Just restrict dogs over a certain weight/size?

[Stroopwaffels]

The main problem with the proposed law about banning these XL bulldogs appears to be defining exactly what a XL bulldog is, given that so many are part one thing, part another. All that's going to happen is that the irresponsible owners are just going to argue that their dog is something else, and it's going to cost a fortune in kennelling and legal fees while it's all decided.

Wouldn't it be simpler and fairer to come up with some sort of law that says that dogs over a certain height/weight are restricted - they must be chipped with owner's details regularly updated, must be muzzled in public, must be neutered unless you have registered and paid £££ to be an official breeder, must be kept on a lead at all times etc etc etc. It's then far easier for a police officer to whip out a tape measure or scales and say that this dog is either covered by the law, or not.

Yes it would affect people like the woman who lives near me and who has two large Newfoundland dogs which don't appear to be aggressive at all but it's certainly clearer and easier for public and police.

All dogs, whatever their size, should be muzzled in public.

There is an active thread called how much do you spend on your dog per month.

People are spending about £400+ in some cases.

Dog walking, day care and classes.

When did dogs become children?

Based on that thread only the Roch can afford them.

Compulsory muzzling in public won't solve the problem.

What about people (particularly kids) who have been killed in their own homes by the family 'pet?'

I don't know what the answer is. Banning XL bully breeds would be a start though...

YABVVU.

The sort of scum people who have dogs like this won’t muzzle it. They won’t pay a fine. And the police won’t do anything to enforce it as they’re too scared not equipped.

My golden was been attacked by a Jack Russel two weeks ago - the wound was so deep (on his stomach) it required stitches and cost me several hundred to get sorted. All my lump of a dog did was roll onto his back and cower and scream.

But sure let’s stop the gentle giants being able to defend themselves whilst these monsters and scum drug dealer owners carry on as normal.

Ultimately, these people won’t ever turn a golden retriever, cavapoo or a Newfie aggressive. They will buy particular dogs with particular characteristics as a ‘status symbol’ as they have tiny willies and need something to make themselves feel good.

We need restrictions on who can buy dogs that can be used as attack dogs. Yes - I do include GSDs etc in that. No one needs a GSD/Rottie/Doberman/Belgium M unless they serve in the military or forces. And I say that as someone who grew up with GSDs.

Any adult dog could win in a fair fight with a primary school-age child.

This is patently untrue and does as much to fuel the hysteria as calls to carry guns in public do.

My DD has two Chihuahuas. If I put them both in a box with a rat I'd put money on the rat faring better than the dogs. They certainly could not kill or seriously injure a primary school-aged child. Their mouths aren't big enough to fit more than a finger inside.

One of them bit me once when DD asked me to hold her while she trimmed her nails. She bit me so hard she was physically shaking from the effort. I had a bruise and minor cuts that could be remedied with a sticking plaster.

Both sides of the debate need to be sensible for it to achieve anything meaningful.

i was not being sarcastic as you seem to have percieved my reply, i agreed that i had perhaps used the wrong word. Also i never said i dont want to be perceived as dumb at all, i said i am not dumb in response to a poster who i felt was unnecessarily rude

It does absolutely nothing to resolve the problems caused by irresponsible ownership

What would resolve that then? Realistically and within the resources we have?

education is great and I’m all for it; however, criminals and dealers are also not going to give a shiny shit about that either. The types of people involved in dog fighting, for instance, would be more inclined to follow any education as a guide on how to produce a really dangerous dog by doing the opposite.

There are many people who want to be responsible owners and will make different choices by legislation just existing. In this instance, something is absolutely better than nothing.

You rather missed the bigger point...

Which is that it's ridiculous to place restrictions such as enforcing muzzles on all large dogs (or dogs over a certain size, if you like) on the basis that certain people 'breed' (and I use the term loosely) dogs to meet certain requirements of body shape and temperament to be dangerous in order to strengthen their own reputations as dangerous men (usually men).

The result is familial lines of mixed breeds dogs that have had the characteristics of strength and aggression bred into them. Mixed breeds seem to be such an issue in the UK because pit bulls are already banned.

It would be more realistic to ban all dogs vaguely of that type, which would include staffies, than it would be to muzzle and restrict all dogs that are too big to reasonably carry (for example).

Of course, many people know that isn't a certain breed of dog which is a problem, but a certain type of person. That doesn't remove the argument for banning certain types of dangerous dogs, however, and I'm not suggesting it should.

The view that size is directly proportional to risk is ridiculous and (honestly) pretty ignorant.

The few have ruined it for the many with their obsession with parading the sort of animal round the streets no one should be allowed without a licence.

Requiring ALL dog to be muzzled and on a lead in public won't happen because the Gov are more concerned about votes than all the people and animals XL bullies are maiming and killing so I wouldn't worry.

IMO, honestly, as sad as it is and it will affect me, all dogs should be on a lead in public. All bull breeds should be licenced, muzzled and neutered so they eventually die out. I have a very docile Rottweiler but like a PP, would muzzle her if it meant Chayanne and Dwayne had to keep their bastard bully muzzled too and no more innocent people and animals became XL bully fodder.

It would solve the problem for most of us, though.

We can't control what others do within their own homes or the dangers to which they subject their own children (and this is not limited to dogs), unless it reaches a standard when social services would intervene, but anything that would reduce the risk to the general public has to be a good thing.

I'm in complete agreement with strick licencing and Insurance for all dogs. Also ye s these new Frankenstein breeds created by people to be strong and agessive like XL bullys absolutely need banning.
But not sure weight/ height is the right way?
How big is a golden retriever for example?
Now jaw type and strength perhaps should be considered? What was the dog actually bred for?
I absolutely hate this trend for strong mascular dogs and sorry that includes Stafford bull terriers.
Maybe all owners as part of the licence should have to pay for a DNA of the dog showing the mix?

People are spending about £400+ in some cases

Dog walking, day care and classes..

When did dogs become children

@Goodornot i take your point about people babying their animals but at least these are focused on encouraging training and the dogs wellbeing. I’d rather people spent £400 on this stuff than excessive grooming and accessories to pimp out their pets.

Exactly this. If people want a merle fat headed child killer in their house, more fool them. In an ideal world all the wankers that wanted to own the latest fad just to look 'ard would live on a different island to the rest of us.

The problem with this government is they just make stuff up on the fly. They don’t believe in experts so decisions aren’t backed up by data. If they were serious people, they would not have made an announcement without knowing what an XL Bully actually is. Now it’s going to months of flim flam followed by multiple legal challenges from Bully owners claiming their dog isn’t a Bully.

The most sensible course of action would have been to learn lessons from somewhere like Spain and muzzle all dogs over a certain size. Also all dogs would have to be chipped, owners have insurance and proof the dog has received training. All breeders should be made to carry out risk assessments of owners including the suitability of the home the dog is going to. For example when the buyer provides an address, check if it’s a flat or house with a garden etc. Also check other occupants of the house, are there children under a certain age there etc.

We have lots of technology available now to check these things. Of course, poor breeders won’t care so resources should be provided to find these people, put them out of business and destroy all of their dogs before they get out into the public.

I know there is nothing remotely funny about any of this, but your descriptions are so accurate @Twistler

I was on FB last night and the people defending these dogs all seemed to call each other hun and mate and had a similar command of English.

It is frightening that people of limited means can get hold of these damn dogs and nothing can be done about it. The whole situation was a ticking time bomb and sadly, if this inept government does decide to effect change, responsible owners of other breeds will be negatively affected too.

"Any adult dog could win in a fair fight with a primary school-age child."

But it isn't primary aged children fighting them off. There's been at least two adult men trying to get the XL off, without success, in every case. There's a XL Billy in the US, his frozen sperm has been bought by people in the UK. His children are responsible for many deaths in the US, one dog took 14 gun shots before they lost their grip on the child they had hold of and had killed. That's one of the issues, the prey drive for anything smaller. Then the fighting ability, couple that with the irresponsible owners and we are saying that WC kids are worth sacrificing. In this recent attack, once again the dogs had previous history on attacking other dogs. In the area were I live they've been being walked in the intense heat passed schools at 3pm. They have also been getting taken on buses, into city centers etc Just why? I was a GS owner, the GS has qualities that outshine any downsides, the downsides only exist if they are overbred, so let's control breeding. Antisocial behaviour and in particular behaviour of teens is having a real impact, I agree that we need to address a few points to do with low level crime and dog ownership. Muzzling wouldn't have stopped four of the deaths and a dog if this size could still kill wearing a muzzle.

I think the law should require every dog to be microchipped, every new puppy from the date of legislation must come from a licensed breeder, delegated authority powers to RSPCA to set clear rules for licensed breeders on welfare as well as breeding out aggression, and multiple police reports logged against the same breeder lead to investigation and loss of license. Police and dog wardens to have scanners able to check microchips against owner ID, a lot more fines for public nuisance or leaving poo, and mandated fines plus sentencing through magistrates Court (poo testing where needed for proof). It can all be self funded through fines.

The problem is not the size of the dog. The problem is the fact these problem dogs are doing what they have been bred for - to be physically aggressive and killers.

However means DNA testing will be a must prior to euthanising a dog that hasn't actually inflicted GBH or murder on someone. Hence that isn't the solution offered by government.

The police have data on the DNA of euthanised dogs and dogs involved in injuring / killing people. I understand that with these XL Bully types can often be traced back to a specific aggressive American dog which was bred for dog fighting. Which was legal until the 70s and still happening in the early 2000s.

Why you would want to own such a dog in the U.K. is totally beyond me. I can understand it in violent lawless countries where you might need to defend yourself, your family and your property. But many of these incidents happen in urban areas of the U.K.

The proposal to muzzle, register and neuter certain types of dogs is good. But only for law abiding pet owners out n about.

I don't think it resolves the majority of the problem - ie people being mauled to death / seriously injured in their granny's caravan or at their mates house and definitely not on the street by a stranger's dog.

I think we can all agree there are many laws and regulations that can be implemented to try and make positive change. But none of that matters of there is no way to ENFORCE it. We need resources where the police, or a well funded dog warden, can follow up on complaints and ensure people are punished for breakings these rules.

I don't own a dog but can you clarify, if you owner a Saint Bernard or an Irish Wolfhound, which bits your object to and why?
Muzzling - I assume like anything there are kinder and meaner versions available?
Chipped - surely something any decent owner does?
Lead - presumably there will be options at dog free parks etc but frankly I don't need any dog small or large up in my space on the beach, walking through the main part of a park, walking to school etc.
Neutered - I do see why this is a bigger issue. I think there should be an option that isn't compulsory sterilisation unless the plan is to wipe out the dog population in a few generations.

Re smaller dogs, I assume people think thinks more like Staffies than something you can pop in your handbag

@TheSpruce exactly; that’s why it should be make very very expensive with costs at every turn for dog owners, it would cover the costs for enacting such policies and hopefully put off idiots

I totally agree with you.

@SleepingStandingUp surely only those with a licence to breed should be left with unneautered dogs though? Would stop just anyone having litters there is no need for general public to have unneutered pets

This privileged thinking possession me off.

What about homeless people whose only companion is their dog?

Or elderly people?

People that have had their dog years and is part of the family, but they are very close to scraping by now because of col.

Why punish everyone because of the few

Neutering isn't always a good thing, neutering an anxious dog prior to training can often times make them worse, early neutering under 2 years old can be problematic as the growth plates haven't closed yet, spaying can cause spay incontinence (why we chose not to spay our second bitch, after our first needed lifelong medication to stop her pissing herself without noticing) etc etc. It's not a one size fits all thing