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

@CafeAuLaitRoyale

John William Jones (68) - 3 bully type breed. No evidence of abuse, they were loved pets. Neighbours said she was always seen out walking the dogs and seemed responsible and the dogs were always under control.

Natasha Johnston (28) - the dog walker. Coroner found she was killed by her own XL Bully. Dog was a loved pet with no previous issues.

Not the same but the police passed an XL Bully that had attacked another dog and bitten a woman to Adam Watts (55) who had two decades of experience in successful rehabbing dogs with severe behavioural problems caused by lack of training and socialisation and/or abuse by owners. He’d been successful with all kinds of breeds but then killed by the XL Bully.

Keven Jones (62) attacked by family pet (his son’s) they’d had for nearly two years. No prior history of aggression and no evidence that the owners had been anything but responsible.

Joanne Robinson (43) killed by one of her own XL bully pets. No history of aggression to humans, people have wondered whether it was related to extremely hot temperatures causing the dog to snap. After her death her mother said “"I trusted Rocco and for this to happen – does it just take a hot day to send them off their trolley?" she said.
"That's the only thing I can think. Was it too hot for him? Because he wasn't aggressive like that and all of a sudden he's just changed. It could happen to anyone couldn't it?"

Anne Dunn (65) killed by one of her son’s pet dogs that she was looking after in their own home. She’d looked after them regularly. While this dog had a problem with one of the other dogs it had never attacked a person before, they’d had it since it was a puppy. No evidence found of any abuse, they were massive dog lovers (with far too many dogs…but still, this shouldn’t cause a fatal attack).

Having never shown aggression to humans before “Bronx has then subjected Ann to a sustained and significant attack consisting of biting, crushing, shaking movements, causing catastrophic injuries to multiple parts of her body. She has collapsed in the hallway and died of her injuries, likely losing consciousness prior to this point."

@ToBrieOrNotToBrieThatIsTheQuestion

I've posted below...many of those I've noted who comment that the dogs showed no previous signs of aggression to people are related to the people that died, and they're not always the owners. I don't think a mother would lie about previous behaviour of a dog that killed her daughter.

Some of the dogs below almost certainly aren't living with absolutely perfect dog owners that have a deep understanding of dog behaviour BUT that applies to all dog breeds. If there's a breed that has genetic issues to the extent it can't be safe with people who aren't perfect dog owners then it should be banned because there aren't that many perfect dog owners!

Some of the dogs below were in less than ideal circumstances - it had been an extremely hot day or their owners had too many dogs to be able to give the required attention a dog needs or were being walked with eight dogs.

But again, while I would never choose to put my GSD on a walk with eight dogs I 100% know that she wouldn't bite anyone, let alone kill anyone as a result.

My GSD cross hates temperatures over 18 degrees because she's part Husky but I 100% trust that she won't snap and kill me.

I would never own as many dogs as some of the owners below but I 100% know she wouldn't kill someone if I did.

Large dogs that are perfectly capable of killing people are put in not ideal circumstances every day across the country.

But there's only one breed where that's resulting in them killing people (and often as below people they live with and have loved).

It's not a coincidence that this breed line also significantly inbred and has been bred from fighting lines with known human aggression.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it's probably a duck.

There is something genetically wrong with this breed and any dog, even the most beloved family pet with no prior signs, could have that problem gene and no-one will know until it snaps. The fact they are also the dog of choice of a certain type of man just exacerbates this, but it's not the only problem.

So I actually think we need to change the narrative because there are perfectly normal people buying these dogs and buying in to the 'it's the owner, not the breed' line because up to now that's been true.

Little do they know that they're being sold dogs that have significant levels of inbreeding (irrespective of how responsible the breeder is because the UK lines are all inbred) and are bred from lines that have fatally attacked people.

I'm pretty sure that a lot of people would not have purchased the dogs if they had known these facts (the idiot 'hard men' probably would have but that's Darwinism).

So now we have normal people and normal families who've bought in to the 'it's owners not dogs' argument unknowingly living with ticking time bombs and no-one knows which dogs have the problem genes.

You can do your absolute best with a dog, but a lot of it is already baked in from when you first get them - as a puppy, more so as a rescue. You can often make lots of progress, but rather like how even the best psychiatrist can't cure schizophrenia - just get it to a manageable level - there are always limits to what can be achieved.

I think you end up making the same point as my post.

This specific breed has some kind of genetic issue and when you read the article about their lines/breeding it's clear why.

By focusing on the 'it's the owner, not the breed' we're missing the fact that for Pit Bulls and derivative breeds like XL Bullies it is the breed.

And that's putting people at risk because, like you said, they're sold as being great family pets and nanny dogs by backyard breeders (there are no known other types of breeder for XL bullies that I'm aware of so far).

I think we actually fundamentally agree - and I will say that until XL bullies came along I was no great fan of BSL (it's proponents often seemed to be motivated by non-evidence based beliefs - staffies look unfriendly, they're owned by chavs, I just don't like them etc etc). But XL Bullies are different, given the statistics on fatalities in the last 3 years or so, and I would support a ban. To be completely honest I'm surprised the police haven't dealt with them before now as being 'pit bull type' under existing legislation.

Fundamentally, it can be the breed, it can be the owner, and it can be the individual dog. It can also be the past owner - I'm always conscious that the person holding the lead might just be the person doing their best to resolve problems not of their making.

Indeed, since acquiring a small rescue dog with behaviour issues, I've become completely intolerant of crap training methods, and much more tolerant of people who have dogs that have behaviour issues but are making good efforts at resolving issues while keeping everyone safe.

I would however note that I wouldn't necessarily trust the mother's judgement of the dog. While I'm sure she's not purposefully lying, she could be as clueless as my own mother, who has variously 'diagnosed' him with a 'mad look in his eye' (he was doing zoomies, entirely innocent) and asked what on earth he was doing when he was clearly presenting his hindquarters for a scratch. In the same circumstances, my own mother would only be able to parrot a few things I'd said to her about the dog, and would be entirely unable to add any well informed comments of her own.

When it comes to references to killing the people they know and love - I think it's important to note that fatalities by dogs of all breeds almost always involve household members (or guests) - they are the people they spend the most time with, and we tend to be more careful around other people's dogs than our own.

Some of the dogs below almost certainly aren't living with absolutely perfect dog owners that have a deep understanding of dog behaviour BUT that applies to all dog breeds. If there's a breed that has genetic issues to the extent it can't be safe with people who aren't perfect dog owners then it should be banned because there aren't that many perfect dog owners!

I completely agree with this - there really is just no margin for error with XL Bullies, and when things go wrong they go wrong quickly, seriously, and with no real means of getting things back under control.

You can, however, get it significantly wrong with a chihuahua - or even an equally heavy Newfoundland - and no one will die.

It's like giving a Ferrari to someone on their first driving lesson.

(irrespective of how responsible the breeder is because the UK lines are all inbred)

There are no responsible breeders of these dogs. They are not a breed. True responsible breeders breed to enhance their chosen breed for showing, working, and welfare purposes.

As the XL is not a recognised breed in the UK it cannot be shown and there is no "line" to enhance.

This is why clamping down on breeding rather than banning certain breeds will do more to prevent dog attacks. If we stop Joe Bloggs and his mates from breeding random dogs together without a single clue as to what they are doing we prevent dogs like this from being created. If we simply ban a certain crossbreed then Joe Bloggs and his mates will move on to other breeds and in a few year's time we'll be having this same discussion regarding another poorly bred, poorly raised crossbreed.

There are no responsible breeders of these dogs.

True responsible breeders breed to enhance their chosen breed for showing, working, and welfare purposes.

I agree.

As the XL is not a recognised breed in the UK it cannot be shown and there is no "line" to enhance.

I'm sure breeders and owners of XL Bullies would quibble with this point. It's not recognised by the Kennel Club (neither were Jack Russells until 2016...).

They have, however, got a breed club which organises shows https://www.ukbullykennelclub.co.uk/shows-and-events

And a breed standard to aspire to https://www.ukbullykennelclub.co.uk/american-bully-standard

I am so desperate for something to be done here. I feel traumatised after encountering one in the street with my baby around a month ago. It spotted my baby in the carrier and started growling/barking and straining at the lead. It was absolutely terrifying. It was probably a fully grown male as it was taller than me and took both men who were with it to restrain it. I have not been able to go for walks on my own with my kids since and have awful flashbacks. I absolutely love dogs but these XL bully breeds are not like any other dog I have seen and do not belong in our communities. The size, power and bite force....you would be absolutely powerless to protect yourself and your children if it takes against you or feels spooked.

@ToBrieOrNotToBrieThatIsTheQuestion

I agree - the only dogs I've had have been Staffies and GSDs so I was also against breed based legislation.

I changed my mind specifically for Pit Bills and XL Bullies when I read up on the terrible breeding practices and some of the background to the fatal attacks where they weren't owned by the typical drug dealer types.

I know it's crazy to feel you have to do this but effectively the only way of having any protection against them is to take a choke chain out.

The only thing that stops them is being choked until they pass out.

(I also hate the breeders for putting people and dogs in this situation. No-one wants to kill a dog and they didn't ask to be bred like this but obviously I would defend my own against an attacking dog if I had to)

I think some perspective is needed here. I'm not denying that these dogs are powerful or that certain lines within the breed may have inherent issues due to poor breeding practices and inbreeding. I for one certainly do not believe that someone breeding to sell to drug dealers is breeding for the best temperament and with all the correct health and DNA tests. But the fact remains, even with these dogs in existence you are still statistically more likely to win the lottery or be killed in an accident involving a balloon.

The overwhelming majority of these dogs will never go on to bite a human much less kill a stranger in the street.

@ToBrieOrNotToBrieThatIsTheQuestion I've heard of that club before. I'd be interested to know how stringently they apply their ethics to breeding. Either, a lot of these dogs being bred are coming from unregistered breeders or the breed club does not apply their own rules very strictly. Personally, I'm inclined to believe the former is true.

I've met and spoken to some lads with an XL bully who were trying to register her to breed and the temperament tests and health tests they told me she was required to pass were very comprehensive. I'd be happy to allow these types of XL to continue being bred.

As a bit of anecdata, I was at a dog-friendly tourist town today and met two or three of these dogs (one was, imo, a pitbull, not an XL Bully) and they were all impeccably behaved and under perfect control. Ditto the Staffy I saw who was dutifully following its high-as-a-kite, foul-mouthed owner.

Here's another 'lottery winner' @Frequency

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-66817795

Here we go

Thanks for the examples @wheresmymojo - sorry I didn't reply yesterday.

Just saw Sunak announce the XL ban on Twitter. I have my reservations - as already posted - but in absence of them wanting it being to totally overhaul dog law, not sure what else they could have done.

Well now see, I guess.

Thank god the government have done something. Will this result is the euthanasia of all of them?

@Frequency I don't care if you're less likely to be killed by an XL bully than a balloon or win the lottery, there's absolutely no good reason to support the breeding and ownership of dangerous dogs. And if you so much try to suggest they aren't dangerous, after so many innocent people have been killed and hurt, then shame on you. We don't NEED XL bullies, there's zero benefit of having them over any other dog breed. So I'm pleased they're banned.

This was a good thing to see

Tg for that

Thank god the government have done something. Will this result is the euthanasia of all of them?

No but there will be a lot of clauses they have to comply with in order for the existing dogs to be 'grandfathered in' as an exempt dog

From Wikipedia

The process for getting a Section 1 dog exempted includes proving to the court that the dog is not a danger to public safety, that it is owned by a 'fit and proper' person to be in charge of a dog, that the dog is already neutered and microchipped,[Note 1] and that the owner has obtained third-party insurance that would cover an incident of bodily injury or death of a person caused by the dog. Ongoing conditions include keeping the dog at the address listed, notifying of address changes, notifying of the death or export of the dog, keeping the dog muzzled and on a lead in public places, keeping the dog securely to prevent escape, and maintaining all previous conditions for the life of the dog.[18]

The Act established the Index of Exempted Dogs and the Animal Welfare section of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) oversees the administration of the Act and the Index.[16]

Initially, dogs born before 30 November 1991 were eligible to be put on the Index of Exempted Dogs (a grandfather clause). Applications were received for over 8,000 dogs; 5,223 dogs received their Certificate of Exemption.[19] Dogs born after 30 November 1991 were not eligible to be on the Index, and it was expected the Index would cease after the death of the last of the original 5,223 dogs. However, the 1997 amendments expanded eligibility, effectively continuing the Index. As of 2015, there were 3,001 Pit bull terriers on the Index, 6 Dogo Argentinos, 0 Fila Brasilieros, and 3 Japanese Tosas.[20] As of 2018, there were 3,514 Pit bull terriers, 3 Japanese Tosas, 13 Dogo Argentinos, and 0 Fila Brazilieros.[21

I'm glad the Government are going to act.
I fear It won't stop dogs being used as weapons by idiots though.

At no point have I denied that there are possible issues with some lines in this mix of breeds. In fact, I explicitly said there may be issues in some lines in the very post you took the balloons comment from.

Before this mix came into existence drug dealers and their ilk were breeding and buying staffies, before the staffies it was pit bulls and rotties. They have had brief dalliances with GSDs and the northern breeds however the number of attacks by these dogs exceeds those of the pit bull etc. I don't think this is necessarily proof that there are definitely issues. It could just be that there are more of them in existence than there were staffies but it is something I believe needs to be looked at/researched in more detail.

It's put me off owning/working with these dogs whereas I wouldn't think twice about bringing a Pit into my home provided it was an adult and assessed by a trusted, experienced behaviorist or a pup from a provable, reliable line.

The point I have been making throughout this thread is that banning them is not going to work. It didn't work when we banned Pitbulls and it won't work now. Dog attacks have risen steadily year on year since well before breed-specific legislation came into play and they've continued to rise since BSL.

We can keep adding dogs to the banned list adfinitum but until we look at the end of lead where the issue actually lies attacks will keep rising.

A few years ago we were having this very same discussion about staffies and before that about pitbulls and rotties. After these dogs are banned we will be having this very same discussion about their next chosen breed/cross.

I'm happy to see they are being banned. When it goes wrong, it goes very wrong. We sadly know this too well!

I doubt it will work. Sadly what needs to be banned is human stupidity and macho show offs, and that’s not possible.

It’s so sad because of the anti all
dog sentiments these idiots and their digs brought on all other dog owners and dogs. There is thread where posters are baying for all dogs to be muzzled and leashed and so on.

The government should have acted faster, but then do they ever?

I doubt it will work. Sadly what needs to be banned is human stupidity and macho show-offs, and that’s not possible.

True, but it is possible to legislate breeding live animals. We can therefore at least minimise the number of stupid, macho show-offs breeding dogs and we can limit the damage the stupid, macho show-offs who do breed can cause.

A law needs to be put into place whereby all animals whose offspring are to be sold must be registered and assessed by a professional for health and temperament issues and all humans who intend to breed must be licensed. It's very possible that all of the XL Bullies would fail a health test anyway. I very much doubt they are healthy. Their weight-to-height ratio is not natural and cannot be good for their joints. Any animal who gives birth "accidentally" cannot have their offspring sold, instead, they must be rehomed through a registered rescue.

Ban advertising the sale of live animals on social media platforms and websites like Gumtree and only allow it via breed associations and the KC who can check the parents are registered and have passed the required assessments.

I feel absolutely sick thinking about another person, a full grown adult human, dying in such an horrifically painful way. Anyone that has been bitten by a dog knows how painful it is. To actually die from being savaged by dogs is beyond horrific and NO ONE should have to be a risk of that.

I've had to come off Facebook. If I see one more fucking crying emoji at the prospect of muzzling a fucking lethal weapon I'll explode. Enough is enough. Get rid of them all, bastard things. And I say that as a dog owner.

The overwhelming majority of these dogs will never go on to bite a human much less kill a stranger in the street.

They have a higher potential due to their grip bite.

They aren't routinely muzzled as some breeds are. I've never seen one muzzled.

That indicates to me that owners aren't responsible.

And as such shouldn't own them. Unfortunately the type of owner who most frequently wants to own them appears to be the type who shouldn't.

Just because you want a dog doesn't mean you should have one.

And the desire to own an XLbully is a red flag in itself to me. Knowing what a ranges of breeds of dogs are like, and also a range of dogs within a single breed.

Their weight-to-height ratio is not natural and cannot be good for their joints.

These toad bullies being bred on Instagram etc are absolutely horrific. They can't walk.