Another dog attack, man killed, can this just go on?

[IthinkIamAnAlien]

Just on the news - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-66817795

Week after week, there is something wrong with dogs (and the owners) today, I grew up with them and this never, ever happened. Maybe because dogs were treated as dogs and not trophy animals. Awful for everyone.

This is why I am against banning breeds.

Because the breed changes.

I remember that staffys were once seen as the most vicious dogs ever and there were loads of calls to ban them.
I don’t think I’ve ever met a staffy that has a bad temperament and it seems like a different world.

When I was younger it was German Shepards and British bulldogs.

The breed changes but what stays the same is the idiot owners who get them without thinking and then get rid of them just as quick.

Why is it ok for a bad owner to get a spaniel and mistreat it until it snaps but not an XL bully.

And yes I understand that it’s because they can do more damage but if we’re banning a breed then why can’t we put more restrictions in place for all dogs.

I'm a dog owner, I wouldn't love a law being passed to make muzzles essential but I guess I'd go with it.

Tarring all the lovely, friendly dogs with the same brush as the out of control, aggressive ones seems very unfair though 😟

You being anxious is probably why he's timid. Chill the fuck out.

Thses dog threads are always so extreme. No we should not be allowed to shoot dogs, stab dogs or muzzle dogs that don't need to be. We should listen to the actual experts:

However, the Dog Control Coalition, a group including RSPCA, Battersea Dogs Home and the Royal Kennel Club, said banning specific breeds is not the solution - pointing to "irresponsible breeding, rearing and ownership".

I'm really surprised that someone can't understand how other dog owners behave and opinions in wider society should affect rules that govern how you can live your live. This is society, this is how it works.

It is like arguing against speed limits because you only drive at 60 mph in built up areas when no-one is around and always slow down if there is a child nearby.

If these high-profile dog attacks continue, public opinion will change and your view that mandatory muzzling will never happen may well be proven to be incorrect.

Muzzling all dogs in public means dog owners would not have the right to selfishly endanger the rest of us.

If you want to let your dog off its lead, book a dog paddock or do it in a well fenced garden.

Maybe the flip side of this is to ensure all small children are kept on reins so they don’t run up to dogs on leads.

Yes, of course children should be taught not to run up to dogs (predominately for their own protection, not the dogs').
When out of control toddlers are killing dogs, we can put them on reins.

I come from one such country

full of stray dogs. Never saw as much dog shit on the streets than I do in the posh development I live in London. It’s absolutely filthy.

and yes to muzzling

Packing my disposable gloves now…….

Plenty of public places local to me already have notices up saying dogs must be on a lead and owners can be fined.

It's really not a stretch to see that being extended.

It's a huge stretch. You are never going to get such a ban in woodland and open countryside areas. I suspect many people here who want such a ban live in cities and large towns. I don't have an issue with dogs having to be on a lead on pavements and in some parks, but a blanket ban. No - it's just not going to happen.

I'm in favour of making it compulsory to have third party liability insurance for anyone who keeps or walks a dog.

So what are the experts saying about how we actually manage this issue? All I hear on the news is how what is being proposed won't work and little in terms.of credible concrete actions to take that will actually keep people safe from violent dogs that don't rely on their owners suddenly becoming responsible owners.

We need simple rules that are easy to enforce, not complex rules and voluntary actions and training that the target group will just ignore and avoid.

@BreatheAndFocus
you will be handed a tag with the council crest on it (that your dog has to wear 24/7) and your dogs registration number, photo of mutt is kept on file and on the licence given to you, cost to you the owner is £500 per dog

I thought this was just for the dangerous dogs.

I'm happy to be corrected if I'm wrong.

Well if an out of control toddler (or several start to make the dog nervous of children it can be a major issue for the dog and owner

Banning them is pointless in the long run and a knee jerk reaction that is an easy win for government popularity.
The people who use these dogs as a threat and to look aggressive will just find a new breed.
I would rather see mandatory muzzling.

Why do I need to muzzle my gun dog because some little druggie gangster wannabe weaponises or can't control his bully? Target the owners by bringing in licenses. If I need a license for my shot gun, and everyone one of my sheep are licensed and accounted for, then why can't we do the same for large dogs. And good luck with banning shops and restaurants from allowing dogs, sales in tourist areas would plummet.

There's already been one post saying that it's classist to look at the demographics of ownership of certain types of dog.

That might mean that the root cause is not investigated, let alone dealt with. And the strong links to organised crime, drug dealing and gangs would not not considered. It's akin to looking at the symptom (dogs) not the disease (who owns them and why).

Might be worth remembering that if you buy recreational drugs from your "nice" dealer. Who gets their supplies from the organised criminals and the gangs - that's where your cash ends up

*Muzzling all dogs in public means dog owners would not have the right to selfishly endanger the rest of us.

If you want to let your dog off its lead, book a dog paddock or do it in a well fenced garden.*

But most peoples dogs won't endanger you, why should the owners or the dogs be put thorough that? Men are more dangerous than dogs. Like the experts say, there are better options that that. Dog licences and better control and rules for breeders would be a better start.

Totally agree with all of this!

On a lead and muzzled. Automatic put to sleep any dog not on a lead or muzzled in public.

dogs only off a lead in specific dog areas . All the rest of the park and woods to be dog free by default.

I agree @Eleganz I think we've gone too far for the "but my dog is lovely..." stage now and sadly there has to be blanket rules to capture the behaviour of the idiots.

We have laws around driving that everyone has to obey because some people in charge of a potentially dangerous item (in this case a car) cannot be trusted to drive safely without them. So we all have to drive to the speed limit because some people would be irresponsible idiots and kill people otherwise. It's getting to the stage where we need the same with dogs.

Not an overreaction at all then!!!

And? If you aren’t able to meet these animals very demanding physical needs which results in aggression and risk to others then don’t have one. It’s not a human right is it. Just get a toy poodle or a cat.

Oh I think you'll find @Moonwatcher1234 that many many people do think it is their human right to own a dog.

Posters can pretend this will happen when we know it won't.