Woman 80s, Savaged to Death by Dogs, Birmingham

[Flaxmeadow]

A woman in her 80s has been savaged to death by neighbours dogs
Am I being unreasonable to want much stricter controls on keeping dogs as pets

Ok but whenever I read about someone dying horribly in a dog attack it’s almost always some pit bull/staffie mix. Occasionally Akita or husky

We know which ones are dangerous and which aren’t. Stop pretending otherwise

It's not really that simple. The tabloid media love stories like this because they can whip people into a frenzy, and people find it hard to be objective and rational as a result.

If pits and bully breeds are more likely to kill, it's probably because they're more likely to be owned as a status simple and badly trained (if not deliberately trained to be dangerous - guard dogs, fighting dogs, etc.). If you ban those breeds, the people who kept them for that purpose will just move onto another breed. Rottweilers, maybe. So ban them. They move onto German Shepherds then. So ban them. Then dobermans.. and so forth. Eventually you have to ban all breeds that weigh over 25kg?

Doesn't make sense. Stricter regulation on who can purchase a dog, mandatory education and training classes, etc. is a better idea. Would require massive policy changes and funding though.

Statistically, most kids injured by dogs are bitten by dogs owned by their grandparents. I believe because they are close enough family for adults to be complacent, but not close enough for the dog/s to actually feel comfortable around the kids. Second most common is bites from dogs within the immediate family. So by far the best thing would be mandatory training that INCLUDES teaching families how to behave around dogs, how to read their body language, etc. to keep everyone safe.

[quote Poorlykitten]@BlueEyesWhiteDragon but this is what I’ve been saying all along. Licenses, compulsory puppy classes and training/education for owners. Home checks. Stricter laws on breeding. Dogs on leads in most areas unless designated dog walking areas.[/quote]
Which penalises responsible owners who follow the rules and does nothing for those who are above the law, who tell you its not their dog, they are just looking after it, or breed litters 'accidentally' which is where the risky dogs are.

We had a spaniel years ago who used to bite. I remember us all getting painful bites from him. My parents refused to put it down as it was my sisters beloved pet. That was 25 years ago. If it was now, it would have had the needle long ago

We know which ones are dangerous and which aren’t. Stop pretending otherwise

I've been hospitalised due to a bite from a a 7kg terrier mix - I'd say that dog was pretty fucking dangerous.

We know which ones are dangerous and which aren’t. Stop pretending otherwise

Are you saying my dog bites weren’t serious? They seemed pretty serious at the time. One left a scar.

But if it doesn’t fit your narrative to here about an icklewickle terrier and a noble carriage dog biting a child then that says a lot about your angle on this.

*hear about

I really think a licence to own / keep/ etc dogs would be so much better. Would save a fortune in irresponsible owners being taken to court to be banned too.

Not on the level of this tragedy, but our local park is now almost unusable because of the dogs out of control off leads.

Saying “it’s not mine I’m looking after it” wouldn’t wash as a proper licence scheme would be needed for all keeping of dogs.

Quarter of a million dog bites need hospital treatment each year. Said the nurse doing the stitches and the tetanus jab because some woman could not control her alsatian.

Two warnings from the cops but she still hasn't shot the thing. With luck it will kill her before it attacks someone else.

Any dog that bites a human should be destroyed within 24 hours. At owners cost plus a fine. Then a ten year ban on keeping a dog. Breach that and it should be prison.

We are too soft on this.

@GertrudePerkinsPaperyThing

I really think a licence to own / keep/ etc dogs would be so much better. Would save a fortune in irresponsible owners being taken to court to be banned too.

Not on the level of this tragedy, but our local park is now almost unusable because of the dogs out of control off leads.

I don’t know why you think that. We got rid of them because they were pointless. A pp says they still exist in N Ireland and achieve nothing there either. Compulsory insurance would make more sense.

This is an extract from a US non-profit created to educate about dangerous dog breeds. Clearly, they have an agenda, but they do use evidence based material/case law citations:

www.dogsbite.org/dangerous-dogs-pit-bull-faq.php#bitestyle

Q: Why do people say that pit bulls "don't let go?"

^Through selective breeding, pit bulls have developed enormous jaw strength, as well as a ruinous "hold and shake" bite style, designed to inflict the maximum damage possible on their victims. This bite trait delivered winning results in the fighting pit. When the Colorado Supreme Court upheld the Denver pit bull ban in 2005, the high court set aside characteristics that pit bulls displayed when they attack that differ from all other dog breeds. One of these characteristics was their lethal bite:
"[pit bulls] inflicted more serious wounds than other breeds. They tend to attack the deep muscles, to hold on, to shake, and to cause ripping of tissues. Pit bull attacks were compared to shark attacks." - Kory Nelson, One City's Experience15^

^Leading pit bull education websites, such as Pit Bull Rescue Central, encourage pit bull owners to be responsible and to always carry a "break stick" a tool used to pry open a pit bull's jaws in case their dog "accidentally" gets into a fight. These same websites also warn that using a break stick on any other dog breed may cause serious injury to the person.16 This is true because no other dog breed possesses the pit bull's tenacity combined with a "hold and shake" bite style.
One of the most powerful examples of a pit bull "not letting go" occurred in an Ohio courtroom. During the Toledo, Ohio v. Paul Tellings trial (Tellings was convicted of violating the City of Toledo's pit bull ordinance), Lucas County Dog Warden Tom Skeldon showed a videotape of a tranquilized pit bull hanging from a steel cable. The dog is essentially unconscious and still does not release its grip. At the time of the taping, the pit bull was being housed at the Lucas County Animal Shelter.^

Q: Do pit bulls bite more than other dog breeds?

^Depending upon the community in which you live and the ratio of pit bulls within it, yes and no. But whether a pit bull bites more or less than another dog breed is not the point. The issue is the acute damage a pit bull inflicts when it does choose to bite. The pit bull's "hold and shake" bite style causes severe bone and muscle damage, often inflicting permanent and disfiguring injuries. Moreover, once a pit bull starts an attack, firearm intervention may be the only way to stop it.
When analyzing dog bite statistics, it is important to understand what constitutes a bite. A single bite recorded and used in dog bite statistics is a bite that "breaks the skin." One bite by a poodle that leaves two puncture wounds is recorded the same way as a pit bull mauling, which can constitute hundreds of puncture wounds and extensive soft tissue loss. Despite the "quagmire" of dog bite statistics, pit bulls lead biting incidents across U.S. cities and counties.^

Sorry, for the italics fail. That's all from the website.

Which penalises responsible owners who follow the rules and does nothing for those who are above the law,

Isn't that the same for all laws? They only restrict the actions of the law abiding.

ruinous hold and shake bite style my arse.
Play tuggy with a rope toy with any dog and you will see that move. It’s not particular to any breed.

Such an absolute load of toss on this sort of thread, every time.

Agree that we need to move away from making the problem breed specific and understand that pretty much ANY dog is capable of leaving injuries whether they be fatal, life-changing or requiring medical attention at the least.
Stop looking at them as 'fur babies' and think of them as dogs with associated needs and behaviours. Yes those that buy status symbol dogs won't change and I don't know what the answer to that is. We but we shouldn't accept that a certain number of people will be killed, scarred or require treatment each year just because we are a nation of dog lovers.
People learn pretty quickly when there are consequences. Farmers round here shoot dogs worrying their livestock without second thought. It only took 2-3 instances of this and suddenly dog owners realised that they could keep their dogs on leads and under control and needless to say it hasn't happened for years now.
Make the consequences thought provoking enough and behaviours will change.

@CallmeHendricks
My post did indicate what exactly happened when he was dealing with children who were always petrified of dogs.
When it comes to anyone that shows fear/uneasiness he ignores them,walks away and looks quite sad and disappointed

I would like to see programmes like C4's The Dog House and the lockdown dog programme that the BBC ran last Autumn banned. They turn dog acquisition and ownership into a reality TV show. The latter had a London family, with a small flat and small outdoor space. The husband of the family did not want a dog, and was portrayed as a miserable killjoy for failing to bond with it. Dog ownership is not a game.

@Saucery ,totally agree
I have to yet meet a bully breed that have this kind of grip.
They are usually very gentle in giving back stuff/toys especially wth children.

@Saucery

I was bitten as a child by a JRT and a Dalmatian. Should we ban those breeds? Or recognise that children and dogs need careful and responsible supervision when together?

Did you lose any limbs? Almost die?

I particularly like the story of good old Stephen Potts, an American Bulldog breeder from Durham, who had his arm torn off by two of his OWN dogs in the street. There's karma and Darwinism at play if ever I saw it. I don't think the idiot learnt his lesson though, probably still thinks he's in control of his dogs.

It's not just about the 'size' of these dogs compared to e.g. the height of a Labrador. They are pure muscle, on a very low centre of gravity compared to their size, and even people trying to run them over with cars has been known not to stop them.

Any full grown man who thinks he can stop one of them, let alone the several that some walk, has illusions of grandeur. (Don't even start me on the trend towards harnesses, which gives the dog something perfect to lean in to and gives the owner even less chance of control.)

I am very much a dog lover, but I am also in the camp that there is no place in modern society for dogs of this ilk. Yes, I accept that responsibly owned they may not be a problem to people - although they are often still a serious problem for other dog owners - but somehow we do have to get on top of breeders like Potts above who keep too many large dogs in poor conditions, and a society that does not seriously respond to complaints about the danger posted by these animals when warnings are given.

I don't know what he answer is really. Certainly there should be a manslaughter charge applied to the owner of these dogs, with a serious sentence.

[quote 3JsMa]@Saucery ,totally agree
I have to yet meet a bully breed that have this kind of grip.
They are usually very gentle in giving back stuff/toys especially wth children.[/quote]
Clearly you know more than the US courts and the forensic experts.

Also from the same organisation:

The pit bull's genetic traits are not in dispute. Many appellate courts agree that pit bulls pose a significant danger to society and can be regulated accordingly. Some of the genetic traits courts have identified include: unpredictability of aggression, tenacity ("gameness" the refusal to give up a fight), high pain tolerance and the pit bull's "hold and shake" bite style. According to forensic medical studies, similar injuries have only been found elsewhere on victims of shark attacks.

@GertrudePerkinsPaperyThing

Saying “it’s not mine I’m looking after it” wouldn’t wash as a proper licence scheme would be needed for all keeping of dogs.

So they would confiscate the dog, the irresponsible people would then get another puppy off their mates who had an accidental litter, and never get a licence for that one. No one wins, and the original dogs end up being rehomed

Ah, an advocate of painful choke/prong collars. How nice. We’ll not even dig down into how you have seen people attempting to run dogs over with cars. I suppose you can find anything on the internet, whatever your tastes.

As you are another one who can’t seem to follow a thread - I mentioned being bitten by two breeds in response to OP mentioning children being bitten. She didn’t say anything about limbs being torn off

I do agree with manslaughter charges for those whose dogs kill. But then again, car drivers get away with killing people because sentencing is pathetic, so owning a dog that fatally injures isn’t going to be taken seriously any time soon.

Advertising for stupid cross breeds called idiotic names - Cockerpoos and Labradoodles started the trend but now you get Yorkidoodles and all sorts of totally ridiculous crosses. These are then advertised for silly money - this needs to stop.

SpaceBat you said yourself that organisation isn’t unbiased.
Every dog is equipped to do the ‘hold and shake’ bite. Training a particular breed to do that to another dog, animal or human is the owner’s responsibility, not the dog’s.

People learn pretty quickly when there are consequences. Farmers round here shoot dogs worrying their livestock without second thought. It only took 2-3 instances of this and suddenly dog owners realised that they could keep their dogs on leads and under control and needless to say it hasn't happened for years now.

They shoot dogs on sight here as well, yet every week there's a story on social media from a local farmer who's had a sheep savaged or killed by a dog. Unless a farmer catches you in the act AND happens to have a gun on them, they're not allowed to shoot.

As in, they can only shoot a dog who is actively worrying, they can't do it afterwards.