Dog walker killed by her own XL Bully Breed dog.

[BethDuttonsTwin]

NOT a pack of 8 dogs as was reported repeatedly with concurrent complete slating of all professional dog walkers.

Absolutely awful. So many of us who have worked with dogs knew this would be the outcome and that packs of 8 dogs do not behave in this way.

After investigations are complete we are now told that the only dog destroyed was the walkers own XL Bully Breed dog. Over and over again it is these dogs and still today I see a man strutting around my locale with two of these type dogs, both unneutered and off lead 🤷🏼‍♀️

Now confirmed as Bully XL.
This is all well out of control.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12103379/Man-37-mauled-death-dog-horror-attack.html

Now there is a surprise.

No surprise there
Something has to change, there are so many now

My goodness- The man who was killed was trying to “ Play fight “ with it?

Horrific.
I just don’t understand that type of “Play”

Any dog who is descended from fighting breeds could so obviously be dangerously triggered by this- And the man paid with his life.

Awful. He probably had no idea as to how dangerous this could be.

This is the kind of training facilities being promoted on social media to idiots with macho breeds and toxic ideas.

Whilst many owners of dangerous dogs (ie, dogs who behaviour dangerously) will not send a dog to a trainer nor hire one, THIS is the sort of shit they are watching and aspiring to. This is the kind of dangerous bollocks they're messing about with, with their mates in parks, in carparks and empty warehouses and in the woods and their own back yards... It is absolutely fucking everywhere, and these trainers are telling people they must train their dogs to do this sort of thing, they must have dogs capable of personal protection because they're at risk everywhere they go (from who I really don't know)...

Absolutely fucking horrible -that table set up is used to tether a dog to using a slip or prong collar, if the dog comes off the table or falls off it will hang. The dog learns this fast and then has to stay on the table whilst the handler agitates and intimidates it... and it learns to bite the handler (yeah, no, I do not know why). The dogs on beds behind the guy in teh thumbnail, they stay put or they get an electric shock, they are all trained through fear and pain, trained to lunge at people, bite people... and then off back to their family pet homes.

When you see dickheads like this, unregulated, undoubtedly uninsured, promoting their 'skills' and ideas to the idiots that buy big, fast, powerful dogs... now you see why we have a huge problem.

Where do the dogs that fail this type of training end up - sold on FB for £200, sold down the pub, rehomed to a mate who fancies himself as a trainer...

these trainers are telling people they must train their dogs to do this sort of thing, they must have dogs capable of personal protection because they're at risk everywhere they go (from who I really don't know)...

Tbf I think you touch on an interesting point there, even if unintentionally.

Aside from just being used as a tough guy posturing accessory, I wonder if many of these young males do partly have these dogs as a misguided form of dealing with their fears of personal safety. A bit like men carrying guns in America really.

When you think about it, it's surely not that hard to imagine why young men might feel intimidated. You say slightly incredulously that you can't imagine why they think they're at risk everywhere they go, but let's be honest loads of women feel this way even despite us being much less likely to be attacked. We see it all the time on here.

If you take a woman's fear of personal safety and add that to a situation where you're 4x more likely to be attacked by a stranger than the average woman and are part of the demographics making up 70% of murder victims....it starts to not seem all that confounding after all. Especially when you consider the type of lads owning these dogs are often young and from deprived areas where they're even more likely to encounter violence.

I'm not a fan of all this protection training that seems to be all the rage in the US, but I'd much rather encounter a properly trained protection dog than a poorly socialised/trained dog that's been cooped up in some chav's flat.

Ideally, you just want a well socialised animal that has never been encouraged to bite or attack anything, but proper protection dogs as trained in law enforcement fashion need to be well adjusted animals with restraint. Many fail because they don't actually want to bite people and this usually has to be encouraged in the dog as many would prefer to just bark, even if their owner is being attacked. Others are just too unstable or without enough restraint.

A dog like the one below would scare me much less than one with no training at all.

I've said for years that a huge part of the appeal for young people, particularly young men... often living in deprived areas which are scary, full of scary people... is that these dogs are:

Easy to train (most will work for a fuss or a speck of food, the fact they've pleased you will do them!)..
Super cheap and easy to feed
Rarely need vet bills for illness
Intimidate others simply by existing

A huge part of the problem is we have big sectors of society who feel fucking vulnerable, and that often goes in hand with poor economic status, poor educational levels...

You can get nicked for carrying a knife or a gun, and they can be used against you, but having a dog with you...... that feels safer, it feels like your own dog would be loyal to you (and by extension your family and friends)... its the obvious choice for many.

How utterly asinine these men are.

Just beggars belief.

They are basically tormenting those dogs who are put in tiny spaces and then triggered by an arsehole with a stick??

Heck, even placid breeds at dog events can “defend “their crates with a growl they feel another dog is coming too close-

Why do these twits feel so weak that they need a dog that is capable of killing them or their children, or someone else?

I respect people who train their dogs to be calm and well socialised-

Police dogs need to be calm and obedient- and to release their grip on command.
They select early on for suitable candidates- bold yet calm.
Not nervous and unstable.

It looks easy to wind a dog up - The skill lies in switching off the behaviour when requested, surely?

And bull breeds, Malinois etc... are very very easy to wind up, very quick learners... once learned... very very hard to unlearn!

The end of that video, it takes three or four different cues to get the dog to 'out' and this is a promotional video, this is them showing off how GOOD they are...... if thats their 'good', I dread to think what their bad looks like!

This is just one example though, there are now tons of these trainers up and down the country, selling their training methods to unsuspecting people, both those who actively want a 'protection' dog and those who just mistakenly believe this is how training should be done. They offer residential training too (almost all such set ups do), where you can send them your dog for them to torture and abuse into a dangerous and unhappy, four legged liability.

Of course with all the people who rushed into lock down puppies then returning to work finding they had an unruly dog they could'nt handle and had no time for... loads of people went for that option and those dogs are now older adolescents... perhaps on their second or third home now....

It isn't just the big macho breeds though, I've seen such trainers using awful methods near enough guaranteed to produce a dog that is a danger, on breeds like cockapoos, cavapoos, schnoodles etc.

@MovinGroovinBarbie Mmm... I disagree, I don't think anyone should have protection trained dogs unless a licenced guard dog/security handler, with some kind of permit authorising them...

That dog btw is trained using prong collars and shock collars, you can see the box on his wide collar and the prong collar round his neck. So he's been trained with pain to do as he's told. That is proven to be risky and increase the chances of aggressive behaviour towards humans.

Agree - I'm not trying to victim blame but he was very foolish. Dogs "play-fighting" very easily become over-excited, and with a breed of this type that can very easily slip into a proper attack - especially if he hurt the dog, either accidentally ir because he was trying to fight it off.

An awful attack which has left a young family fatherless.

I'm a long time Mumsnet user but I have name changed for this post as I know I'm probably going to get grief somewhere along the line!

I am sick to death of seeing the hatred across the site for bullies/mastiffs etc. I own a Bully. He's actually a cross breed (bully X corso X DDB X neo).

HE IS NOT A STATUS DOG.

STATUS DOGS AND "PERSONAL PROTECTION DOGS" ARE THE ISSUE HERE.

It isn't a breed thing, it's an owner thing. At the moment, the irresponsible "protection dog" owners have Bullies or Corso's. When I was a kid they had Rotties or dobermans. Then they had GSD's. Then they had Staffies.

My dog, and all of the others of similar breeding that I know - including some siblings are wonderful dogs.

Do some of them end up in bad hands? Yes

Are some "trained" by dodgy 'protection' trainers? Yes.

Would a reasonable and responsible owner ever dream of doing protection training unless there was just cause? No.

These dogs, like breeds before them, have become a status symbol for a small minority of people. It is that minority that cause an issue. It's a very similar thing to knife crime - except the dog is the weapon. Certain people see dogs as their legal weapon.

The breed, the dog, doesn't need banning but the people do. For every owner of a bully or mastiff X there is a "protection" trainer that is genuinely clueless and quite frankly dangerous.

The majority of owners understand how to be a good dog parent. The majority research their breeds and characteristics and make informed decisions as to the breeds they would like to take on. The majority train their dogs to be good citizens.

Sadly, there will always be the minority who choose a dog based on appearances alone - whether that's a Frenchie or a bully...obviously for a different reason. The breeds may change but those people are always there - certain people will always want the "fashionable" dog and certain people will always want the "tough" dog that's currently fashionable.

It isn't right and it isn't fair.

When I was a child 30+ years ago Rotties were the most hated dog. My parents owned a Rottie (they rescued him) when they moved into our family home there was a petition against their dog....who was soft as tripe and had done nothing to anyone ever. This was purely based on his breed.

Not every Labrador is capable of going shooting. Not every border collie can be a sheepdog. Not every spaniel can be a house dog. NOT EVERY BULLY HAS THE PROPENSITY TO BE A KILLER.

Do some of them end up in bad hands? Yes

Are some "trained" by dodgy 'protection' trainers? Yes.

Are all of them selectively bred to form a breed that is predisposed and honed for fighting to the death with as much power as possible?

Yes.

Ok, do you have a source for this?

I don't dispute that this happens occasionally, as with other breeds. I don't dispute that at the moment they are the status dog of choice for some people.

They are not solely bred to fight!!

NOT EVERY BULLY HAS THE PROPENSITY TO BE A KILLER.

Do you have a crystal ball?

How do you know which individual dog is capable if just turning and which isn’t?

Do you honestly think some of these owners or family members that have been killed by their own dogs thought they were capable of it?

@AmericanBullyOwnerAMA

“The majority of owners understand how to be a good dog parent. The majority research their breeds and characteristics and make informed decisions as to the breeds they would like to take on. The majority train their dogs to be good citizens. “

When you say “the majority of owners” are you talking about the majority of large bull breeds / mastiffs/ cane corals? Because if you are, you’re seriously deluded.

If anything I would say the opposite. The majority (but obviously not all) of the people who but these status dogs (and the ones that you rightly point out were there equivalents in the 80s, 90s, 00s etc) often do eff all research. Live in smaller than needed for size of dog / cramped spaces with untrained, unsocialised and under challenged dogs with huge physical capabilities. They don’t neuter when they should and they sometimes allow these dogs around kids when they most definitely should not. That’s a fact. These dogs often are chosen by people on the chaotic edges of society with chaotic lives. For reasons very well explained upthread.

There are of course exceptions. And I’m glad your dog is one. And you as an owner are one.

*cane corsos

Why would any pet owner need to cross need a cane corso and Neapolitan mastiff?
What characteristics would you expect from such a cross?

*cross breed

No, do you?

You can't tell, as you can't with any other dog breed on the planet. Being a responsible owner involves understanding this and setting your particular dog up to succeed.

Yes, I'm fairly sure that some people know what their dog could potentially be capable of but think if they go to the local dodgy trainer it'll be ok.

Or they have gone for the local trainer, trained their dog how to protect then just sort of forgotten about it. This is rife.

The normal "type" of person who has a large breed dog doesn't under estimate their dog and their size. They train them, love them and do everything in their power to make them good doggos! Often more so than owners of smallest dogs!

Ok, do you have a source for this?

The parent breed of the American Bully is the American Pit Bull. The pit bull was bred entirely for fighting, first with other animals, then with other dogs.

https://www.britannica.com/animal/pit-bull

It's just pretty clear that the police should shoot these animals if they are not under control. The risk to human life is not worth it.

Sorry, I was refering to the majority of dog parents and their breed choices.

I agree in regard to people wanting these breeds as status symbols and for that purpose only. Or because they look tough! (If you have one that does I suppose, mine looks like an overgrown puppy 🤣)

“Not every Labrador is capable of going shooting. Not every border collie can be a sheepdog. Not every spaniel can be a house dog. NOT EVERY BULLY HAS THE PROPENSITY TO BE A KILLER.”

Think about your statement with some logic. What’s the outcome when a lab doesn’t have a soft mouth and isn’t great on the shoot? Nothing really - great family pet.
A border collie that lets the sheep get the better of him. Not great for a farmer who bought for that and might want you rehome him blah blah. The consequences of it performing to its breed specifics are NON FATAL and INCONSEQUENTIAL.

A Bully XL that does or doesn’t have the propensity to be a killer … do you perhaps glean that the consequences here are a little bit higher. And that this propensity doesn’t come stamped on its arse when it leaves it’s (backyard) breeder.

FFS. It’s got a bloody jaw as powerful as a lions. So even if it’s a 5% chance it might snap on a given day and turn on me, my kids, someone else’s kid, another dog .. these are all beyond serious consequences.

The fact that you used this analogy really reinforces the idea that people who keep these dogs really are not very bright. at all