Another child killed by a dog

[NeverTrustAPoliceman]

Breaking news now. When is this going to stop?

Rip little one.

It truly doesn’t bear thinking about! But my point stands. Every dog owner is part of this problem, responsible or not I’m afraid. Because the culture that anybody and everybody is entitled to own a dog with no legal responsibility to train them or look after them correctly is so entrenched in British culture that shifting that is very very difficult. Like gun control in the USA. It’s part of the national psyche.

Definitely not true that larger dogs are better trained in my experience.

I assume the 'hyperbole' comment was aimed at me.

The gun example is a good one that proves the point.

The changes to the law post Dunblane resulted in the removal of 200,000 illegal guns and yet today there are 1 million illegal guns in the UK (that number is rising) and approx 35 people killed with guns per year (this number is also rising). Last year we had a month where 8 innocent people were killed with illegal guns, including a nine year old little girl. The law didn't save them and it won't save the next 35 or 40 this year. As I said, one of the key reasons is because a woefully underfunded police force cannot keep up with enforcing the laws we do have.

fwiw I would welcome additonal restrictions on dog ownership, because I think mass ownership is hurting the species. But I think it's impact on the specific problem being posted on here will be limited (if any). I think any restrictions likely to pass law are actually going to be pretty weak in terms of animal welfare - as we've seen with some many other animal-related laws. That means it's still going to be pretty easy to pass the criteria. If the supply of dogs is coming from someone who is abusing their animals for profit, you still have a licenced owner with an unstable dog. And as most attacks are within the home and many are within the first weeks of ownership (as appears the case with this latest) I still think we will see these 'surprise' attacks within homes of newly acquied dogs with unknown and dubious backgrounds.

The reality is that any increased laws are unlikely to impact me. I have a dog, I have a degree in canine behaviour and so am likely to be able to pass any criteria they set. I live and walk in the arse end of nowhere, where I can walk for hours without ever seeing another soul and it matters not a jot (to me) whether my dog is on or off lead for those walks. For the majority he is on lead anyway because fields can contain livestock and I want to do whatever I can to keep all the animals around me safe.

I'm not saying I don't think laws will work because I am worried about how they may affect me personally. I am saying they won't work because I genuinly believe they won't work. But I only get my one vote as everone here does, so it's also probably not that important what I (or any individual) thinks. It'll be the majority that drives change if it is to come.

The pet industry has a strong vested interest in making people feel as if their animals are equivalent to humans, the more you see your dog as quasi human and part of the human family the more money you will spend on it, pet insurance special food toys clothing etc.
They will push back hard against any legislation which seeks to control the numbers and types of dogs.
In my view this is a big part of why the dog menace continues in the UK.

Every industry has a vested interest in whatever they sell. That’s basic economics.

Not quite sure what is wrong with wanting insurance, decent food and toys for your pet. I’m not a fan of clothes on dogs for fun, they should only be practical for breeds that need them due to climate.

Pets are part of the family - no amount of sneering from people who don’t like/want pets is going to change that.

We regulate industries so that they can't cause harm to wider society.
Of course I can see that many dog owners consider the animal to be a part of their family but this is a figure of speech, the dog is not human, it is not part of human society, it is an artefact of it's owner's leisure activity and hobbies, a kind of living toy if you will.

Just to point out, the gun laws put in place after Dunblane absolutely have made a difference.

The gun fatality cases referenced by the earlier post are related to organised crime gangs. They are not easily accessible to members of the public.

Dunblane has never happened again because people suffering from severe and dangerous mental disorders cannot get hold of the tools to carry out such a crime.

This is the population we have prevented from causing further tragedies, and that is a massive success even if there are other situations that it hasn’t addressed.

These dogs are not in homes that will comply with legislation, rarely are they even chipped (legal requirement) I doubt they can from a registered breeder either. They haven't released the breed yet but it won't be a spaniel im guessing

This is the problem though and part of what I was talking about. People who aren't dog owners and/ or want some sort of control over them are referred to as "sneering", as dog hating monsters. Not being keen on dogs is just not an acceptable thing to declare publicly in the UK because many dog owners see it as a personal attack on their own dog. Of course it's not. We need to be able to have a reasoned debate without non-dog people being branded as monsters and evil and heartless and actively anti-dog. I'm not anti-dog at all. I like most of them and actively love a few I know well. But I still think there needs to be some sort of control over dog ownership before it gets completely out of hand. That doesn't mean I'm going to break down your door and take your dog away.

Ah, then I think we are in agreement after all so maybe the hyperbole comment wasn't aimed at me :)

When I said the criminals won't listen to dog laws on breeding, I was also referring to organised criminal gangs who are using dog breeding as a lucrative cover and way to launder money. Some are able to do so whilst in prison, using a network of stooge homes on the outside. In fact, much of what they do is already illegal and yet they are still doing it. These dogs then eventually find their way into homes around the country and because there is a need for constant puppy turnover, we're talking about hundreds of dogs produced this way every year.

Does that not mean that owning a certain breed or type of dog will soon become a marker for criminality?

Sorry, @Soothsayer1 I'm not following you...

sorry for not explaining properly I mean if you own a certain type of dog (the ones that are used for money laundering) that marks you out as a criminal?
So the police can focus their efforts on owners of said dogs because who else would have a dog like that unless they were a criminal?
I remember an incident that was in the news some years ago where two or three police officers had to raid a property where there were three or four pit bulls and there was footage of them all being attacked by these dogs it was horrifying
I suppose you can understand why the police don't want to deal with them 🤷
Then again there could be a special dog unit where you have to wear special protective clothing?
Which takes me back to why on earth have we got powerful and aggressive predatory canines which are capable of killing humans roaming free in urban areas ???

Pitbull lobby have really pulled a blinder in convincing people that disliking pitbulls is akin to racism, and that not wanting to interact with someone's nanny dog/softest goodestboy ever/velvet hippo/pibble is literally discrimination.

My eldest is afraid of dogs. As in jump into the road to avoid. The main problem I see is how few people have actual control over their animals. We live by a beach and the amount of times we’ve had (they look friendly) dogs gallop up to us and leap around excitedly while their owner goes blue in the face calling them back…and they usually add, ‘don’t worry he’s friendly.’ They don’t seem to recognise that not everyone wants a dog leaping and jumping up at them. At times when they have come running and barking my 8 year old launches himself at me or my DH and climbs up us. Owners should be able to recall their dogs with a word or a whistle and it’s bloody infuriating that we can’t go out for a walk without them bounding up to us. And I like dogs!

Ah, I get you now @Soothsayer1

I think not, really. Because these dogs typically change hands multiple times. Someone buys a dog from these gangs because they like the hyper muscled look or some other extreme feature or because they crop ears (an eg of illegal activity they still continue with even though the law prohibits it) where law abiding breeders do not. The buyers are not doing anything illegal, even if immoral imo. No one buying a dog with cropped ears really cares for the welfare of that dog and so the cycle continues. Maybe they are also involved in crime, maybe not.

There are then high instances of that dog being resold or given away, often with little regard to where it came from or went to. Pets4Homes, Gumtree etc. Sometimes several times. Sometimes ending up with an owner who understands the dog and sometimes not. But the trail back is well cold by then and a well meaning but perhaps ill informed family gets the dog and does not have the skills to see the signs of trouble in a deeply unstable dog. An eg is that the dog is unlikely by this stage to bark or growl as a warning which is what most people would recognise as a sign there is something wrong. By the time they get to this stage, they are likely to have learned barking or growling is (at best) ignored or (at worst) results in a thump to the head. So, now we have a large, unstable dog that never gives any obvious warning they are upset in a home that may not be able to realise that.

Breeding these kinds of dogs might be an indicator in some cases. But, as I say the breeding is going on under cover, behind closed doors, sometimes in multiple homes with puppies moved and spread out multiple times within their first 8 weeks.

I agree with the sentiment, what on earth is a very large and powerful dog who is still largely unknown to the owners having only been acquired a few weeks ago, doing in a tiny suburban garden with a small child. But all these cases involve a 'what on earth' moment, sadly.

Yes, I think we do agree.

Just because the criminal underworld will continue to own these types of dogs and would be unlikely to follow any licensing laws or restrictions, does not mean that we cannot prevent them falling into the hands of the rest of the population.

If anything, it could become a useful way to spot the crims!

Its much easier to trust a working service dog.
I do get nervous but put a lot of faith in their training and handling
It is not a pet

Well, as unseemly as it is it place blame when a child has tragically been killed, it is the parents. Parents should not let their babies and children mix with dogs. It's that simple. You can talk about legislating and licensing as much as you want. What we actually need is a massive public information campaign about do not have a baby and a dog in the same house. End of.

A huge part of that is stopping dogs being sold on these awful pet websites. Dogs should only be rehomed through rescues. And yes, that is enormously difficult as rescues are overflowing as it is. But people need to stop breeding dogs at home full stop.

Allegedly it was an American Bulldog, what a surprise 🤷🏼‍♀️

It was an American bulldog, recently got from a rescue centre according to the local media. No surprise there, it seems to be a pattern.

That poor little girl, what an awful way to die.

Her parents failed her, so did the so called rescue centre. They both need to be held to account. Why did her so called parents want this particular breed of dog when they had such a young child given their reputation?. Why did the rescue centre approve this home if they knew a young child was living there. Both are responsible and should be charged!

Reportedly they'd only had the dog 6-8 weeks.

I don't know where they get it from, but this is why the advice is to get a dog from a reputable rescue, and not Pets4Homes.

A reputable rescue will assess a dog's behaviour and match it to a home accordingly. A lot of rescues have a blanket ban on adopting out to families with children, and will only adopt out dogs to those with older children where the dog has successfully lived with children before.

Getting an adult dog privately is a recipe for disaster. The old owners have a vested interest in minimising or lying about the dog's behaviour issues because they want rid of the dog. Even where they are well intentioned they may be utterly unable to identify what's going on before their eyes. I adopted DDog from a friend who couldn't keep him and - though well meaning - he just couldn't have given an accurate description of the dog's behaviour issues (thankfully I knew the dog well and knew what I was getting into).

Whoever sold / gave the dog to this family should be expecting a knock on the door from police.

Forgot to add that there's no regulations on who can call themselves a rescue centre; there are some dodgy ones out there. Hence specifying a reputable rescue.