To think there should be more controls on dogs and more banned breeds

[Merryclaire]

Just seen on the news that another young child has been killed by dogs - that must be at least 4 this year in the UK - there have been a number more that have thankfully not been fatal. Always seems to be (most often) a US bully or sometimes a husky. Why are there not more dog breeds being banned (especially the bully)? And why is there not more noise about dog ownership rules in general being tightened up?
For the record I have always liked dogs but these regular child attacks scare me.

Oh goody, another dog bashing thread, it's been a whole half hour since the last one.

Because we already have four banned breeds in this country and it's done absolutely nothing to prevent dog attacks.

In fact, I believe dog attacks have actually increased in number since we banned certain breeds.

I think it’s hard to prove a breed. And it’s not only pure bred or a certain breeds that kill.

And very often it’s not the dog that’s the problem, it’s the adults.

Banning breeds hasn’t worked yet. If it did then given that the previous four breeds were banned in 1994, there should be none left in the country, as those dogs would have been neutered and would now have died naturally by now without any offspring. But there are banned breeds still here. I don’t see how adding more breeds to useless legislation will help.

I don’t see how banning certain breeds can increase dog attacks and if it’s not reducing them then there needs to be tighter controls about ownership in general.
And this is not a commentary at all the gentle dogs out there, which I know are the majority.

While I do think there should me more controls put in place in regards to who can own a dog, I don't feel it is right to ban certain breeds. Bull breeds get bad press, mainly because the ratio of their power against a small human is huge, but lets not forget a couple of years ago a baby was mauled by a jack russle. Any dog can do damage and no child should be let unsupervised with any dog, but banning certain breeds won't stop dog attacks.

Because banning a breed doesn't stop people breeding other kinds of perfectly legal dogs that are just as dangerous when they end up in the wrong hands.

How many more breeds do you want to ban? We've already banned the Dogo Argentino, the Japanese Tosa, the Filo Brasiliero and the American Pit Bull Terrier and it has done nothing to reduce dog attacks, nor has it stopped those dogs existing in the UK.

The children aren’t always left alone with the dogs though - a couple of times recently it sounds like a dog just attacked and the parents couldn’t stop it. A baby was recently killed by a stranger’s dog and they couldn’t do anything. How many more children need to die like this before laws change?

@coffeecupsandfairylights most of the recent attacks seen to be the US bully - that can’t be a coincidence.

Banning breeds doesn't work. We need tight controls on ownership.

Police background checks, breed education , compulsory training.

People need to put much more thought into the breed they get , most average homes cannot offer a dog the correct exercise and stimulation , homes like this should stick to lap dogs. Unfortunately many get working dogs or big powerful dogs with zero thought to the dogs needs.

It’s hard to price or disprove definitively what is a Pitbull. This is the gov site:

Whether your dog is a banned type depends on what it looks like, rather than its breed or name.

Example
If your dog matches many of the characteristics of a Pit Bull Terrier, it may be a banned type.

And this is what the RSPCA thinks about the legislation: https://www.rspca.org.uk/getinvolved/campaign/bsl

Most countries are repealing these laws because they just aren’t useful or effective.

It's not a recognised breed in this country so how would you go about banning them?

They're just a mixture of various dogs bred to look a certain way.

So if you banned them (not sure how you'd monitor it), what happens when everyone goes on to badly breed a different type of dog? Ban them too?

It is the irresponsibility of people that cause the issues. Humans are nearly always the problem.

As a seperate issue, more should he done on cracking down on breeding. Frenchies, pugs etc are a perfect example of health deformation yet people still breed and buy them. Breeders should be licensed and insured, and professionals (if you can call them that).

Insurance and licences for owners too. Can't afford a pet and all that comes with it, can't have one (changes in person situations excluded).

If it’s so hard to legislated banned breeds then there needs to be much tighter control on dog ownership, training, leads etc.

For a start all dogs should be kept on a lead when outdoors.

Banning more breeds won't make any difference, because people don't see dogs for what they are.

Given most fatal dog attacks occur in the home, this probably wouldn't make any significant difference to the statistics.

I don't necessarily disagree but how would you enforce this, given anyone can go out and buy a dog from a stranger on the internet?

Agree with last poster. It would be nice if more areas of the country were taken back from dog owners. It would nice to have half of the parks (and I mean parks, not play parks) dog free for instance, where you could have a picnic without it being ruined, and play football without endless dogshit and dogs running off with and busting balls (personal experience).

Who’s policing this? There used to be a dog licence, but again, enforcing this would be money I guess most people would prefer to be spent on something else.

Bad owners (& bad breeders) make bad dogs. Bad owners aren’t going to go to training classes or use specific leads. Bad breeders continue to make money from dogs kept in poor conditions. The government should start there if anywhere.

Any large to medium short coated dog that is involved in any sort of incident will be reported as a "US bully" . However, people are really bad at identifying dog breeds.

It would probably make the situation worse overall.

Making it harder to adequately exercise dogs - they really do need a bit of a run around - so they end up going stir crazy. As is often said, a tired dog is a good dog. Most fatal dog attacks occur in the home - it's not hard to see how a dog that's always been a bit dodgy could be tipped over the edge by inadequate exercise.

In Finsbury Park there's a dog free picnic area, which is fenced off.

Imagine my surprise when walking DDog in the park, I discovered the dog free picnic area was deserted but the general use areas (where dogs are allowed) had loads of picnickers in it. Clearly there isn't as much demand for such areas as you imagine.

There should be no banned breeds or stronger controls on dogs.
There should be stricter policing of dog breeders and owners. Licensing with mandatory training/socialisation classes and insurance as part of that scheme. Also much harsher punishments for owners of out of control, unlicensed and violent dogs.