Essex dog attack: Man arrested after woman dies in Jaywick

[SerendipityJane]

Not much to say really.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-68197109

Add to that vulnerable, frail people

For all the glue sniffers claiming that 'any dog' could have done this, do any other dogs breeds kill, decapitate and cannibalise their siblings - even when they have easy access to food?

I've pixelated out the image of a decapitated puppy's head that's being gnawed upon by another pitbull puppy.

Pitbulls, and their derivatives, are not normal dogs. This isn't about how they're raised or how much their owners love them. It is purely genetics.

IMHO the ban doesn't go far enough and they should all be put down.

And that kind of talk, - suggesting insanity just for having a well informed opinion, frankly reflects a shit judgemental attitude. Stinks.
You've blown my statement out of proportion.

This shows a lot of ignorance. And you are cherry picking photographs to boot. I'm sure the sun might be looking for writers you could try them

I think you're mishearing. I'm saying I've worked with all size dogs for years & yes that includes the huge 'dangerous' type breeds. I'm saying from my experience, it's not those that have bitten, or even tried. Any dog can bite in the right circumstances, and you're saying "but these kill because they're bigger" depends doesn't it on how small the human is. A baby could be killed by a little dog & this has happened. The fact that PEOPLE are breeding & exploiting these breeds, to gain financially (hence the breeding), explains the current focus & further the increased reporting of attacks

You cannot argue with statistics. Although I feel some people might try.

Sadly, the people who have been tragically killed in the U.K. are predominantly by a select number of breeds and XL bullies are hugely over represented.

You don’t see many babies being killed by cavapoochons, do you?!

It's funny you should mention The Sun. They have an interview with the owner of these killer dogs.

He said: “Never in a million years did I see [the dogs] as a risk.
“If my dogs did that to her, when I had never seen anything but love from them, then that breed just has a killer switch.

“I honestly thought the ban was a stupid government plan to wipe out a breed which I had never seen anything but softness and love from.
“Now I think they need to be wiped out.

www.thesun.co.uk/news/25740032/rapper-xl-bullies-breed-wiped-out-killed-gran/

A grotesque backpedal, in an attempt to save his own neck.

I'm speechless that (according to that report), one of Esther's daughters still says "People are angry about the dogs. It's not the dogs". Her mother was mauled to death by a cross breed that is infamous for it and she still refuses to acknowledge that the dog's temperament has a role in the incident.

Hideous all round.

That man is a miserable liar facing prison time. He will say anything to save himself

That's exactly what he's trying to do.

I just hope he gets a sensible judge who laughs him out of court (and into a cell for many years).

He had a breeding pair, a litter of 6, and a broomstick to separate them from fighting one another. He isn't fit to own animals or be with children, he's an utter exploitative dolt and if a prison sentence is available I hope they throw away the key. Pig.

Breeding dog's should be illegal unless licenced & made a crime if people do this. And licencing should be really strict the government really need to get on top of this. That's my tuppence worth

If a person breeds more than 3 litters in a 12 month period then they should already be licensed.

Animal breeding law is in need of an overhaul, or at the very least the obvious loopholes (such as the one allowing the mass importation of XL bully semen over the last half a decade) closed.

Harsher sentences for all puppy farming, illegal importation, overbreeding & the banning of breeding dogs for deformities such as brachy faces.

It will never happen, there's no money to be made from animal welfare, but I can dream.

Or we could save ourselves a ton of money in pointless and complex licensing schemes and just ban pet dogs over a certain size.

Through a previous line of work I had to do a home visit and one of these dogs was present. The owner was adamant the dog was friendly, but he had zero control of it- it did not listen to commands at all and was ridiculously strong and powerful. Even its tail wagging felt like a whip against my leg. I sat there absolutely terrified whilst trying to appear as calm as possible as this gigantic muscular dog was practically on top of me, with the owner declaring how friendly it was and telling it to get down (which the dog just ignored). I was so relieved to get out unscathed.

It's not just dogs over a certain size though that's the issue is it? Rescues are crammed, people take on dogs then decide "naa this is hard work/ dog needs training/ this is expensive/dogs not the right size" etc etc. Then it's to the rescue, which are full anyway. Absolutely chocca & now, post COVID, no-one wants to re-home. Yet people STILL breed dogs, & when no-one buys them (because we're in a recession) they are dumped or worse.
Strict breeding laws banning breeding altogether & criminalising it for all breeds. Strict licencing including training for breeding. They've got away with exploiting animals for gain for too long, high time the govt got involved & properly.

Licensing should only ever be for the protection of people or to fund dog control. The public purse should not be used for dog welfare.

And licensing does or should protect people & pets. It's interchangeable with welfare. You cannot separate the two

And licensing does or should protect people & pets. It's interchangeable with welfare. You cannot separate the two

People only need protecting from dogs because other people choose to own those dogs. The people who choose to do that should bear the cost to society of policing it and ensuring that dogs do not impact anybody else's life in a negative way. Pet dogs in residential areas are not necessary for society and there's no reason anybody who doesn't own one should pay towards he costs incurred as a result of others choosing to do so. If people don't want to pay a share of that cost they can choose not to have a dog.

There are plenty of reasons of why owning a pet dog is beneficial to people.
It helps them

• go and take more exercise
• helps against loneliness
• helps people to de-stress
• helps against being attacked/being burgled
• helps you to be less isolated

It doesn't mean that there aren't issues with too many and of the wrong types of puppies being bred though.

A licence would be paid for by the owner but public services need to get on top of the breeding of pets because it's out of control.

The reason it's out of control BECAUSE the licencing laws don't go far enough, you can't trust the person breeding on mass to do the right thing, get licenced & suddenly decide, this isn't good for my neighbourhood or society so I'll just stop breeding dogs.
Change has to come from above it's the only way.

It's not well informed though is it? The statistics don't agree with you. I can't find any UK stats for shih Tzus being more aggressive/biting than XL bullies.

You can position it as your experience and anecdotal but you have to be willing to have that opinion challenged if you are putting it out there to say why everyone else is wrong about XL bullies.

My opinion is that your opinion is insane and I am judgemental about your attitude to this all, yes.

You can separate them. We already do. Tax payers don’t pay for dog shelters, they’re funded by charitable donations. Tax money doesn’t pay for vets, they’re funded by pet owners. The RSPCA etc don’t get government money (except for tiny amounts for special purposes), thank god.

Any licensing should be to allow for punishment of owners who put others at risk and inconvenience (attacks, no control, barking, fouling etc). Nothing else.

The welfare of dogs is not something tax money should pay for. Any more than it should pay for the welfare of guinea pigs or goldfish.

You can separate them. We already do. Tax payers don’t pay for dog shelters, they’re funded by charitable donations. Tax money doesn’t pay for vets, they’re funded by pet owners.

👍🏼Did anyone actually think tax payers money went to dog shelters?!

” Pet dogs in residential areas are not necessary for society “. You could say this about a lot of things…. Shall we target all the unnecessary things. 🤔

A licence would be paid for by the owner but public services need to get on top of the breeding of pets because it's out of control.

The reason it's out of control BECAUSE the licencing laws don't go far enough, you can't trust the person breeding on mass to do the right thing, get licenced & suddenly decide, this isn't good for my neighbourhood or society so I'll just stop breeding dogs.
Change has to come from above it's the only way.

I think you have misunderstood my point and we're talking at cross-purposes. My view is that the dog licence fee should be set at a level where it funds all enforcement activities including dog wardens to take away and PTS any non-compliant dogs, any dogs off lead in a public place that isn't a designated and fenced in dog walked field, confiscate dogs from non-compliant premises with illegal breeding/ insufficient fencing to ensure dogs cannot escape from private property, do spot checks to check dogs seen in public are chipped and from a licenced breeded, etc.,

As much of this cost as possible should be recovered from owners who break the rules through significant fines that will be offset against the cost all dog owners pay, but the whole point is to force the moronic owners to comply with sensible laws then ensure that no humans are negatively impacted by dogs if they haven't chosen to have one, and that this in enforced at the expense of those who do choose to keep dogs, not at the financial or physical expense of the rest of the public.