Government to *finally* look at banning XL bullies

[NoCharnce]

Thank goodness. I cannot believe it has taken so long* to even look at banning these awful creatures (I say that as a dog lover). Looks like the viral footage of an XL mauling two men who were trying to defend an 11 year old girl is the straw that broke the camels back.

Tweet direct from Home Sec: https://x.com/suellabraverman/status/1700924751646982312?s=46&t=QlNZXgFJWDXuxa3K3yo7ag

*policy makers have been captured by the RSPCA/Dog’s Trust etc “it’s not the breed, it’s the owner” dogma

@bombastix no I'm not a trainer of any sorts and I don't need to disclose my job to anyone on the internet. I'm defending a breed that I've not seen aggression in.

@Pizzanight I'd say after watching that video at the top of the thread it is completely rational!

I'd never want to meet one! That is an incredibly powerful and fierce animal.

Worked with thousands. A source of income that dries up. Breeder perhaps? Either way you put money first I think

@Pizzanight they are equally as dangerous. They have the power to kill and have done. Because there is no deaths lately doesn't mean they couldn't do it if they chose to.

@bombastix money makes the world go round as they say. Bully's don't even make up half my income. Financially the banning of them would not affect my sleep.

It's a combination of bad owners, lack of socialising and bad genetics. The majority of people who own and breed these larger powerful breeds have no clue about dogs, training and welfare they are just a status symbol and a money maker they probably have never owned a dog prior to this let alone a large one. These dogs are being bred and bred in conditions comparable to puppy farming, by people who have no care for the wellbeing of the animal and just want the cash. They will unknowingly be breeding two dogs who have aggressive tendencies and behaviour problems so the cycle continues instead of only breeding the ones who haven't shown these negative traits like a responsible knowledgeable breeder would. They are then sold to any tom dick and Harry. If you are to own a breed of this size and strength it should have a large secure garden, be socialising from early, be mentally stimulated throughout the day and kept on a lead in public. The amount of people that have been injured or worse is a disgrace and the amount of bully's that have and will be euthanized is also a disgrace all because of uneducated imbeciles

Not a very fair comparison. No one is suggesting terrorising them, trapping them and ripping their throats out but that's how they kill isn't it.

So you believe that a person of retirement age is able to handle an XL Bully walking on a leash? This is irresponsible. There's no way it can be done.

It costs the NHS a total of an estimated £70million in 2017-18 for dog related injuries. Are you happy with this @bonbon2023

https://www.bmj.com/content/381/bmj.p879

I remember a german shephard taking a dislike to me from across the street
It took 2 grown women and a man to hold it back.

I very much doubt a pensioner or child would have managed to stop it attacking me.

To those saying we need to tackle irresponsible owners. How do we do that?

An exam on dog behaviour?

A physical agility and strength test every 2 years?
Wait to see if their dog attacks then remove the license?

What happens to the dog if you fail your agility test. does the dog then get PTS?
It is very hard to assess responsible owner. It is far too vague a statement.

I'm sure a pensioner or child wouldn't have been able to restrain such a dog.

Honestly I just think it's completely irresponsible to have a dog that's stronger than you.

I've told DP that I won't agree to a dog that is big enough that it could pull me across the road in pursuit of a cat / dog friend / because it felt like it. He wants a St Bernard in future - huge, but not something that features on the fatality statistics - and it's a no from me for that reason along with the short lifespan and drooling.

The point is that you have done financial interest in saying what you do, to us, to your customers, and to people who have fears and legitimate ones about injury. That is a little a cigarette company telling me that cigarettes are not very dangerous.

I understand now why you post as you do. If my business depended in part on these dogs, my life would be a lot easier if they were not banned. Just my life, and no one else perhaps.

I would be thrilled if we made people take a course on dog ownership and training - theory lessons before you get the dog, practical lessons after you get the dog.

This would be easy to combine with more stringent requirements for certain breeds - like being able to physically restrain the dog, with the expectation that you will be able to do so for the rest of the dog's lifespan (75 year olds? No. Just diagnosed with MS? No. etc.).

With XL Bullies I would have a temperament test done when quite young, and after adolescence around age 2-3 when problems tend to have set in if they're going to.

Right now we have fuckwittery like this going on.
https://www.pets4homes.co.uk/classifieds/l-bphlda0-18months-old-bully-male-bradford/?recombee_recomm_id=b16b548249f5dd806756879e07fc6430
£150 for an 18 month old XL bully who has been kept outside and "has to be the only pet unless the owner is strong". I don't think it takes much to read between the lines on that one.

https://www.pets4homes.co.uk/classifieds/ks4q4ibew-female-pocket-standard-bully-abkc-10-months-old-wolverhampton/?pmg_source=all
£250 for an 18 month old XL bully - she's reactive and "I prefer she is spayed but if you breed her I'll expect a puppy back"

As a dog owner, I’d have happily done a course. Would only have been beneficial.

Well maybe trining courses are okay. But I think you would quickly find a lot of cheeky people taking money, claiming to be experts and teaching all sorts of drivel. Easy money.

Who would make sure it was good and actually did the job?

Me too. I inherited a dog (long story) who had almost zero training and a few behaviour issues, and went on a very, very steep learning curve.

It would have been much better for both ddog and me if I'd had some sort of formal training covering theory and practicals. Instead, we both learned the hard way, and I rather flew by the seat of my pants for the first few months.

If I'd had access to some theory sessions then we would have got off to a much smoother start. There's a few things I look back on and cringe!

It's just as applicable for people who have kept dogs for many years - often they're outdated in terms of their knowledge and are completely unaware of certain things. My late grandmother kept dogs all her life and was amazed to hear they're not meant to eat raisins or onions nowadays! She raised several generations of mild-mannered but almost entirely untrained dogs (recall? Never heard of it!)

Exactly this! Just goes to show the idiots that decide to own these breeds. Completely agree people who own dogs should have to do a course and take a test and have a lisence if needs be we can't keep punishing animals that's the easy route out and nothing will change.

I'm pretty sure at one point labradors had the highest rate of dog bites recorded but we didn't go around culling them, they're big enough to do a lot of damage as are any other large breed.

@Hayxx

You are mixing up your statistics. Labradors at one point accounted for the most bites reported in hospital- so not if other dogs. But they are also the most popular dog breed. So lots and lots of them. Statistically speaking your average lab is unlikely to bite but most bites were labs because there were so many of that breed.

But pit breeds make up a very small percentage of dogs owned in the U.K. but account for 90% of attacks and bites on other dogs and humans. Therefore statistically your average pit breed is likely to bite or show aggression.

Does that make sense?

I would argue that all large dogs being walked in public should be muzzled- even large labs.

Course seems popular
What about the fitness, strength and agility test? as said person would need to be able to physically restrain their animal in certain situations.

Yes that does make sense, however I just don't agree with killing this breed of dog there are many of them who are loving family pets. I believe we should give hefty prison sentences for those who irresponsibly own dogs which cause harm to others. There has never been enough done to punish owners who own a dangerous animal or abuse their animal etc. The whole system needs to change.

Well, there was the Good Citizenship Dog exam. Not too sure what it was worth though.

You can't ban the owners; that's not going to work.

You must ban the dog.

It's a trendy dog amongst certain people. It was bred as a status symbol in the late 80s. Threatening. As part of an image.

There is absolutely no reason in 2023 why anyone should have a dog like that. People who want them want them for the image and the threat.

It's a version of a gun and a loaded one at that.

In theory - yes.

In practice - I'm not completely sure how it would work.

Most of these people who want XL Bullies seem to be young, fit men who want something that makes them look extra macho. If anyone is physically capable of restraining such a dog, it's probably the majority of the people already buying them.

Of course, I'm not convinced many fit young men can restrain an XL Bully who is hell-bent on attacking....

... but how do we account for the differences between two dogs of similar weight - like an XL bully and a Newfoundland? One is much more muscly than the other, and much more likely to do damage. The worst a Newfoundland is likely to do is to drag you out of the water because it can't tell the difference between your inelegant front crawl and drowning.

How would we test for the ability to restrain such a dog? What parameters would be set, and what margin for error would we allow? How would we allow for the natural changes in strength that someone has over the next 10-15 years?

If, in ten years time, the pup has grown into something mild-mannered but the owner loses a leg in a car accident, do we take the dog off them? It would seem an overreaction.

Most - but not all - of the fatalities have been people attacked by their own dog. Fending off a dog that's attacking you is harder than simply restraining one that's trying to lunge at someone else.

There's also a risk that we create a scenario where a few people are stopped from buying XL Bullies, but "I passed the test of strength to have an XL Bully" becomes an extra macho status symbol, and makes them more desirable.

A dog like that is a working breed type.

It's kept as a pet; lap dog type.

You don't get a border collie unless you're prepared to keep it extremely busy as it's a working dog.

These dogs are working dogs as in fighting or guard dogs.

I believe that among people who've been killed by an XL bully recently included a man who was an experienced dog trainer.

@placemats dogs bite have happened since forever why you asking me if I'm happy about it lol