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.

*where their dog isn't used to children.

One of the issues is who is going to regulate any new rules? The government is already wanting to reduce the civil service to austerity levels. There's no one to do it. Frankly there's not enough civil servants and police etc to do the basics already.
I do agree though dogs are inherently dangerous and people underestimate them (I like dogs usually so not a dog hater).

I want to ban irresponsible, stupid, inconsiderate and negligent dog OWNERS.

so many of these cases occur in chaotic and dysfunctional homes. Or at least careless ones.

It’s always the humans underlying this issue. Dogs are just victims of those who are meant to care for them (and train and protect them).

The etiquette of having your dog off lead should be clearer - dog only a few metres ahead or behind you. Good recall. If you see another dog walker in the distance put the dog on a lead until the dogs have passed each other.

I have a small terrier who is generally calm. Never seen aggression from him. Still wouldn’t leave him alone with a young child as his bite strength and ability to tug is surprisingly strong despite his miniature status.

Here we go again...

This year in the UK a child has been killed in a dog attack almost every month.
Sadly too many dog owners simply do not care. They just dont give a damn and will use every excuse they can to defend dangerous dogs
Yes OP many more breeds/breed types need to be banned but it won't happen, those who defend dogs are part of an increasingly powerful cult like lobby, and more children will be maimed and killed. Nothing will happen. It never does

Dog owners should be made to pay for a regulatory system via dog licensing

@OldWivesTale Yes, because another child has just been killed.

Speaking from personal experience, poo crosses can become reactive because people see a fluffy puppy and allow their "friendly" (aka untrained dog with no recall) to bounce all over a young pup/ teen that is still in its socialisation phase.

Or they allow their dog to come up to an on lead dog despite requests to not allow their dog to approach.

It doesn't matter what the breed is if the owner is a fuckwit! Both of mine have been trained, have excellent recall and are the gentlest creatures around humans. However, because some humans aren't responsible dog owners I'm now having to manage a scared and fig reactive poo cross.

A properly trained dog can bring a lot of joy. But training is a lifelong commitment which people forget. Totally agree with PP who point out that requiring licences isn't the answer.....it would be pretty much unenforceable without other whole scale changes in the way dogs are bought/sold.

Banning breeds isn't the answer though.....just makes the dogs (either pure bred or cross bred) more desirable. There are no easy answers, but on the whole dogs do more good than harm.

To all the people saying it’s the owner’s fault and not the dog’s - I largely agree with you (even though anyone can be caught out).
That’s why the onus should be on people selling, breeding, buying and owning dogs.
You wouldn’t drive a car without passing a test and paying money to learn, be taxed and insured, and follow the rules of the road.
Owning a dog should also be treated as a big responsibility - for the sake of the animals and the people that come into contact with them.

There should be more controls on ownership. Around my part of London the situation is getting quite ridiculous. There is dog poo everywhere and out of control dogs in the park. I like dogs and I am not scared of them in general but there are some dogs that are quite scary and intimidating.

'reactive' is a new word used by dog owners to minimise what is dog aggression
Same with 'nip' when what they're really describing is a bite

2 people were killed earlier this year by falling tree's - shall we ban certain tree types too?

Dogs are a part of nature and are animals, there are things we can do to protect children from animals - but how could you even determine what could be a 'dangerous breed' and what couldnt?

I remember reading a story not long ago about a pack of jack russells attacking and killing an elderly person - hardly the usual 'dangerous dog breed'.

It should always be on the ownership of the parents of the child and the dog owner. I suspect most sensible humans would not allow a known dangerous dog to be in a situation that would kill a human, resulting in their pet being killed and a potential prison sentence. The same way a sensible human doesnt allow a child to play with a toaster in the bath. Common sense and observation is needed all round.

There's a terrifying American Bully near us and I dread seeing it. The owners struggle to contain it, it goes for anything and anyone that is anywhere near it (in public spaces). The owners are not nice people, they are smell time drug dealers and keep the dog in a flat, so whether the dog's temperament is due to nature or nurture, or a combination of both, who knows?

A pit bull isn’t a actual breed, it determined on a number of measurements and characteristics so it’s really hard to prove a dog is a banned breed.

A lot of dog attacks are actually not bull breeds but the deaths are, the bully has the body weight, strength and jaw to cause serious damage making it hard for anyone to pull the dog off. I do think there should be rule around owning a dog, especially a powerful breed and especially if you have children. Many times these dogs are rescue dogs that have been stupidly homed with people who have no idea about the breed and people with children.

I’m a huge fan of the Staffordshire Bull and the English bull terrier, they have amazing personalities and are very loyal, they get a bad press due to getting into the wrong hands and due to the American bull terrier. Huskies are another breed that get into the wrong hands, they are not a easy dog, they tend to have poor recall and like to chase, they don’t make the best pets but people went through a stage of wanting them because they look similar to wolves. People really do need to do their research before buying any breed and need to think long and hard before having a dog around children. Sadly anyone can just go and buy a puppy, this is something that needs to change.

Dogs kept as pets are definatley not part of nature. They did not evolve naturally. Dogs were intensively inbred to service humans and perform tasks. To work, to kill for sport. Whete people think the term pit bull comes from? Its from bull baiting and dog fighting, fighting to the death in a pit for 'sport' and gambling. It amazes me that anyone would want this type of dog in a family home, but they do and its a ticking time bomb

Dog killings in UK are now running on level with mass shootings in USA. There have been at least 5 this year. US has a strong pro gun lobby and UK a strong pro dog lobby. I support a simple annual licensing system. It would not restrict dog ownership in any way. It would not be compulsory except if you wanted to take a dog off your own property. If you want to take a dog off your own property,you would need to get an annual licence. The licence would be for you and any dogs. You would need to take annual tests showing you can control the dog - i.e. it responds to walk ,heel,sit, and stay and you remain in control despite sudden loud noises and triggers like other dogs, cyclists,children etc. The licence fee should cover the costs of running the system. This should gradually deter many irresponsible dog-owners.

2 people were killed earlier this year by falling tree's - shall we ban certain tree types too?

What a stupid comparison - a tree falling is an accident. Arguably a tree could become dangerous overtime, requiring maintenance or removal. But it has no will.
A dog attack is not an accident, and is caused by a mix of the dog’s breeding, background, and lack of training and control. This may be manageable until the dog perceives a threat or annoyance and lashes out, and the owner can’t control its outburst.

I agree.

They're increasingly popular as a status breed bought and breed by young men and teenagers with very little experience.

They're not on leads, have no mussel, no dog licence checkups.

Dog laws are non existence in Ireland rarely enforced.

That’s right, one of the Poo crosses. Little fluffy teddy bear things that are ridiculously popular at the moment. Dog most likely to be untrained with clueless ineffectual owners round here.

I doubt that’s one of the (cross) breeds you want banned though, OP?

No dog should be allowed behave like that, though I'd kick a Poo swiftly a decent distance and would dive in to prevent an attack from one on anyone.

I certainly wouldn't have the strength to kick a muscle bully any distance, I'd also tink twice about stopping an attack by one unless I'd a knife to stab it through the eye so it'd release the victim.

As pp have said who would enforce this? I'd support it (got two dogs myself) but I doubt there are the resources to do this. Unfortunately a lot of people buy dogs without understanding the breed (look at what the dogs were originally bred for), exercise requirements etc, and once they have the dog don't do any training at all. The Kennel Club do run good citizen awards but it's voluntary - again I'd support a test for dog owners but who would run it. I suspect the responsible owners would comply but irresponsible ones wouldn't.
I'd support the enforcement of no dog areas e.g. play parks, sports fields, and some beaches and strict fines for fouling but there should be areas where a dog can run free off lead - keep some beaches and open areas dog friendly so people who don't want to be with dogs know they will be there.

It would be paid for by a big increase in fines, prison sentencing if not paid, and by dog licensing
It's not complicated.
I'd also like to see some kind of environment tax brought in for dog owners, as dogs cause environmental damage, not just to parks, beaches, rivers etc but via the dog food industry as well.

If anyone can come up with a workable licensing system and sensible dog controls in parks etc I would support it. But who is going to come up with it? I know nothing about dogs unfortunately so it won’t be me!

@magnoliaabomination

A dog free picnic area fenced off, with a 'general use' area where dogs are allowed!! Ridiculous! It should be the other way around - the majority of the park should be for people without dogs 😂 Why the bleeding heck should dogs take priority and those humans without dogs be limited to a 'fenced off area'. What a joke.

As said before, who's enforcing this? Hand guns were banned following Dunblane but it hasn't stopped people getting them.
Why just hit dog owners with an environment tax? I've seen a lot of damage caused to beaches with discarded disposable BBQs, used nappies, broken glass, litter etc but are we going to charge people to go on them...