew that your dog was a dubious/dangerous breed and likely to be put down if the bite got to the ears of the authorities, would you seek medical attention? I bet lots of people wouldn't.

duchesse Thu 28-Mar-13 09:48:25

Yes, labradors on the whole have lovely temperaments but they are still dogs, and big ones with powerful jaws at that. I say that as a labrador owner and lover. He is fairly patient but like all animals he has his boundaries. You cannot 100% trust any dog.

toffeelolly Thu 28-Mar-13 09:54:41

At least if attacked by lab or jack russel u stand a bloody chance of not being killed would you stand a chance with staff , pitbull, doberman mastiff or rotweiler DO NOT THINK SO.

Wallison Thu 28-Mar-13 10:04:12

^ People keep saying 'only XX deaths over XX years...'. That's not really relevant - how many serious attacks, kids with ears and fingers bitten off? ^

Good point. Every year, 6 and a half THOUSAND people require hospital treatment after being bitten by a dog. Half of those need plastic surgery, and almost a quarter need facial surgery. This is a massive, massive problem and it is getting worse - year on year, there are more people who are attacked in this way. Which kind of puts the witless "Oh my staffie is lovely" comments into perspective. Dogs are dangerous.

Nancy66 Thu 28-Mar-13 10:06:44

All dog owners think their dogs are lovely.

'He's only playing with yer' were the last words said to me by the owner of a doberman before it sunk its teeth into me and I went to hospital for seven stitches after it chased me while I was out running.

You think you would have a chance against a Jack Russell? How many do you know? I wouldn't give myself much hope tbh. They are not called 'a big dog in a small body' for nothing.

But this rather emphasises the point that there is little validity in banning certain breeds.

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 10:10:58

I would like a law that ruled all dogs had to be muzzled in public.
Then even the out of control, not interested in recall, panics at the site of bicycles, killing cats sort of dogs could not do serious damage.

Spero Thu 28-Mar-13 10:12:12

If a bunch of 'lowlives' got hold of a lab, didn't feed it, didn't exercise it, didn't socialise it, I bet it would behave exactly as the bull mastiff did. And they are big dogs.

I agree - all dogs are potentially dangerous but with the smaller breeds you have a chance of fighting them off.

But it is not 'witless' to say 'my staffy is lovely' . She is. Because I trained her, I socialised her. The problem is with the owners who create dangerous situations.

Just read that the owner of the dogs who killed Jade will not be charged as it happened on her home. I can understand she can't be charged under the Dangerous Dog Act but why can't she be charged with reckless manslaughter?

Is anyone suggesting dogs are not dangerous though really? Don't think anyone is actally disputing the fact that ALL dogs have the potential to be dangerous? Stating that their dog is lovely isn't actually denying that fact.

I might have read the thread incorrectly though so apologies if I have.

Wallison Thu 28-Mar-13 10:15:23

Even a 'well-trained' dog can turn. I agree with Nebulous - muzzle the fucking things - they are too unpredictable to do otherwise, and the priority should be public safety. Make people have them on leads. Microchip them. Control ownership.

higgle Thu 28-Mar-13 10:15:24

When I am out with my elderly lagoubrious Staffie there is a Jack Russell we have to look out for, his owner leaves him out in the garden and he jumps over the fence and flings himself at my dog, all teeth and snarls if you go past. His owner takes the "what a character" approach.

Next door's jack Russell inflicted a very nast bite on my brother's nose when he was young and I'm sure they could kill a child.

SecretLindtBunny Thu 28-Mar-13 10:16:35

Muzzling the dogs in public places would have had no bearing in this situation as she was in their home.

KeriRussell Thu 28-Mar-13 10:17:49

I have 4 dogs, Alaskan Malamute, Siberian Husky, Jack Russell and my mothers King Charles. The King Charles is old but has always been the one most likely to nip, followed by the JRT but only to other animals. I am a scientist, and yes genetics will play a part but the majority of this will be due to their lack of handling, they are powerful dogs, their jaw strength is huge and they can lock on. I do also think that people are often only breeding from the most aggressive lines...where as when you meet a dog of this nature that isn't they tend to be smaller and just a bit, well dumb really! We've had a staffie attack our Malamute, luckily she has very thick fur and skin and the dog did no damage and she didn't react to the dog as she is huge and could have seriously hurt it. But she is wary and we always walk her with a muzzle now just incase anything like that happens again. BUT I do think it would be unwise of anyone ever thinking its only certain breeds, any dog has the potential to seriously maim or kill and as such I would never leave any child on its own - but agree its shocking that this happened. My heart goes out to her family sad. They really should start licensing again.

Spero Thu 28-Mar-13 10:19:06

No one could sensibly disagree with proposition that all dogs are potentially dangerous.

But read the Malcolm Gladwell article - it puts it far better than I can. But in a nutshell, dogs become dangerous due to a combination of temperament, treatment and environment. By far the most important element is their treatment. The real problem is the humans.

Apparently no one ever reported this woman whose dogs killed Jade even though she had five dogs cooped up in a back hard, no doubt slowly going mad through lack of exercise or any stimulation. That alone should have merited the dogs being removed from her.

ExRatty Thu 28-Mar-13 10:20:30

Why do people need to have big and or powerful dogs?
I don't get it.

I also don't get why dog owners are always so defensive when a child is killed by proximity to an unnecessary, potential killer.
Large, powerful dogs kill.

They should be banned.

Wallison Thu 28-Mar-13 10:20:40

Yes, but it might make streets and other public places a bit safer. I am sick of cycling/running along paths and having some bloody out of control dog chasing after me and snapping at me. Dog owners seem to take the view that as long as there are no cars around they can let them run around and do what they like, including shitting all over the place as well, regardless of other people going about their daily business and hoping not to get attacked by some filthy crapping hound.

Spero Thu 28-Mar-13 10:22:39

Small dogs kill also. Are you going to exempt guide dogs, farm dogs and police sniffer dogs? Or are you advocating simple cull of every dog in UK?

Does swearing really add to the reasoned arguement?

The dogs were in the home when they attacked so how would muzzling them when out have helped here?

What are the stats for the location of most attacks? Then you can have a reasoned discussion whether using muzzles is appropriate.

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 10:24:49

'Muzzling the dogs in public places would have had no bearing in this situation as she was in their home.'

I agree, but it would stop both a lot of the random encounters when dogs are out, and it would calm a lot of the fears that many of the public have about dogs.
Dog owners often complain about how ridiculous people's reactions to their animals are. If the teeth were restricted, a lot of the responses would change.
Being bounced at, snarled at, barked at an occasional leg-rogering is altogether less frightening that the threat of being bitten.

Spero Thu 28-Mar-13 10:24:59

Most children have been killed in someone's home. Because these dogs don't tend to go out. That is a large part of why they are aggressive and dangerous. They are not socialised and are isolated, because their owners are often isolated.

Spero Thu 28-Mar-13 10:26:45

I would be happy to muzzle my dog in public if it would reassure people. I would like there to be areas where I could let her run free, perhaps these could be policed by wardens with powers to issue fines on the spot. Fund this by dog licensing.

MajaBiene Thu 28-Mar-13 10:28:41

Muzzling dogs in public would stop nips and bites in parks, dog on dog attacks.

Wallison Thu 28-Mar-13 10:29:27

Half of all dog attacks occur on the owner's property. So that's over three thousand people a year bitten while out in public. And those are just the bites that require hospital treatment. I think that's a fairly good argument for muzzling them. Dog-owners have had their chance and have proved that they can't control their animals. Even the owners on here who bang on about how "lovely" their dogs are admit that their dogs bite.

Spero Thu 28-Mar-13 10:30:22

Make the law clear that if you dog bites or kills someone on your property or anywhere, you will be charged with assault or manslaughter.

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 10:30:57

All the bad encounters I've ever had with dogs have been in public.
I have several friends with dogs, they are responsible owners and I have no issue with their pets as they don't bother me and I don't bother them.
Yes, people will still get bitten and maimed in the home, but muzzling dogs in public would help to contain a growing problem of biting outside the home.

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 10:32:37

I find it hard to care about dog on dog attacks when dog owners are so resistant to any change in the status quo. Muzzles would indeed prevent those happening too.

Spero Thu 28-Mar-13 10:32:40

No, my dog has never bitten anyone or anything. Got into a few tussles with other dogs but neither wounded in any way.

But if it would reassure people, I would muzzle her.

As long as the law is still going to go after the dangerous idiots who can't look after dogs. Because I still say that is the real problem. muzzling my dog solves nothing because she doesn't randomly attack children or cyclists.

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 10:34:04

My DS doesn't randomly stab people on the street either, but he's not allowed to carry a knife by law.

Spero Thu 28-Mar-13 10:37:46

I don't get the analogy. Unless you are saying all men are capable of killing, but most thankfully don't go around hurting others?

WestieMamma Thu 28-Mar-13 10:40:06

I suspect that a massive contributing factor to the dogs' behaviour was the pack. I see it with my dogs. Their behaviour is very different when they are together than apart. If I carry the cat through the 'dog zone' while one is around it'll follow with a look of desperation on it's face, waiting for a chance to chase. If both dogs are there they go crackers, frantically jumping up and trying to drag the cat off me (thankfully they can't jump so the cat is safe). When I also have my friend's beagle staying I don't even try to cross with the cat as it wouldn't be safe because the beagle goes just as nutty and she can jump. The beagle lives happily alongside 3 cats, she doesn't have or need the segregation we have, and yet she completely loses it when the terriers start.

Wallison Thu 28-Mar-13 10:42:29

See, I just don't get posts like yours, WestieMamma. Why on earth would you want something in your home that behaves like that?

MajaBiene Thu 28-Mar-13 10:44:06

Well yes, everyone with full use of their arms is capable of stabbing someone if they have a knife on them Spero.

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 10:44:37

All dogs bite, although most don't bite people in public.
However the potential threat means that dogs should be muzzled.

Oh, and all people in the UK are banned from carrying knives with a blade longer than 3", not just men.

FWIW I would resent muzzling my dog. He's less than 6 months old and a Springer. I spend hours training him. He's not perfect with people he knows (other dog owners in he main) but, because I have spent the time and effort training him, he will not react to runners, cyclists, horse riders, walkers etc. If I am in doubt about this, he is asked to wait and I then hold his collar until said distraction has passed. As he is a Springer, his main aim in life is to sniff, so muzzling would hinder this!

I would also resent not being able to use a certain restaurant on the assumption that my kids will be badly behaved, when we (as most I supect here) have spent time, effort, love and patience into making them (hopefully!) lovely kids. Probably a bad example but I am multi tasking smile

I wouldn't be at all bothered though about dog training up to KC Bronze level being compulsary however and puppy socialisation classes also being so too. That's the bare minimum I would expect to do as a dog owner.

Plus far far tighter restrictions on breeding.

Just my opinion though and rather selfish too smile

Wallison - be great to have the link to the stats re half of attacks being at the owners property if you have it? I love a stat smile

Spero Thu 28-Mar-13 10:46:47

I wouldn't want animals in my house that behaved like that either. My dog was trained to stay away from my cats, which was so successful that one of my cats now follows us to the park to slap my dog.

I think there is too much tolerance from some dog owners of unacceptable and aggressive behaviour. Small yappy terriers are the absolute worst. I am more wary of them than any of the bigger dogs I meet as they tend to be aggressive and yappy to everything they see.

WestieMamma Thu 28-Mar-13 10:47:06

Behaves likes what? Desperately wanting to chase a cat? Our house is set up in such a way that normally their paths never cross, it's once in a blue moon. Plus they don't want to hurt the cat, they want to chase it. My mum has 2 mean cats who never run from the terriers, so the terriers are scared of them and leave them alone.

sorry re spelling etc, DS's laptop is dreadful, half the keys only work!

Spero Thu 28-Mar-13 10:49:02

But most people wouldn't dream of stabbing anyone?

Because some people are murdered by knives, you are not saying 'ban knives'. You are saying, surely, find and arrest the dangerous people who stab?

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 10:49:36

Of course you resent muzzling your dog. Which is why we can't afford to leave it up to the individual.

Spero Thu 28-Mar-13 10:49:44

Westie - so what would they do if they caught the cat?

WestieMamma Thu 28-Mar-13 10:51:28

They caught it once. Then let it go and barked at it and nudged it and terrified it into running again so they could chase it again.

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 10:52:03

No, I'm saying keep knives in appropriate places and if they have to be transferred from place to place, then do as several friends of my sword-owning do and put them in a secure container.
I'm not trying to ban dogs in public, just control their ability to use their teeth.

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 10:53:07

That sounds a hideous existence for any cat, and you seem indifferent to its fear.

WestieMamma Thu 28-Mar-13 10:53:24

And strangely enough, they don't bother the cat when in the garden, it's only when in the house that the mayhem starts. The cat often comes with us when we go for a walk round the block.

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 10:54:06

'several friends of my sword-owning do a'

grin

sword-owning friends do.

KeriRussell Thu 28-Mar-13 10:54:37

I never let my dogs off the lead and always clean up after them. If you want your dog off lead take them to a proper dog park (although they are few and far between). It was a JRT that killed ababy last year - but in reality cars kill far more children every year and although I am not taking away the horror of it I think a cull/ban is not the answer but stricter controls on ownership. Look at the outcry about culling foxes - in reality there has been what a handful of supposed attacks compared to dog attacks - something does need doing to make people safer from irresponsible dog owners and their ticking time bombs but I don't think a ban would work.

Spero Thu 28-Mar-13 10:55:33

Ok, muzzle in public except for designated dog areas. But we have got to go further than that surely, given that as far as i recall, the children killed in last five years were killed in someone's home.

Spero Thu 28-Mar-13 10:57:07

Westie - I thought mine was the only cat who came for a walk with my dog...but she only comes to biff the dog when I am not looking.

WestieMamma Thu 28-Mar-13 10:59:56

That sounds a hideous existence for any cat, and you seem indifferent to its fear.

If I were indifferent to it's fear, which is only when they try to chase it, I wouldn't have taken steps to ensure the dogs are contained in one area of the house whereas the cat has free range and can come and go as it pleases and completely avoid any dog contact if it chooses. The dogs cannot go upstairs at all, the cat had his own entrance constructed which takes him straight up there, where he's fed and sleeps. The only time he comes into contact is the once in a blue moon occassion when he sneaks into the dog area, chickens out and finds himself cornered on top of a bookshelf.

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 11:00:28

Yes, I agree but dogs in the home are a different issue and that discussion needs to be between dog owners and the government.
Start by controlling them in the public domain.

WestieMamma Thu 28-Mar-13 11:02:02

Westie - I thought mine was the only cat who came for a walk with my dog...but she only comes to biff the dog when I am not looking.

grin Mine hides in the bushes and jumps out on the dog and then legs it again further up the route to his next ambush point.

Spero Thu 28-Mar-13 11:02:43

I don't think it is a 'discussion'. Gov says -you are prohibited by law from owning dogs you cannot control, you will not exercise or train or feed properly. We will send it dog wardens to check, you must licence your dog, neuter it and train it. If you won't do that, you can't have a dog.

Wallison Thu 28-Mar-13 11:03:18

Why have designated dog areas? Public spaces should be for people, not bloody dogs. Muzzles, licences (costing a lot of money), more dog wardens and microchipping are the answer. And if the owner doesn't comply, then it's bye-bye doggie and a lifetime ban on owning another one. Dog-owners can't control their dogs - that much is clear, given the number of dog attacks every year. So the state should step in and exercise that control that is so obviously lacking in the owners.

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 11:03:35

Sounds reasonable to me Spero. smile

KeriRussell Thu 28-Mar-13 11:04:22

Here's a question for you, someone said have a dog pts and charge the owners with assault if the dog attacks on its own property. What if the dog is protecting you or your baby? For example a guard dog type? This has happened before where someone has broken in and the dog bit the offender who got away with a slap on the wrist whilst the dog protecting its family was pts.

Sorry, my post wasn't clear at all. When I say that he 'reacts' that's puppy jumping up and being friendly. I didn't word that well at all stupidly. My bad, as the yoof of today say (and somebody put in a work email to me yesterday!)

I spend ages training our puppy though, probably an hour a day, plus Saturday mornings we do our KC 'good citizen' award, which we will take to gold standard the do agility or some ohter training. I also walk him for two plus hours a day, have worked really hard at socialising him. Not expecting a medal, it's what I expected to do to produce a well behaved dog. So I would feel he would be missing out by being muzzled when I have tried hard to esure he is well behaved. Bit like a whole class punishment iyswim?

I just wish other owners were as commited, that's all and wonder if it should be made compulsary although how enforcable it is I just don't know.

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 11:05:48

Fair enough to have designated dog areas, the dogs need exercise and the owners get a huge amount of pleasure out of it. I don't want a totalitarian ban, just to feel safe from unwanted attention of any kind when out,

keyboard errors!

Spero Thu 28-Mar-13 11:09:14

Keri - it is a defence to an assault if you were trying to protect yourself. So if dog was reacting to protect someone else, the owner should not be charged.

But we need to move away from this view that it is acceptable to have aggressive dogs as 'protection'. Unless they are very, very well trained - I would say to police dog standard - they aren't discriminating about when they are aggressive and toddler gets same treatment as a burglar.

As long as I can access open areas where my dog can run, sniff and play I would be happy to accept restrictions in other areas.

Spero Thu 28-Mar-13 11:12:13

Why designated dog areas? Because I pay my taxes and my dog gives me an enormous amount of pleasure and is a true addition to my family. What on earth is the problem in clearly designated areas? Then dogs can play and those who want to avoid dogs can do so much more easily.

WestieMamma Thu 28-Mar-13 11:16:03

Here in Sweden dogs are supposed to be on a lead at all times when out and about. Although the recent attack on my little westie shows that some ignore it. Also every park I've been to here has had a completely safe and fenced in 'dog park' where they can be let of lead to have a good run around. The one near us has a proper dog playground with all sorts of doggy agility stuff in it for them to play with.

Wallison Thu 28-Mar-13 11:18:18

Well I pay my taxes as well and I don't want the money being spent on maintaing public land for other people's dogs to run around on. I would probably think differently if I didn't currently spend so much time in public places worrying about getting attacked by some fucking animal while the owner bleats "He's only playing", but I am fucking sick of dogs and their half-wit owners ruining people's enjoyment of public spaces so I don't feel much inclined to give anything over to them. If you want a dog park, maybe buy some land and set yourself up in business providing one; I don't see why the state should.

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 11:19:30

DDAs would also enable dogs to socialise with each other, and for owners to talk and share information. Which can do nothing but good I think.

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 11:20:30

You could present the same argument about children's playgrounds Wallison! grin

Nancy66 Thu 28-Mar-13 11:22:25

I have to say I agree with Wallison. My local common has become pretty much a no go area for me and my kids - too many morons with dangerous dogs.

duchesse Thu 28-Mar-13 11:22:59

My DCs' infant school in the 1990s was next to a park with a footpath across it leading from one of the exits off the school playground. Some bloody dog owners would always pick school out time to come and exercise their bouncy dogs, where they'd knock children over, terrify them and leave crap everywhere. So eventually the council designated a special area within the park. It was a very good area, fenced off the same size as the substantial child area with playground. And still some bloody dog owners refused to use it. There's no winning with some people [grr].

In my current village we have people driving to the edge of the village playing field, letting their pooch out whilst staying in the car themselves, watching it crap from afar, calling it back (I suppose we should at least be thankful the animals have recall), and driving away again. So we have begun a campaign of encouraging the dog-owning community to police itself. It seems to be working reasonably well although twats will always be twats.

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 11:24:34

But DDAs and muzzles, along with compulsory crap collecting would solve that problem.
The DDA could be fenced off, to avoid accidental mixing.
(Can't believe I'm the moderate on a dog thread smile)

duchesse Thu 28-Mar-13 11:24:53

Let's face it though, the same kind of people who keep dangerous dogs for "protection" are same kind of morons who carry weapons "for protection"- ie so far outside the norms of what we would view as our common belief system in the UK that it is impossible to reason with them- their world view is just so different.

Wallison Thu 28-Mar-13 11:26:06

Children do not shit everywhere and run around snarling at and biting people. Well, not most of them.

I realise that I am anti-dog but I don't care; I fucking hate the things. We have a local nature reserve here that is entirely covered in dogshit - you have to wash your shoes every time you go in there. Not only that, but when you are walking around you never know when some fucking snarling great bruiser of a dog while stand and face-off at you - I've had a couple of near misses with my ds in such situations, and it has got to the point where we hardly ever go there now - it's pretty much become a no-go area just because of dogs. There are other public spaces locally that are similar. And I realise that the logical answer to that is to provide designated dog areas but I just feel so cross about public land being wasted in this way that I don't much want to give dog-owners anything.

higgle Thu 28-Mar-13 11:32:41

Wallison, I'm not sure I want any of my taxes spent on you, in view of your prejudiced and unreasonable stance on dogs. Taxes fund leisure facilities of all kinds and dog owners are a large and overwhelmingly responsile sector of society. Yes it is shocking when a dog urts a human, but I think we humans would be shamed and shocked if we knew the full extent of the suffering we cause them.

morethanpotatoprints Thu 28-Mar-13 11:33:26

My future dil heard nothing else about this yesterday as she works near to the area. Local people are saying she was attacked for pies she had just gone to buy, and was house sitting for a friend.

The poor child didn't stand a chance. There are many similar houses in the vicinity with these dogs. They aren't safe and even if trained properly can turn.

Wallison Totally agree with your post.

higgle - I am not sure Wallison will 'fucking' care smile

morethanpotatoprints Thu 28-Mar-13 11:38:55

higgle

When people are missing out on a leisure activity, scared for their dcs and themselves, because of an animal lower down the food chain than us, plus some irresponsible owners who put their animal before human welfare, there is something wrong.

duchesse - I agree with your post entirely.

Fillyjonk75 Thu 28-Mar-13 11:44:38

A labrador might knock you over for a meat pie but would be unlikely to rip your throat out. It is down to the training/lifestyle of the dog and owner though, not just the breed. But some breeds definitely have a more killer instinct than others and the one that have the lock bite are terrifying. I think dog breeding is well out of hand and really needs a crack down. Still loads of ads for puppies locally, charging £400+ a time- no wonder people do it. Still loads of bitches suffering from having litter after litter.

However, I've never seen a remotely dangerous dog in the local park, or anywhere locally, there are a number of idiots who don't pick up dog poo in public areas though. The field is for playing sport on, but seems to be mistaken for a giant dog toilet at times.

I do agree dog ownership needs to be toughened up, hopefully the obligatory microchipping system will help but it needs enforcing too. I also think though that dogs are a part of life, they aren't going to go away and if you have an irrational fear of them you need to get treatment. Fair enough to be afraid of a dog that is snapping/snarling at you, and one slobbering all over you and jumping up is unpleasant, but not of all dogs, just being well behaved and normal. DH's cousin has a dog phobia and the ILs have to make all sorts of allowances for her. She is the one with the problem. Also a couple of kids who DD1 plays with won't come in the house if we are looking after IL's or DP's labs! Kids should be brought up knowing how to behave around animals and have a healthy respect for dogs but being completely afraid of a well-behaved dog is ridiculous.

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 11:47:18

'but I think we humans would be shamed and shocked if we knew the full extent of the suffering we cause them.'

We don't, you see. It's usually dog owners that cause their animals distress. It's not dog dislikers that fill the shelters with bewildered and abandoned animals, or who neglect their needs.

Wallison Thu 28-Mar-13 11:53:07

'Prejudiced' against dogs? Oh my, that is wonderful.

Look, you can no more be prejudiced against dogs than you can be prejudiced against anchovy paste, or shoelaces or any other number of things that are Not Human.

curryeater Thu 28-Mar-13 12:01:04

Wallison is so spot-on on this thread.

This sort of thing makes me foam:

Higgle:
"Yes it is shocking when a dog urts a human, but I think we humans would be shamed and shocked if we knew the full extent of the suffering we cause them."

WTAF? Are you for real? Are you actually comparing the welfare of humans to the welfare of dogs? There is no way you can put dogs on one side of a scale that has children on the other and expect me to see the balance tip even slightly, even the tiniest tremble. Setting that supposed "balance" up just makes me lose all respect for anyone remotely pro-dog. I think your brains must all have softened in dog-shit-borne diseases.

I mean, this is awful wet drivelling bollocks at the best of times, but now, while countless other pages of this site are covered in mealy-mouthed justifications for cuts that are making people homeless and causing families to go without food - ffs, let's eat the fucking dogs.

curryeater - sorry, did I read your post correctly? I am sorry if I haven't, honestly I am. Are you bringing the welfare cuts into the argument about how to reduce the number of attacks on children/people by dogs?

I do wonder how any further restrictions (which I think there should be) would be policed? Any ideas?

curryeater Thu 28-Mar-13 12:08:25

Actually that reminds me, I can't help wondering if all the drivelling dog-saps are vegan, or even vegetarian.

I mean, I am happy to eat birds and cows and fishes and feed them to my children and we all go out wearing hardy and comfortable foot-coverings made of the skins of dead mammals. But animals are not people, I would not arrange for people to be killed because I am hungry, do you?

SnuffleTheDog Thu 28-Mar-13 12:13:13

there are some posters on here who would make excellent MPs, most of them aren't interested in tackling the actual root cause of a problem either.

Banning certain breeds is an insult to our intelligence, as even a total idiot can see that it wont make a blind bit of difference. The dickheads will still want a 'status' dog, it just means they'll turn their eye to another breed.

Tougher punishments for reckless owners is the only way to stop this from happening.

curryeater - what realistic suggestions to you make regarding the control of dangerous dogs?

I have suggested training being made to be compulsary. We are already seeing the introduction of micro chipping all dogs. Tougher punishments as above.

What do you reckon?

Whatnameforme Thu 28-Mar-13 12:42:58

I'd like to say that I am "the type of person" to own two of these dogs and I am sick of having the "lets ban the dangerous dogs" rubbish every time. What has happened is horrific and no child or parent should have to go through this. A larger dog has the capability of causing more damage than a smaller dog but any dog can be a dangerous dog. All dogs need to receive proper care, proper training and proper supervision. I have met plenty of small dogs that are overly aggressive, lack training and social skills and have no discipline what so ever. They are far more dangerous than a Staffy that has been trained by responsible owners. I completely agree that we should have licences, compulsory training. But I also think that we should punish owners for their dogs actions. Yes it is manslaughter, the owners actions caused a death without that intention!
Banning the entire bread or any dog over 5lbs doesn't fix the problem!
I have known of people that had dogs taken away from them and were banned from keeping them for 5 years, a couple of months later he had more!!! No one ever did anything more about it.
If a parent raises a teen that joins a gang, mugs and shoplifts we don't ban all teens, we give their parents a nice house, lots of benefits and pay their way in life hmm
As for the dog poo then again it's down to responsible owners. I think most people would be as upset and annoyed about stepping in a Labradors poo as they would a bull mastif?

curryeater Thu 28-Mar-13 12:54:03

I don't think dogs should be kept as pets in towns and cities except as exceptions. I think the "part of the family" nonsense is what is causing this pathetic muddled thinking whereby the wellbeing of people in busy, overcrowded, under pressure, expensive areas, is being mistakenly and wrong-headedly "balanced" against the (completely non-existent) rights of dogs. I think if you want to keep a dog, and you live anywhere near anyone else at all, or want to take it into any village, town, or city, you should have to make a case for it and there should be very high bar for acceptable behaviour. Below this level, the dog gets put down.
If you have a working dog - like a blind dog - or if there is a strong social reason why you need the company, then dogs can be tolerated. But not otherwise. People will look back on how we live now and marvel that we were so stupid and filthy, like when children boggle when they find out that medieval cities used to have chamber pots emptied into the streets.

We are really struggling to manage the pressure of human populations in so many urban and suburban places. There are not enough dwellings - so many dwellings are piled up on top of and against each other so that living in them you can always hear other people and feel unacceptably crammed against strangers all the time - traffic and parking is a huge problem in so many cities - parks and open spaces so often look tired, the grass and plants are worn out from so many people walking on them, there is litter - we live like this because this is where we can make a living. Why add dogs into all this?

If you can keep a dog and it is honestly no inconvenience to anyone else, well you can have it - but you will not be in a city or a town or even a suburban area. And before you say "Oh but my dog is no inconvenience to anyone else", yes it is. they always are.

Jux Thu 28-Mar-13 12:54:47

Dog licences.

curryeater Thu 28-Mar-13 12:59:45

Whatnameforme:
"I also think that we should punish owners for their dogs actions." yes, I agree, because the dogs are not humans and cannot take human responsibility in our human society for what would be crimes if done by a person. but also the dog no longer has the privilege of being tolerated in our society, not as punishment, but because people come first and the dog has proven itself dangerous to people.

Dogs can't take moral responsibility for their actions and therefore we do not have moral resonsibility towards them equivalent to that we have for other humans.

Whatnameforme Thu 28-Mar-13 13:06:49

Seriously? No ones should be allowed to keep a dog because some people are homeless? Curryeater your mad!

We have no moral obligation to dogs, as they have none to us? So it doesn't matter how we treat any animal as it wouldn't care how it treated us? Ok blush

curryeater Thu 28-Mar-13 13:11:17

I didn't say "no moral obligation to dogs" I said "not the same as to humans". I think we should not abuse animals.

How would you enforce your proposal and who would put the dogs down? Assuming there is legislation that will allow city dwellers be discriminated against.

Agree re dog licences, which could incorporate the need to training within a particular time frame. Revoke this if not adhered to. Problem is what to do with dog when this happens and rescue centres being already full. It's such a difficult issue.

Also agree re strong punishments for owners with dangerous dogs.

SnuffleTheDog Thu 28-Mar-13 13:14:25

Curry - your solution would be very expensive and time consuming, would cost tax payers money - YOUR money, your dog-hating-money - and would only satisfy a minority.

it would benefit more people to just impose tougher punishments on the crap owners. People who dislike dogs just carry on not disliking them, people who like dogs carry on liking them, and the fuckers who want to treat them like shite may well think twice if they knew they'd get a hefty fine and a custodial sentence if they step out of line.

Its fairly simple really, no need for hysterical banning of the ownership of dogs altogether

curryeater Thu 28-Mar-13 13:14:58

It really does matter how we treat animals, of course it does. but we don't have to treat them like people. They don't have to live with us and shit all over our parks and cities and jump up at us with their filthy paws AND KILL PEOPLE.

If I was on the way to a job interview and a toddler smeared banana all over me I might be a bit annoyed but I would think "well, he doesn't understand about the interview, and he is only a little child who deserves kindness and respect to help him learn to be a fully fledged polite adult human."
When some stupid dog does something like me I think "animals like that shouldn't be allowed in cities."
there seem to be some people who think you should treat the dog like the toddler. YOU CAN'T THERE IS NO POINT THEY ARE NOT PEOPLE

SnuffleTheDog Thu 28-Mar-13 13:15:29

*carry on disliking them rather

MannishBoy Thu 28-Mar-13 13:15:44

The level of ignorance in here is shocking. Good to see plenty of balanced views too, though.

Yes all dogs can be dangerous, but children can also grow up to be murderers and rapists if they're raised in a shitty environment.
Dog licencing and checks should be compulsory and enforced. At the moment it's only responsible owners who chip their dogs. The scum who want trophy dogs don't.
We have a GSD, who needs lots of exercise and stimulation. So we give it to her. We spent months researching the work involved before we got her.
Plenty of parents do none of that when deciding to have a child they then neglect.

It's too easy to ban the dogs out of hand. Being a dog hater isn't a valid reason either. Dog shit is left by the owners, the dogs can't pick it up themselves and can't use a human toilet. Bad off lead behaviour is also the fault of the owners.
Our dog can be excitable, hence she is always on a lead. We never leave children alone with her, due to her excitement.
Although the most she does is herd the kids in the garden.

duchesse Thu 28-Mar-13 13:25:55

It's been a legal requirement to have one's dog tattooed and/or microchipped in France for decades. There are still loads of dogs that are neither. We found one near my mother's house last year. Lovely little dog. We'll never know whether she was lost or abandoned though. She went to a shelter to be rehomed. I don't see why people don't have their animals microchipped- it's not expensive, it takes seconds to do, and you have a much higher chance of recovering your animal if it gets lost. Unless you are up to no good with your pets and don't want the authorities to find you that is...

curryeater Thu 28-Mar-13 13:33:34

Mannishboy, your post has a very nasty tone. The bit about "scum" is particularly vile, and your assumptions about who is responsible and who is not. Pray, how do you know all this? Also, you twice compare the ownership of dogs to having children. The two can't be meaningfully compared. It is this sort of fuzzy thinking which is the whole problem. Dogs are animals, they are not human.

snuffle, by the way, I don't hate dogs, I quite like them.

I used to love dogs, but since becoming a mother have come across so many irresponsible dog owners of late that I would rather dogs weren't around at all. Dogs off leads on the pavements, particularly on the routes to the schools near me. The pre-school and primary school my DS1 attends have to be reached via a small park and so many idiots have their dogs off leads terrifying the little ones. If I hear, 'he's only being friendly' one more time.....that is not the damn point, friendly or not, your dog has frightened my child, I have my baby with us and anyway I do not want mud and slobber on me or my DCs. Don't even get me started on all the dog shit. My parents have always had a dog and DS1 wasn't frightened of them until two years ago when we started doing the walk to pre-school and all the incidents with dogs en-route. We are the only country where people put dogs/animals equal or above humans.

SnuffleTheDog Thu 28-Mar-13 13:37:26

Mannish is right, the people who get dogs as status dogs and then try and goad them into being tough are scum. The dog then does something horrific, gets PTS and the owner gets off scot free. Pretty scummy if you ask me.

Am surprised to hear you like dogs, considering most of your posts are very negative towards them.

MousyMouse Thu 28-Mar-13 13:40:41

I actually agree with curryeater.
many many dog owners are not responsible, just look at the dog shit everywhere. I think it is unfair to keep dogs in unsuitable conditions (small inside space, not enough excercise and training, stressfull/noisy environment) and so I think dogs, with the exception of working dogs, should not be kept at all.
or at such an expense that only very responsible people will take on a burden like this. dog license, compulsory insurance and training, compulsory spaying/neutering...

FairyJen Thu 28-Mar-13 13:44:13

I was " attacked " by a dog when I was around 10. I wasn't bitten just badly scratched. It was after a ball I was playing with which I held above my head to keep away for it. It was jumping up and I ended up with long deep scratch marks down my front from it jumping up.

I remember this very clearly and I remember the pain. I cannot imagine what that poor girls final moments must have been like at all.

I like dogs, my parents have two Labradors however some breeds should be banned and destroyed and irresponsible owners should be banned from ever keeping ANY animal.

RabidCarrot Thu 28-Mar-13 13:44:45

It is not the dogs that are to blame but the scum that own them.Keeping 5 dogs in a tiny space is madness, and getting a dog to make you look "hard" is beyond sad.
Any dog can be dangerous, but most of the time the issue is the owner and how the dog is treated.
The people next door have a staff and she is beautiful, calm, well trained and well treated. She is scared of my cats grin but as lovely as she is I would not trust her alone with a child.

SnuffleTheDog Thu 28-Mar-13 13:45:19

Easy option.

Thats all talk of banning dogs altogether is, the easy, lazy, 'dont have to think too hard about it' option.

I think Men should be banned. Far to many attacks from males on females. Lets get rid of them all, with the exception of a select few for obvious reasons.

There, Ive just solved the male on female violence problem. hmm

curryeater Thu 28-Mar-13 13:47:00

Snuffle, I can see the appeal of dogs because they are so fun and friendly (usually), and have enjoyed looking after them (dog-sitting in the country - I was very nice to them by the way, I would not ever be cruel to an animal) but I think that the ridiculous attitudes you see on here so much (elevating entities who are not equipped for it to be quasi-human) means that they are incompatible with human social interests in towns, cities and suburbs.

LittleAbruzzenBear has it right. "I would rather dogs weren't around at all". Not that I want them to be hurt. Just not shitting and slobbering all over the place. and their owners saying "it's alright" - no it is NOT alright, my child is sobbing in fear and covered in footprints! You may be alright, we are not alright.

My mother grew up on a farm with sheepdogs and greyhounds, and we spent a lot of time there as children, and I have inherited her attutudes: dogs belong in the country, they work, they do not go in the good rooms and put their feet all over the furniture, you train them, you do not mistreat them, you tell them what to do and they do it, if not you have them put down.

higgle Thu 28-Mar-13 13:48:25

And policemen - you are far more likely to be killed by a policeman than a dog.

curryeater Thu 28-Mar-13 13:50:22

Snuffle - you do realise that men are humans and dogs aren't, don't you? Yes? Just checking?

SnuffleTheDog Thu 28-Mar-13 13:52:22

Curry - I agree, its not alright, but banning dogs altogether because of a few people who cant look after their pets properly is just totally insane.

curryeater Thu 28-Mar-13 13:53:35

I mean it would be great if everyone who could get hold of one could have a private jet, wouldn't it. They are so much fun and it is great swooping around the sky in them. Obviously you would constantly be having accidents and killing people and the noise would be horrific and then there's the pollution and where would you keep the damn things, but that's not the jets' fault is it, it's the owners' , so by a magical leap of logic there is no problem at all and I can carry on making my neighbouhood hellacious by buzzing around all the time in my pathetic jet, and at least it is not a common jet like the sort that scum have, so they should have theirs taken away, but not m.

SnuffleTheDog Thu 28-Mar-13 13:53:57

Curry - yes I do, but what I proposed is a solution to a problem.

Just like banning ALL dogs because of a few is a solution to a problem.

Hysterical overreaction? Yes, absolutely.

bigkidsdidit Thu 28-Mar-13 13:55:42

I wish councils / MPs would do something to enforce picking up dog shit. I swear it would be the biggest vote winner ever. You can't go for a walk to the swings here without getting poo all over the pram wheels hmm

Whatnameforme Thu 28-Mar-13 14:02:49

Banning either all dogs or certain breeds won't stop irresponsible people being a drain and a menace to the rest of the population. We could move all those people to the countryside, thus creating more space for well behaved dogs.
I also agree that no dog should approach child or adult without being asked. No dog should jump up at an adult or child. A dog should not be treated as human and should be taught its place, second to all humans. But banning them is a little ridiculous, unlikely and a quick fix lazy answer.

curryeater Thu 28-Mar-13 14:03:31

bigkidsdidit, I wish you were right, but iirc, leaving-dog-shit was actually cited by an MP a few years ago as "not a real crime" that would be the focus of CCTV info. I was fuming. It seemed to me that this reference to the triviliality of dogshit was both indicating and reinforcing a sense that we all have to live with it. I had a toddler and our local play park had a fenced off "no dogs" bit around the play equipment and it was FULL of dogshit. We just couldn't go there. I had SPD which made it harder to get further afield or physically negotiate managing a wobbly toddler around the turds and it really felt like we had been put in our place. Doesn't matter. Fuck off. It's all about the dogs and their stupid owners who can't be criminalised.

curryeater Thu 28-Mar-13 14:05:17

It may seem like a simple solution to legislate agains buying a private jet and keeping it in the front garden and flying it around when you like, but you are mistaken - it is in fact a quick fix lazy answer.;

curryeater Thu 28-Mar-13 14:06:47

Whatnameforme - so many shoulds here: " also agree that no dog should approach child or adult without being asked."

but they do

" No dog should jump up at an adult or child."

but they do

" A dog should not be treated as human and should be taught its place, second to all humans."

but they aren't.

So how about some quick fix lazy answers?

SoupDreggon Thu 28-Mar-13 14:11:57

Perhaps we should ban all cars because some drivers are a menace.

SnuffleTheDog Thu 28-Mar-13 14:13:13

"So how about some quick fix lazy answers?"

Welll I know one quick fix lazy answer to the problem. But its a bit silly, and unworkable, not to mention a total and complete hysterical overreaction so I wont mention it, especially as it would make me look like a right tit.

D0oinMeCleanin Thu 28-Mar-13 14:15:33

For perspective:

The average number of deaths per year from:

Dog bites: 16
Forklift Truck Accidents: 68
Lightening Strikes: 82
Car Accidents: 43730

The average number of deaths in children per year from:

Dogs: 10
Balloons: 11
Playground Accidents: 15
Buckets: 22
Human Caregivers: 826

American data where Pitbulls are legal in several states. Taken from CDC online.

Now you can argue that dogs are not necessary, unlike car travel, although as non driver, I tend to disagree with that sentiment, however are balloons necessary? Playgrounds? No, they're not but they bring pleasure to many and given the rarity of fatality or injury are relatively safe.

Dogs bring pleasure to my life and to my children's, they provide us with exercise, social enhancement, stress relief, warmth, love and help us to feel safe. Training with them is a great source of amusement on rainy half term days. My children and yours would be safer in my house, with my dogs, than in your car, at your party with balloons, at the playground or being looked after by Granny, statistically speaking.

PeoniesPlease Thu 28-Mar-13 14:20:30

I don't actually know a good solution to this problem - I wish people would be a bit more sensible about dogs! Why choose these massive breeds in the first place? If you are so compelled to, then make sure that they are properly handled, and are not let off the lead! Everyone thinks their own dog is lovely, which is why there should be legislation in place to ensure that the individual owner is not making a judgment about their dog's safety around others.

But I really don't think the comparison with cars is a sensible one - dogs are not necessary for modern life. Cars are for many people. Therefore, the analogy doesn't hold true for me. We should try to reduce risk to human life as much as we possibly can. Of course, this means traffic calming, encouraging people to use other means of transport etc, but we cannot compare dogs and cars.

I think all dogs should be licensed. Any dog which isn't should be immediately seized and a decision made about its future. Any dog which attacks a human should be pts.

RIP Jade. What a horrible and sad thing to have happened.

PeoniesPlease Thu 28-Mar-13 14:24:38

Quite a funny x-post Dooin!

I still disagree with your post though - for a lot of people, a car is necessary because there are no alternative transport options. Now, I actually wish that wasn't the case, but I think it is a topic for another time!

Dogs aren't necessary. I'm glad you enjoy yours, but it cannot be compared to cars. Therefore it isn't a useful comparison to look at death/injuries from the two.

SnuffleTheDog Thu 28-Mar-13 14:27:21

Peonies - I can tell you why I chose a SBT if you are interested - their reputation as a family dog, character, the temperament of every one I have met, they are actually quite small, dont shed much hair, and dont really smell too much apart from their farts.

SBTs are the only breed of dog I have owned and will ever own.

SnuffleTheDog Thu 28-Mar-13 14:34:21

It could be argued that a dog/pet is a necessity for some people.

For a long while my dog was the only reason I got up in the morning. Without her I would have sank into a very deep pit of depression and I honestly cant say if I would have got myself out of it.

So my dog is/was actually a necessity at that time.

higgle Thu 28-Mar-13 14:35:25

Indeed Snuffle, I cuddled my old Butch up last night and cried to think anyone would hate him or be frightened of him because of his breed. I think it is the only breed of dog I will ever own too because I feel so sorry for the poor homeless ones, and I know because of all this nonsense about them there will be even more needing homes too.

Yes, the farting is awesome, but Greyhound owners tell me the same.

rubyrubyruby Thu 28-Mar-13 14:49:43

It's ridiculous suggestion to ban dogs.

It's a tragic accident that could have been prevented as all accidents can.
But it was just that - an accident.

SnuffleTheDog Thu 28-Mar-13 14:54:00

I know Higgle, makes me very sad to think some of them might be ditched by worried owners. In a way they would be better off, if their owner is so quick to get rid when it hasn't even done anything wrong they are probably the type who would get rid of their dog if it walked away rather than wag its tail happily after llittle Tarquin pulled on its ears or some other bollocky reason (I have actually heard of someone getting rid of their dog when their baby pulled its tail and it ran off, apparantly a good family dog should have just sat there hmm )

maisiejoe123 Thu 28-Mar-13 15:00:13

How many of us guessed that the owners would be a feckless woman like this who has now gone into hiding. What stops her getting another few dogs when this has died down.

I am sure she is sorry about what has happened. I think most people could have guessed that the 'owner' of these dogs would be someone like this.

She makes me feel sick.

Going forward what can be done about this.

SnuffleTheDog Thu 28-Mar-13 15:11:38

Its always a feckless owner.

Which is why the owners need tackling. Calling for banning of breeds is far too simplistic and if that is the laughable solution the government come up with then we, as intelligent people, should absolutely not accept it as its just paying lip service to a few, and just shoves the problem on to another breed.

Dog licensing, micro chipping, hefty fines that are actually enforced, being made to report in to local police station on a daily basis, and charges of manslaughter will be far more reaching than just "ban the breed".

FigSolution Thu 28-Mar-13 15:18:59

Jokey comments about dog farts on a thread about a child that has been mauled to death is extremely poor form.

The solution to the problem is to make dog breeding and dog ownership considerably more difficult and considerably more expensive.

Much more legal responsibility should be placed on breeders of all breeds and cross breeds.
Compulsory home checks of all prospective owners, with detailed questioning of the prospective owners knowledge of the breed, exercise and training requirements etc.
Compulsory microchipping of all puppies before they leave.
Legal documentation that puppies to be returned to breeder if they are unable to be looked after and/or if a dog warden confiscates the dog and deems the owner to be unsuitable to continue to look after it.
Compulsory health testing of sire and dam.
Spectacularly large fines and removal of dog breeding licence if above not adhered to.
All these costs to be passed on to the prospective buyer.

For dog owners.
Mandatory written exam pre dog ownership.
Additional breed specific sections, particularly relevant for breeds with specialist needs (eg Northern Breeds) or training requirements.
Compulsory attendance at dog training.
On the spot checks and fines for things such as reliable recall in a public place, not carrying poo bags, antisocial behaviour (fairly easy to carry out if all dogs are microchipped).
(Large) annual dog tax to pay for wardens and administration of licence.

Owning a dog is way too easy and way too cheap in the UK. Make it difficult and expensive, then you will at least reduce the opportunities for tragic incidents such as this being repeated.

ChocoLatToBeLickedByMe Thu 28-Mar-13 15:22:02

I was reading this yesterday
(WARNING: don't look if squeamish (it shows photos of dog attack injuries))

I wasn't surprised to see that there were several involving Border Collies. Out of my 3 dogs I trust my collie the least, although she has never shown any aggression to anybody. I presume it is due to them being bred to react quickly to movement although they shouldn't really be reacting by savaging the sheep.

Muzzling dogs wouldn't have helped Jade as IIRC even the dangerous dogs act only enforced muzzling when out of your private property. Although the act seems completely pointless as Pitbulls are still in the UK and in theory if they all had been neutered when the law was enforced then there shouldn't be any, unless of course they are all 23 years old

amothersplaceisinthewrong Thu 28-Mar-13 15:23:50

In my dreams, I live in a completely dog free world. I hate them all.

How awful sad
RIP
I have a DD the same age

seeker Thu 28-Mar-13 15:33:03

What is it about dogs that makes people take leave of their senses? I am a typical mad cat woman- but even I can tell the difference between a cat and a person.......

SnuffleTheDog Thu 28-Mar-13 15:35:12

Fig - comments about dogs in general and their behaviour and things they do are bound to crop up on a thread where total banning of dogs/certain dogs is discussed. It doesnt detract from the tragedy of what has happened.

SnuffleTheDog Thu 28-Mar-13 15:37:01

I agree owning a dog is far too easy, you should have seen the list of questions I was asked at PAH when I went in to buy a GOLDFISH.

I actually came out without one as I didnt pass their test hmm

curryeater Thu 28-Mar-13 15:47:21

Snuffle, you probably said "yes" to "does this fish have a vote?"

curryeater Thu 28-Mar-13 15:48:24

To be fair, maybe it was a trick question - maybe they said "what is the legal voting age for fishes?" and you said "18" and they said "maybe keeping an animal is not for you, dear" while making twirling motions with their fingers beside their temples

higgle Thu 28-Mar-13 15:50:37

Fig - If you look at the situation with puppy farming - a major contribution to the problem with excess numbers of dogs that cannot be homed - and see how government struggles to control even this I think you proposals, laudable as some of them are, would be unworkable. There really should be a total ban on Staffie breeding, except for exceptional show standard dogs maybe for a while to get the numbers down. The woman in this cas bred what looked to be a lsrgish litter she sold on Facebook, there are thousands for sale on the internet puppy sales sites and clearly not enough homes for them. Accountability by way of registration of dogs and chipping for all is a good start. I don't think it is the "cheapness" of dogs that is a problem, a lot of these irresponsible owners seem to pay a lot for them and still go on to be irresponsible.

Moominsarehippos Thu 28-Mar-13 15:51:51

Border collies are beautiful and intelligent beasts - and people like them because of this. They are also rather highly strung and need hours of exercise (or they go batshit crazy), which is why farmers tend to keep them only if they are working dogs and not pets.

I don't want dogs banned, but not do I think that any Tom, Dick or Harriet who 'wants' one can just have one, no questions asked, no proof of ability/knowledge of how to look after one.

No-one admits to being a feckless dog owner, so there need to be rules, and certainly no-one should be able to to just set thenselves up as a breeder with no training or knowledge.

There should also be rules about dog poo (yuk) and keeping animals under control. Our park has had loads of brids mauled by dogs - there is a sign saying 'keep your dog on a lead' but some twats still throw balls and sticks into the lake for their dogs to retrieve (scattering swans, geese and ducks as they go). Mutts come and sick their hooters into your picnic with the twatty owner either ignoring it or saying 'he's only being friendly...' as you throw your dog-snot sandwich in the bin. Don't get me started on dog-walkers!

Many cannot for the life of them believe that anyone does not think that their dog is the bestest, most loveliest and desireable creature to grace Gods earth (like some parents with their kids). I even saw one stroppy cow telling a tourist to 'bugger orf back home' when he told her off after her dog bounced up onto a little girl and she had hysterics (really terrified), then licked her brother's face (about 2 years old) and he started crying too.

SnuffleTheDog Thu 28-Mar-13 15:55:46

Why would i say yes to that?

Oh you were being funny smile

D0oinMeCleanin Thu 28-Mar-13 16:01:11

Snuffle, you are probably an irresponsible fish owner, like me. I made the mistake of asking about dd2's BiOrb and stocking suggestions on a fish keeping website once.

14 pages later I had fairly comprehensively reached the conclusion that a lot of people do not like BiOrbs, not even free ones grin

Luckily the man in the local aquatics shop was much more helpful.

SnuffleTheDog Thu 28-Mar-13 16:11:10

I decided not to bother with the fish in the end. The sales guy put me off a bit when he asked some bollocks about voting ages for fish. I thought they only lived for a year or two.

FigSolution Thu 28-Mar-13 16:18:31

Higgle I reckon most of my proposals are perfectly workable if the right amount of money is thrown at them. Money that would come from an annual dog tax. Start by breeders microchipping puppies and then owners from the day they pick up the dog being 'attached' to that chip and you have a nice system to tax that owner annually.

The cost of buying a dog is a drop in the ocean compared to the lifetime costs of good quality food, vets bills, insurance, training and kennelling, as any responsible dog owner knows.

TheRealFellatio Thu 28-Mar-13 16:24:05

I am not a fan of Staffordshire Bull Terriers at all - don't see the appeal of them myself, and I personally would never choose to own any dog whose breed was originally developed for fighting or baiting, and I question the motives or judgement of anyone who does. However, I am aware that they have been a very popular breed for years with very little bad press at all - until they became the latest status dog of choice for knuckle draggers and people with violent/criminal tendencies.

The trouble is, what most of these people really wanted were pit bulls, but a) they are banned, and b) they were pretty hard to come by. Breeding more muscular, more aggressive strains of SBT has been a way to emulate them for many.

But breeders have worked on crossing Pit Bulls with all/any of the other bull terrier breeds, also mastiffs, and American Bulldogs and have come up with all sorts of smoke and mirrors schemes to basically sell dogs that are 9/10ths pit bull, or pit bull crossed with staffs, or mastiffs, cane crosses etc, to get the biggest, baddest dogs, chockful of fighting genes, that they can produce, but always managing to dodge regulation and the dangerous dogs act, by saying they are not 'pit bull types', or banned breeds, but 'staffies' or bull mastiffs. And they are selling dogs which are to all intents and purposes Pit Bulls under code names like 'American Guard Dogs' etc. The internet is full of them if you know what to look for.

Certainly Bull Mastiffs are no angels, despite what their devoted owners will tell you. The people I have known who have kept BMs have been the sort of people you don't want to accidentally bump into in the pub iykwim, so let's say it's no coincidence they don't own poodles.

It's extremely hard to be exactly sure what breed some of these dogs are, or are not. And my guess it that hundreds of thousands of dogs are going under the title of 'Staffie' in this country when actually, they are not pure Staffie at all. They are at least part banned breed, and the owners know it, but won't admit it. But there is little doubt they have been breed to be strong, brave, intimidating and fiercely loyal. In other words, weapon dogs that they think will give them added gravitas.

I have only ever known of three people in my aquaintance to be attacked and injured by dogs.

One was about thirty years ago - my then boyfriend's aunt took on a pit bull type/American Bulldog puppy from a rescue. This was before they were very well known, and before the ban. She had to have it destroyed at about a year old when it attacked her and she ended up with a face full of stitches and not much top lip left.

The second was a friend's 2 year old nephew. They went on holiday and stayed in a hotel where the owner's dog was a Bull Mastiff. It savaged the child in a totally unprovoked attack as the family all sat eating a meal in the hotel garden. The child underwent emergency surgery and the dog was destroyed.

The third was my friend's daughter who owned an Akita. Despite being trained in dog handling and animal behaviour, it still attacked her and she had to have it destroyed.

I've seen the photos of the dogs in this recent attack and not one of those dogs looked like an actual Staffordshire bull terrier to me. Two were bull mastiffs and the others looked to be of a pit bull type. Although they may have 'officially' been staffie as far as the owner was concerned. hmm

Whilst I agree that the problem lies probably more in nurture than in nature, I do think that some breeds are more predisposed to attacking and fighting than others, and when under stress or in a pack, are more likely to revert to type. Especially if they have been poorly handled by fuckwit owners. And no-one will ever convince me otherwise.

I agree that any breed^ has the potential to turn nasty and get a bad reputation en masse, if enough irresponsible, dim, or downright nasty people buy them. I agree with what DoinMeCleanin said upthread - I think the next status dog to go bad will be the Husky, Malamute or Akita. And it's no good saying 'oh but daschunds and chiahuahuas and Jack Russells are really unpredictable and aggressive - yes I believe they can be, but they are about this > < big, so.... confused

But I also think that until macho, wannabe gangstas with small dicks and even smaller brains want to start dragging Golden Retrievers or Cocker Spaniels around with them while they patrol their manor, (or is it hood these days?) we are ALWAYS going to see a disproportionate number of attacks by Staffies, Staffy-crosses, pit bull crosses, Bull mastiffs, or any other breed that was originally bred with fighting or baiting in mind. It is not a coincidence that the wrong kind of people pick these dogs, is it?

Moominsarehippos Thu 28-Mar-13 16:29:22

Jack Russels can be a bit bitey - we had some - but I think smaller breeds can be snappy because people just don't train them properly. Where they may take a larger breed more seriously, a small dog that you can pick up with one hand is probably seen as being easier to control, so aren't taken to classes.

Cheddars Thu 28-Mar-13 16:43:38

Good post TheRealFellatio.

And this bit It's extremely hard to be exactly sure what breed some of these dogs are, or are not. And my guess it that hundreds of thousands of dogs are going under the title of 'Staffie' in this country when actually, they are not pure Staffie at all. They are at least part banned breed...

is the reason I won't choose a rescue Staffie to be homed with my children. sad

Curryeater - confused smile One post you say that you would never be cruel to an animal and I believe you. However, another post you suggest them being put down? Not sure!

TheRealFellatio - good post. Although I am a convert to dogs recently (looks at Spaniel puppy asleep under my kitchen table after romping through the woods with a Cocker Spaniel for 90 minutes this afternoon), we did choose a breed that was known to be a good family breed. he has given us so much more than we could ever envisage, despite the commitment and the inevitable mud! He's pathetic really and would never survive in the wild I am sure, given he was the runt of the litter and has no prey drive whatsoever, but I still have the caveat that you never fully know.

He's just not 'ard enough and doesn't look the part. I did Google 'Spaniel attacks' and didn't get a lot back, not that there will be NONE.

I passionately hate cats, I really do. They poo in our garden as we are the only ones without a cat round here, we are forever digging or picking up cat poo. Not nice, rather like standing in dog poo on a path, except all the dogs in the vicinity don't come and poo in my garden smile Ironically, I have trained the dog to 'go' in a field, way way off the path, which is perfectly possible with training! I respect other peoples love of the animal though, and wouldn't think it acceptable to suggest a blanket ban, as some have on here.

curryeater Thu 28-Mar-13 16:48:46

needastrongone, are you vegan?

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 16:53:02

You seem to have drifted from the point of this thread, needsastrongone.
Poo is annoying, upsetting and unhygenic. Cat, dog whatever, it's yukky.

Cats don't attack people and maim them. In the same way that so many other animals create mess and damage but aren't dangerous.

er no? I have a beef in the slow cooker soaked in cider and orange from 7am this morning smile Is this relevant?

wannaBe Thu 28-Mar-13 16:56:13

so,

How much additional income tax are people prepared to pay in order to bring in all these magical solutions? 1%? 5%? 10%? because we don't have enough money in the system to enforce the laws as they currently stand, let alone to bring in all these enforcement officers to ensure that all dogs are licenced/microchipped/newtered etc etc.

The fact is that there is actuallly no way of enforcing any kind of law like that. So you make people have dog licences, how do you prove who has bought a dog? puppy farms are a reality and there's nothing that can be done about those for starters, so anyone can currently go and buy a puppy and collect it at the severn bridge where it will be brought from Wales (where puppy farming is a huge problem), take it home, keep it there, never take it for walks, so no chance of it being seen by the proposed dog wardens which people want patrolling our local parks...

Pitbuls are banned in the UK yet they exist. The DDA has been unenforceable because there is no way to actually prevent someone from owning a pitbul, all you can do is act when you become aware of one's existance, by which time it is usually too late.

I agree that out of control dogs are a nuisance. I agree that there should be harsh penalties for anyone whose dog attacks a person, and I even go so far as to disagree with this notion often perpetuated on here that a dog who bites should be rehabilitated and rehomed "responsibly". The only responsible thing to do with a dog who bites unprovoked (and yes, not all dog attacks are unprovoked) is for the dog to be put to sleep. But we simply don't have the money available to start bringing in these enforcement measures, and it is far too easy to evade them so the irresponsible dog owners will just continue to be irresponsible dog owners, but the responsible dog owners but who just don't have that much money at their disposal will be the ones having to give up much loved and and well cared for family pets, while the 'ard blokes with their status dogs will live on.

curryeater Thu 28-Mar-13 16:56:18

I was wondering whether you think it is ever ok to humanely kill animals

You haven't met my friends cat then Neb (joke!)

I think there's been a fair bit of drifting, not just by me tbh, but fair point which I take on board.

Just was making the point that just because I don't like cats, really don't like them, that's not relevant to the actual argument about dangerous dogs.

Jux Thu 28-Mar-13 16:59:09

Owning pets - particularly cats or dogs - has been shown to have therapeutic value.

I would agree with an animal being put down if it was dangerous yes, or if it was in pain and suffering. But would I agree if the owner (not the dog) hadn't met the standard required in the test that you suggest (the general I don't disagree with, I think training should be compulsary so ensure minimum behaviour standards, although, as I said, how enforcable that is I am not sure), that that wouldn't sit easy with me tbh.

SnuffleTheDog Thu 28-Mar-13 17:03:00

I dont think making it more expensive to own a dog is the solution as that would basically mean that most people on benefits or lower incomes would be priced out of owning one, which isnt fair. I dont think micro chipping from birth as a revenue stream is workable either, as all the idiots will do is claim their dog has ran away or been stolen, or been ran over etc. They will find a way around it.

maisiejoe123 Thu 28-Mar-13 17:03:26

I'm going to throw out a few ideas here. Some people will be up in arms about some of them I am sure, others hopefully could be considered.

1. Dog licences £50 per dog. All dogs to be microchipped

2. Certain breeds (ie rottie, GSD and bull mastiff's) will need further checks. You will be required to attend a approved training centre where you will be trained in looking after these dogs. You must pass the test. Otherwise the dog is taken from you.

3. At these training centres at the end of the course (which you will be paying for having personally chosen a breed on the 'list') an assessor will decide whether the dog and you have passed.

4. For certain breeds there will be a home check (again at your cost) to ensure you have the space to care for their large size. if you do not pass and insist on getting a dog your neighbours/concerned passer by's can report your dog to the police and it will be taken away.

5. For people on benefits (and this is the one I am going to be flamed for!). One dog only.....

I totally understand the joy that dogs give to say the elderly or alone. However you might need one dog - you dont need more than one.

And yes, I am judging people and their ability to pay for the pleasure of having a dog.

Of course there will be exceptions but we need to give people consequences and responsibility when they choose to have a big breed dog.

I am also speaking as the owner of a rottie.......

'just as others don't like dogs, really don't like them', not sure what happened to my other post.

higgle Thu 28-Mar-13 17:05:06

With this sort of draconian laws passed as a knee jerk reaction to an event like this you only create a paradise for lawyers who will find ways to drive a coach and horses through it, as they have with the present legislation. It certainly couldn't be financed and run on the basis of dog licences. Dog owners are voters too and I can't see it being a popular measure - not sure any political party would be very happy to run with anything like this.

PeoniesPlease Thu 28-Mar-13 17:07:30

I've just had a look at some pictures of those dogs that attacked Jade. I really don't think that big white one is a Mastiff or a Staffie - it is absolutely huge and its ears and eyes are wrong to be a Mastiff.

I'm sympathetic to people who love their SBTs or similar. I just think it is impossible to be objective when thinking about your own pet. That's why I think regulation is the answer here - I liked FigSolution's ideas.

I'm cautious of all dogs that I don't know, but it has to be said that you don't hear of spaniels ripping people's throats out in the way that you do about SBTs etc. I'm sure some of that is down to who chooses which kind of dog, and how they subsequentely treat it, but I'm just not sure that I personally would be able to trust a SBT around children.

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 17:09:09

I'm one of the older posters here, and in my lifetime I've seen a lot of previously unimaginable laws come into practice, be resisted and are now part of people's every day understanding and are unquestioned.
Laws will tighten, it's just the time frame that's in question.

Bloody hell, sorry about errors, I should spell check and not multi task, can't even blame the phone smile

TheNebulousBoojum Thu 28-Mar-13 17:13:04

Peonies, the white one is an American bull dog.

maisiejoe123 Thu 28-Mar-13 17:14:06

The woman owned these dogs because SHE could. There are no laws to stop her, she is plain stupid to think that having all these dogs is a responsible thing to do.

So, moving forward people like her need to be forced by laws and in a monetary terms to consider whether she can really afford to have one. At present she could do what she likes. She could move back into her house with 4 dogs of exactly the same breed.

PeoniesPlease Thu 28-Mar-13 17:16:33

Thanks Nebulous - I think my ex neighbour used to have one. Absolutely terrifying beast that used to bark at me whenever it saw me and strain at its lead. I did report it, but nothing happened.

maisiejoe123 Thu 28-Mar-13 17:18:14

Neb - what true words you speak! And look at technology. I didnt grow up with a mobile phone (they werent around!) and sat nav. What a great invention. Unthinkable many years ago....

Wallison Thu 28-Mar-13 18:23:52

^ Ironically, I have trained the dog to 'go' in a field, way way off the path,

Do you own the field?

No, but our friends do, it is where DD keeps her pony. I have spoken to our friend about our dog going to the toilet there and he is absolutely fine. Their dogs are also trained to go in their fields rather than the footpaths in the small village where we live. It breaks down naturally rather than being bagged and on landfill, the latter being preferable if on footpaths or public places naturally. I walk my dog a lot on their land, with permission. I also have permission to walk on the field of the other local farmers. So, he is not bothering anyone by jumping up or pooing where he shouldn't be.

I got the meaning behind your question but, in this instance, leaving a mess on someone else's doorstep, so to speak, isn't the case.

Although, I don't know if all the foxes, badgers, deer, mice, birds, horses, cows and sheep get permission to poo in his field though! How rude of them!

Joke smile

LillianGish Thu 28-Mar-13 18:52:36

As someone put it so well down thread - never mind banning breeds, we need to look on the other end of the lead! I haven't seen a photo of the dog owner or her house, but I can imagine exactly what she and it are like.

I didn't mean that last comment to sound crass in light of the death of Jade. If it did, then I apologise, I didn't mean it to.

seeker Thu 28-Mar-13 18:57:39

"Curryeater - confused One post you say that you would never be cruel to an animal and I believe you. However, another post you suggest them being put down? Not sure!"

This is a very important point. putting an animal down is not being cruel. I can't stress this enough. Animals have no sense of time and no sense of self- they do not know they are being put down. So it is not even remotely cruel, so long as it is humanely done obviously.

maisiejoe123 Thu 28-Mar-13 18:58:08

Single mother with disability type benefit with 5 children if the headlines are to be believed.

And yes, totally irresponsible and stupid but again - no real consequences regarding what she has done. I am sure she is very sorry. If she wasnt that would make her something else completely.

maisiejoe123 Thu 28-Mar-13 19:00:42

Seeker -I agree. Dogs do not carry around the fact that they will one day die. Humans know this but dogs live in the moment.

When they are taken to the vets for that last visit, they dont know what is coming. They slowly slip away hopefully being cuddled by their owners.

Blimey, I am filling up as I write this.

moonabove Thu 28-Mar-13 19:01:03

Some very sensible ideas in maisiejoe123 list.

The law needs changing, she should be prosecuted. Reading this thread with interest, however I don't understand how all these ideas would be paid for and enforced, it seems to me genuine good dog owners would be the ones who would follow any new law, pay any amount necessary, but the owners of the more unscrupelous cross breeds would probably not, the people not interested in the dogs welfare more interested in having the dog as an aggressive weapon, Who would be responsible for ensuring all these 'owners' complied with the law?

moonabove Thu 28-Mar-13 19:09:56

Maybe certain breeds would have to have a visible tag of some sort to show they had been through the process outlined by maisie?

maisiejoe123 Thu 28-Mar-13 19:20:02

If you were flagged as having a 'special breed' then the police etc could move quickly if there are any complaints. At present what can the police do about this feckless woman with 5 huge dogs that she clearly cannot afford and who are running wild. If she had to prove they had been training and microchipped she might think twice.

And I love BIG dogs.....

maisiejoe123 Thu 28-Mar-13 19:20:30

And of course - you arent forced to have a 'breed on the list'!

D0oinMeCleanin Thu 28-Mar-13 19:31:00

And of course those who have always abided by the law will continue to do so and those who have not will continue not to. Do you honestly think that the kind of people who own dogs who go onto to attack will be any less inclined to own them because of a list?

It didn't work when they banned the pitbull and it won't work now.

Tighter restrictions need to be placed on the breeding, sale and advertisement of dogs for sale. Ban the sale of dogs/live animals on public websites such as FB, Gumtree, Preloved etc. Ban unlicensed breeding. Place tighter restrictions on breeders who are licensed. Ban all breeding of the SBT for at least 5 years. Reputable breeders will not be effected as they don't advertise using sites like that anyway, they use breed associations.

Seeker. I understand what you are saying, but it still feels wrong to end the life of a dog or any other animal for that matter because the person who is supposedly responsible for it isn't up to the job. Probably the animal wouldn't know any different as you say, but that doesn't seem to me to be the point. It feels like such a let off and morally not quite right. Just to me anyway.

Bloody irresponsible humans.

LillianGish Thu 28-Mar-13 19:49:06

There will be people who don't comply, but as Maisiejoe says at least the police will be able to call on them and question them or even stop them in the street or park before their dogs kill or injure someone which is how the law stands at the moment.

How anyone honestly thought having 5 dogs, breeds known to have particular tendencies, in a terraced house, with just a back yard was responsible, I have no idea. If this is all true.

Let alone breed them.

LillianGish Thu 28-Mar-13 19:57:33

There were probably many people who thought it was irresponsible, but as the law stands at the moment it is not actually illegal so what could anyone have done about it?

When I lived in a HA flat you were not allowed dogs, and iirc council flats in my area was the same, i know so many people flouted it that eventually they called an amnesty and tried to stop anyone new having dogs, it didnt work, so many laws need bringing in and enforced, but I can't see the logistics of it working.

Speaking recently to a local policeman in my area as regard to some nuisance/scary owners and their dogs n my local park, he said that the dogs would attack policeman on command so they were scared confronting these people, very worrying really.

duchesse Fri 29-Mar-13 00:58:05

Can I just chip in and say that you absolutely should not leave dog faeces lying around in fields either! Farmers growing food crops get very upset about this as any pathogens will not have had time to fully break down in the short life cycle of a vegetable crop, meaning that there will be dog poo on your turnips and carrots. An arable field is a not an open-air dog loo.

duchesse Fri 29-Mar-13 00:59:19

I thought at least one of those dogs looked like a dogo argentino.

wannaBe Fri 29-Mar-13 01:16:50

but with all these proposed measures to prevent these dog attacks, no-one has as yet come up with a suggestion as to how the government is going to afford to pay for them to be enforced.

In theory you make registered breeding only legal, with registered breeders having to microchip their puppies before selling them. the microchip would, in theory, then become the dog licence. but how do you enforce that? fact is you can't. There will always be people who will allow their dogs to become pregnant, even if you make newtering compulsory, because you shouldn't spay a dog until it has had its first season, and the recommendation now is to not newter male dogs until they are two. So the unscrupulous will still allow their bitch to get pregnant during her first season just for the cute puppy factor and there is absolutely no way to prevent that from happening. And there is absolutely no politician in this country who would bring in a law that said any dogs bred outside of licencing laws should be destroyed, that would never make it through parliament. So now you already have unlicenced puppies born to a non licenced breeder, except you can't necessarily prove it.

There do need to be penalties for owners whose dogs inflict injury on to people, but we simply do not have the financial resources in this country to bring in schemes which call for compulsory training/breeding regulation/licencing etc, and to implement such a law would just be paying lip service to the anti dog brigade, but it would never be enforced. in much the same way as the using mobile phones while driving law has on the whole been a worthless effort.

TheRealFellatio Fri 29-Mar-13 03:40:23

The trouble is, backyard breeding of puppies and kittens can be big bucks that go completely under the radar for of the tax man for people who are otherwise unlikely to have a decent job. It involves precious little effort or brains on their part, and even without KC reg papers a good puppy can go for hundreds.

Duchesse. I don't leave dog poo on arable land.

wannaBe Fri 29-Mar-13 08:01:42

yes exactly. Just look at the designer dogs trade. none of those are KC registered because they are crossbreeds.

If I ruled the world newtering of all animals (cats included) would be compulsory as there are far too many of them. But reality is that this is completely unenforceable, because you can't legislate for animals that get out during a season or someone who has more than one who happen to breed before the female can be spayed and that's before we get to those who deliberately bring their animals together because they "want the dog to experience motherhood," (yes, I have seen this said on here, for instance,) or because "kittens are cute and it's lovely for the dc."

duchesse Fri 29-Mar-13 08:48:49

I've just been on the owner's facebook photos of her dogs, which she has unwisely left open to public comments. Some of her comments at the time of putting the photos up suggest that she was not deliberately breeding dangerous dogs, but more ignorant and a bit deluded about them. The large white evil looking one (the one I think is a dogo )is explicitly mentioned as having aggressive behaviour haha (albeit mild at the time- growling and "being a bully") back in September last year. There is a picture of an extremely wary looking staffie who apparently was looking like that because "he'd just woken up".

Not a dangerous woman, but a stupid and misguided one, yes. sad She is getting an immense pasting in her (open) comments on the photo of dogo.

WestieMamma Fri 29-Mar-13 09:29:25

TheRealFellatio makes a very good point, that I always wonder about when there's a report of staffies being involved in an attack. 50+ years ago, before they had any status as 'hard' dogs, my great aunt was a staffie breeder. When I was a child she had retired and just had her 3 which weren't replaced as they got old and died. Her staffies were tiny, stockier than my westie but no bigger. As a child (7ish) I could pick them up and carry them with one arm. I'm not sure that the huge staffies we see today are actually staffies.

DH was just out on a cycle ride in the country and came across two aggressive dogs (he said they were terriers of some sort, but not SBDs) in the road who chased him. He shouted as loudly as he could at them, climbed off his bike, shook it at them and they backed off. Then a little further along were two young girls walking their westie and they said the dogs wouldn't let them past so they were waiting for them to go. DH offered to walk back that way with his bike between them and the dogs if necessary. They went for DH and he yelled at them again and threw his bike towards them. Anyway, the owner came out of his house and had a go at DH and the girls! DH was fuming and said after what happened to this poor young girl in the news people like him should bloody well control their dogs and it isn't just walkers and cyclists, but motorists using these country lanes, his dogs shouldn't be on the loose. The guy walked off. Says it all. Makes my blood boil. However, the young girls (and their westie!) were really grateful to DH.