To want a ban on dangerous dogs as pets?

[humanity15]

I feel this is a matter of public safety and people need to be informed.

Whilst working for a well known dog rescue charity I was attacked by a breed banned in many countries, but not here.
Because it was not banned it was taken in just like any other dog.

My story can be found on youtube.

With many years of experience in the dog sector what I see happening on our streets right now is frightening.

Those advising the government on dangerous dogs are giving bad advice and as a result putting people's lives at risk.

People do not understand dogs, especially genetics. Because of this attacks will keep happening and people are going to get killed.

All dogs have inherited characteristics. Certain ones are stronger in certain breeds depending on what they were originally bred for.

Although all dogs can bite, there is a huge difference in why they bite and this unless understood could prove fatal.

To communicate a dog will often give signals. So if it feels uncomfortable with someone coming too close it may put its ears back, cower, tuck its tail in etc.
If these signs are ignored the dog may resort to biting as a last resort.
Once it has effectively communicated, with the person moving away it will stop.

This is totally different to a dog biting because it has been bred to fight and has a strong drive to do so.

This drive has been bred into certain breeds of dogs on purpose. How strong that drive will be different for every individual dog depending on what has been passed down.
No amount of good will is going to change this.
This is your starting point before any external influences.

Instead of breeding that instinct out what we are now seeing is the result of the opposite having been done.
Individual dogs that have shown high aggression have been bred from resulting in literally ticking timebombs now out on our streets.

No amount of cute photos or affection will change this.
No dog trainer or behaviourist no matter how good can do anything because this is in the dogs genes.
All that can be done is for this instinct to be surpressed, it cannot be removed.
At some point under certain circumstances it will come out.

If you have a dog with a high drive to fight you could be in serious trouble and so can anyone who encounters that dog.

When it takes sometimes five people and tazers to get a dog off someone that is serious.

• This is what people are not being told but what they need to know.

Dogs are not good or bad, they just are.

Just because a dog brings you something because it was bred to retrieve does not make it bad.
This is the same for a dog bred to fight. It is doing what we have basically programmed it to do.
The fact we see one instinct as acceptable and one not is not the dogs fault, it is ours.
We are the ones who have brought both these dogs into our homes and labelled them as pets.
Certain dogs should never have been expected to fulfil this role.

Dogs are not morally driven, they will not sit and contemplate what they are about to do they just react.

They have the mental age of a toddler, a young child at best.

It is so important we understand and remember this to keep everyone safe.

The charity have had every opportunity to inform the public, but have chosen not to.

New members of staff only find out about the safety record of this charity through other staff informing them.
They are not aware when they are contemplating working for them.

There is currently a letter surrounding what took place at this charity on the
All Party Parliamentary Dog Advisory Welfare Group.
There is also many suggestions of what changes need to happen.
The MP's in the group are well aware of what happened as are many members of the Lords.

I'm sorry you didn't like the video, it wasn't meant to be entertaining.

This post is about public safety and an important discussion that needs to be had.

For me you clearly have an agenda which is more to do with the charity than the dogs which is never going to be helpful.

I think a serious discussion needs to take place. It is not for me to decide, I can only share my knowledge.
What I see is breeds or 'types' having been bred for aggression being put in a role they are too dangerous to be in, that of a pet in a domestic setting.
Some have been trying to breed this instinct out whilst others have done the opposite.
With no proper regulation on what can be bred or by who we now have a very dangerous situation.
For me it has got out of hand and the only way back is to ban certain breeds/types as pets.
Properly regulate breeders and licence them so they are the only ones allowed to breed dogs. All puppies to be able to be traced back to the breeder.
Catagorise certain dogs and who can own them.
Education around different breeds and also a dogs body language for not just children but for adults.
I would also introduce an acceptable breeds list to prevent more dangerous breeds/types.

People in the US are already starting to move on to the next 'trend' in totally unsuitable dogs...

Kangals and Alagais

Potentially even worse than XL Bullies.

Alabais (not Alagais!)

OK I get the kangal a bit it looks like a cute Shiba inu tail.with a lab boxer face

But most of these aggressive breeds aren't even cute or attractive!!! They look like bald hellpigs. Sorry. The bullies look like gammons.

I have strong feelings about this due to personal experience. We have massive issues with dogs being bred for quick cash and certain types of people seeking out big, powerful breeds. The only way is to make it illegal to breed, buy , sell or give away any dog without an official contract and health meeting. By this , I mean by law the animal must be handed over in the company of a vet nurse who conducts a basic dog health MOT and books the vaccines and neutering ( paid for upfront) and then prints a dog ID card to match its chip. Any animal , in public at any time ( or encountered during a police or social worker visit) without this is removed. There should be an outright ban on breeding pit bull type breeds too. It’ll eventually wash the criminals out because no one will buy animals that they can’t walk or show anyone. Reputable breeders of safe breeds should be vetted annually to keep their licences. If someone can’t pay £200 to chip and register the animal then they Can’t afford it’s insurance and training etc can they?

BSL would work if the police actually upheld the law.
i agree with banning bull breeds and the types of dogs that can do serious damage.

100% agree with the poster. There are many dogs like this in my area and it makes me scared to walk on the street. Ofc a jackrussel can be aggressive, but it’s unlikely to overpower an adult on the otherside if the street.

recently I was in a beer garden with an XL bully off the lead, complained to management and the owners said “ wouldn’t hurt a fly”. Why would you get this breed if you are truly looking for a family dog with a kind gentle temperment ?

My other issue is that a 3 bed semi with a tiny garden is not appropriate for a dog that is bread to hunt bears! It’s just not! And this inappropriate environment makes them even more unstable.

Your issue is with the Dogs Trust and the branch you worked at. They failed to implement simple health and safety policies that would have prevented or reduced your attack.

I work at a rescue shelter. Dogs are categorised according to breed and temperament. Initially all dogs are categorised the highest risk until more is known about them.
Any of the highest risk categories need 2 handlers, at least one experienced and trained.
All staff carry a radio with a panic button.
Break sticks, fire extinguishers and slip leads are placed around the place incase of emergencies.
Behavioural assessments would be carried out, and the dogs risk category updated as necessary.

That particular breed would have been one of the higher risk categories to start with due to size but livestock guardian breeds are not particularly known for being aggressive.

I highly doubt they would be put onto your list of banned dangerous dog breeds.

I will also say that I do agree certain breeds of dogs, or certain individual dogs that have shown worrying behaviour, should not be rehomed.
However rescue centres get vilified for every dog they put down.

If they put it down for being a certain breed- ‘murderers’ ‘Deed not breed’ ‘There’s no bad dogs, just bad owners’

If they put it down because it has a bite history or resource guarding or food aggression- ‘murderers’ ‘just needs training’ ‘every dog deserves a chance’ ‘just needs the right home’

Can’t win. I am a huge dog lover and dedicate my life to dogs, but I think we are too precious in this country, and too reluctant to euthanise. There are thousands of balanced, friendly dogs in rescue centres, why do we insist on putting a risky dog out into the community?

You won't get dogs banned , they've already said if you ban a certain breed the Chavs will just turn their attention to another breed .
You need to stop indiscriminate breeding not ban certain breeds .

DD and I went to China 10 years ago. We were told the average salary was £3,000 pa and a dog license was £6,000. Dogs were very much a status symbol and only allowed outside after 10 pm. Despite visiting several mega cities and the countryside in 2.5 weeks, we only saw 2 dogs and they were at night.

I agree

I have spent the last few years campaigning for better protection for whistleblowers as well as sharing my knowledge on dangerous dogs.

I've spoken with the Chief Executive of the charity where I worked about what needs to change.
To lose the trust of staff is a disaster, especially when you are working with potentially dangerous dogs.

What happened didnt just affect me, it affected all those in this sector, especially the dogs.
When people don't feel protected enough to speak out things don't get reported.

One of the things i've said needs bringing in immediately is an annonomous system for staff to report near misses and accidents.
Not only does non reporting put other staff in danger and those who the dogs are rehomed to, it also puts the dogs at greater risk of losing their lives.
If caught early, intervention can take place before a problem escalates.

I have a campaign page where I have called for various measures to be put in place to protect rescue workers.
I've also called for people to continue to support the charity.
I do not want the charity to suffer which is why they have been given every opportunity to inform the public.

People have no idea just how important whistleblowers are.
Without them not just you and me, but every last soul on this planet is at risk.

So yes, this charity needs to be honest with the public for the sake of all those in this sector and the wider population.

If not then like you see in the statement my colleagues sent, fear quickly spreads and people are put in danger as a result.

This cycle needs breaking

@Quisquam

When it comes to animals, China isn't a good role model to follow. When it comes to animals, wild and domestic, they have the biggest cruelty record in the world.

Do you honestly think installing dog licence fees that would bar everyone from owning a dog apart from the very rich I'd the way to go?

And ban all breeding of dogs for two years, all imports of dogs from anywhere for any reason, all clipping, docking etc of ears and tails. Every single dog should be chipped and dna'd when a pup. Any that are not should be seized and taken to a reputable rescue for rehoming, and there should be wardens everywhere checking dogs etc.

@Prescottdanni123

I am well aware of the Chinese attitude to animals. However I do think there is a middle way to controlling, who can own a dog. Dogs are not here, imo to be used as weapons by people, who have no real idea how to look after a dog properly! We don’t let people loose on the roads with a car, with no driving lessons or knowledge of the highway code. What is the difference - both can kill people?

@Quisquam

I agree measures need to be put in place. In an ideal world, everyone would have dog licences (I say this as a dog owner) but who is going to keep on top of it all?

But dog licences that cost twice as much as the average salary? For one, that would rule most people in the UK out of owning a dog (and there are plenty of responsible, loving dog owners in the UK) and two, irresponsible dog owning doesn't start and end in council estates. A dog licence would need to protect dogs from people as well as protecting people from dogs. The worst case of dog cruelty I've seen, and reported, was carried out by a millionaire land owner.

I agree that many dogs kept as pets are unsuitable. Any guardian dogs or breed powerful enough to kill is a project very few have time and knowledge to take on, and rescue dogs may have a host of complicating issues. OK to take on an anxious, overprotective rottie if you are home all the time, go for 8 mile walks every day, have a spacious secure garden and are an expert in dog behaviour and training - plus you are willing to stay away from other people and dogs in case your rescue gets triggered. But people like that are a tiny part of the population. We should never have made these dogs pets, and I would be happy to see all dangerous and potentially lethal dogs banned. I don't want them all put to sleep, but there must be a way to phase them out.

Which breeds would you like banned?

YANBU
When on earth is this government going to wake up and do something about it!!

I absolutely agree. I'm so sick of those that will come on and say it's not the breed it's the owners. Well the last few dogs I've read about were well loved family pets. Some breeds through no fault of their own have that instinct. It's in their dna. I was so relieved when my DDs boyfriend had to give up his xl bully because they stupidly bought one into the property they rent and the landlord told them it has to go. I was so scared for my dgs. Now they want to move so they can get the dog back. Actually in this case I do blame the owners because the boyfriend is an idiot having one of those breeeds in a flat for starters. They aren't family pets they need to be in the right environment not attached to some idiot who thinks they look hard.

I like the Swedish system where all dogs have to be registered, all puppies need to attend training and no dog can be left for a maximum of 6 hours. Also they have to have an outside view if they are left inside and need to be leashed in cities and public places. There are very few abandoned dogs as a result. They also have pretty strong breeding laws

Lol sure. It’s just a concidence that XL bullys continue to mail and kill humans. Funny how it isn’t Shih Tzu whi do it. I wonder why that is

I’m actually quite horrified that people know certain breeds are killing humans and other dogs at alarming rates and they just shrug and say ‘Oh well Irving can be do e’.

People in the UK are weird about dogs.