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.

So what have they done?

This is the kind of plan we need.

Breed specific legislation is knee jerk nonsense which has been repeatedly tried and failed. It's the wrong approach not because some breeds aren't more dangerous than others, but because the definitions of what falls in the breed get really messy and the dangerous owners and breeders always just move on to a new status breed with the same characteristics.

Are you actually suggesting a large scale slaughter of 12 million dogs, including compulsory seizure of pets against owners wishes so break and enter / arrest etc?

Yep. I mean, I’ve met a lot of chihuahuas and few have been pleasant so I don’t particularly like them, but I’d have a far better chance of fending off an attack from a chihuahua than I would an XL bully.

Incidentally, the small handful of XL bullies I have encountered have all been well-behaved, but I still wouldn’t want to have any responsibility for one, or be in a situation where I had to defend myself against one.

I know that I'd rather take my chances with a jack Russell with a 100-200 bite force rather than an XL bully breed of 500+ that weighs in at 12 stone in some cases.

@Twistler bless you, are you OK? my post was a joke, in response to the OP's batshit recommendation that all dogs above a certain weight need to be muzzled and based on the well known trope that chihuahuas are a bit mad.

I am 100% in support of xl bully restriction once the breed has been defined

ps I would tone down the nasty personal remarks on the intelligence of people you don't know if I were you. someone less nice than me might report you. also maybe have your funny bone looked at by a doc. needs adjusting

Babies have died. Or don't they count as they weren't an adult?

Anything can kill a newborn baby. We don't go around banning pillows, duvets, iron tablets, honey, plastic bags - we require their parents to exercise ceaseless vigilance and we label them "keep out of reach of the under 4s". We start to control dangerous items for things that pose risks to children above that age where they're out of reach of their parents.

It’s a chicken and egg situation, though I can’t argue policing in this country is in dire need of attention and funding.

Just the existence of any legislation will influence a proportion of people to make different choices though. It absolutely wouldn’t be 100% pointless.

I'll admit to having not read the whole thread.

But the elephant in the room seems to be that you can have every law you like, who is going to enforce it?

We know that most of the owners of these dogs would be unlikely to follow it.
So how do we enforce it?
To bring in any new law will need loads of police enforcers.
What do they do when presented with a house with a big dog, not neutered, no muzzle and no paperwork?
Are we going to have massive sets of kennels to take these dogs in? Who will enthanise?
Will vets co-operate with the scheme? What happens when someone takes it to court? Who looks after the dog in the meantime?
If we leave the dog in the home, then next time the police visit it has 'gone' What then?

Remembering that a big dog, shut in kennels and not exercised will become a much more dangerous dog.

So whatever law we decide on, and I could suggest quite a few to improve dog ownership, the issue is always how will it be enforced?

@steppemum
We know that most of the owners of these dogs would be unlikely to follow it"

Why not? Apparently they are all law abiding middle class accountants....

😂yes and their XL bullies are gentle souls who wouldn't harma fly....

@steppemum you raise good points and the truth is we haven’t got the police or legal system to enforce the laws we currently have never mind new ones.

But, as a country I don’t think we’ve quite reached the point of just accepting that (which I think is a good thing) and we shouldn’t lower our standards with the expectation of never being able to enforce this properly. If no legislation exists there is no argument or justification for funding it whereas if it is written into law there are obligations for it to be considered in budgets and its performance monitored, perhaps even enhanced in the future with exactly what others have called for with wider education.

So my 45kg incredibly lazy and gentle hounds would be included. Don’t think so 🤣

@Milkkbottles - of course. It's not like they will suddenly all decide to have a personality transplant.

Owners that don't, well the precedent is that the dog is confiscated and destroyed. It is up to the Government to enforce it. Making a law by itself does nothing.

Most dogs will see a vet at some point (at least for vaccinations etc), perhaps vets could be checking licences, chips and insurance and reporting non-compliance?

I have a lovely soft Bernese dog. He is usually on lead unless within our closed estate where everyone knows him and no one is nervous (closed community - know all the neighbours).

I would happily train him to wear a basket muzzle if it became legislation. If it meant everyone else with badly trained dogs that run up to mine and growl and show teeth because he is big were also now muzzled. I'm sick to death of badly trained dogs and dog shit on the pavements.

Ultimately the problem is bad owners but as you can't ban people then making it more difficult to own a dog would seem sensible.

They would. But then they run the risk of being fined more than it would have cost to just licence the dog. Dogs aren’t particularly easy to conceal.

No one is going to check every dog, just like no one checks every car is taxed and insured but it’s still a very effective tool in ensuring cars are’t being driven around without either.

generally to improve all dog ownership I would

1. make dog walkers licensed and limit the number of dogs they can walk at once
2. make all dogs registered/licensed and chipped
3. have rules around dogs ownership v. house size. Large dogs in small flats should be banned, limits of number of dogs one person can own etc
4. any dog attack that is reported against another dog should enable the same measures as if it were against a person. There are frequent cases of dogs who have been known to viciously attack other dogs then going on to attack people. Dog attacks, dog gets put down.
5. Stop all importing of all dogs from elsewhere, especially street dogs
6. Have stricter rules about walking on leads, eg on pavement everywhere always on lead. Town parks on lead etc.
7. Fine and prosecute dog owners regularly for breaking this stuff. Have dog wardens that can enforce patrolling parks until it becomes normal. On the same note, your dog attacks a person, you get prosecuted for dangerous body harm or whatever.

I have a large dog. He is a rescue. He is not perfect. I would abide by all these rules.

I always despair at the deed not breed posts. It’s always people clueless about genetics and heritability.

Then in the next breath…

Deed not breed…but chihuahuas are the most aggressive, labradors bite the most, German shepherds guard their owners and bite people, your more likley to be bitten from a small dog, staffies are nanny dogs not savages.

So, you agree chihuahuas have the breed trait to be aggressive, but not bully’s? You agree staffies all inherit nanny dog traits (Rubbish btw), but not the traits they were bred for?

You can’t pick an argument then discredit half of it.

Twat owners will remain twats, but if they don't get licences then action can, in theory, be taken the moment their dog looks at someone funny, or barks late at night.

I think that better results would probably be achieved by clamping down on breeders. A widespread advertising campaign saying "Paying money for a dog to anyone who's not on the registered breeders register or a registered dog rescue is a criminal offence" might help by stopping some of the innocent but clueless idiots making profit and incentivising the really nasty breeders.

I agree.
I guess my point was that we have to be prepared to sink quite a lot of money into dog police.
Initially it will mean tracking down many dogs and dog owners and getting them compliant and teaching them to law.
Then enforcement, which would have to be zero tolerance for it to be effective, otherwise cases drag through the courts, which is what happened with some under the DD act. Very few actually got euthanised.

As a dog lover it is hard. Perhaps one day my dog will do something wrong and then he will be removed and destroyed. But we do have to be prepared to put money into the policing of it. And a huge national advertising campaign to get people on board.