Rehomed XL Bully, found dead in Glasgow......

[oOiluvfriendsOo]

So sad what has happened to this poor dog......is it the first consequence of the ban, it certainly won't be the last .

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/man-targeted-vigilantes-after-dead-31822636

To the human? Yes.

Or are you condoning animal abuse?

Humans. We will never learn.

Fear not, the government hasn’t gone far enough so only animals will suffer. Already breeding the next load of dogs to abuse. Well played Rishi- you bellend.

So what is the alternative? I mean not giving exemptions to people with a criminal history (like they wouldn't get a gun licence) and actually enforcing the laws we have would help.

But how do you stop people being selfish gits, especially since the worst aren't known for their forward thinking and impulse control so longer sentences are water off a ducks back. Any consequence for owning a dog too strong to be controlled isn't going to bring their victims back to life. Why should anyone be afraid to walk to school because dogs specifically chosen to intimidate and fight line the path?

An anonymous poll (so no-one could issue death threats) of vets show the majority support the ban, largely because a lot of them have tried to save dogs ripped apart by XLs. Just like plastic surgeons, they can see that not all dog bites are equal.

@ejsmith99 The majority of peer reviewed studies into the causes of canine to human aggression agree that circumstances play a greater role than breed. Most studies into bull breeds show that they are no more likely than other breeds to display aggression to humans, so banning breeds in order to decrease the overall number of bites/fatalities caused by dogs makes no sense.

If you look at the ONS figures into deaths caused by dog bites since the DDA was ammended in 1993 they have risen steadily up until lockdown when they exploded.

The ONS does not record breed when recording deaths, however, a few publications (Wikepeadia being one if you want to look for sources) have correlated this data with news reports from the time and have shown that bites by pitbulls have remained roughly the same since the ban.

If the aim of the DDA was to reduce dog bites/fatalities it has failed unilaterally, and yet, we keep doing the same thing and expecting a different result. This latest amendment is the same as the one made in 1993. History tells us that dog bites will continue to rise steadily and that in 20 years time another breed will be banned or we could try something different.

Some countries, counties and states have managed to put measures in place which have reduced the number of bites/fatalities. All of these sucessful measures have a greater emphasis on responsible ownerhsip than on breed. Studies have shown that education can reduce dog bites by 80%, whereas banning breeds has been shown to reduce dog bites by precisely fuckall.

Is there an issue with the XL Bully? Quite possibly, yes.
Will banning them reduce the number of people killed by dogs? Evidence of previous breed bans not just in our country but in other countries suggests it will not.

I genuinely do not understand why the general public are so supportive of this ban when the same action in 1993 failed so spectacularly. Why are they not up in arms and demanding change?

Incidentally, recent evidence (Google search stats) suggests that the breeders of these dogs are already moving back to Rottweillers and Cane Corsos. In 20 years when we ban crossbreeds of Rotties/Cane Corsos they will just as quickly move to another large breed or move back to Staffies.

As an interesting observation Rotts and Cane Corsos are not bull breeds. They were not bred for fighting or aggression to humans or other dogs. They were bred as livestock guardians. Rottweillers have been a "fan favourite" of this subset of people previously and have a similar number of fatalities attributed to them as a result as pitbulls do. Perhaps, this supports the idea that breed is not the biggest factor in canine aggression?

@Frequency They're not bull breeds but molossers that haven't been crippled into not being able to move, which makes them dangerous. All you have to do is look at the list of fatality by dog to see it IS the breed that makes a dog dangerous. From 1993 onwards, they are all molosser or bull breeds excluding a man who died of infection from a spaniel bite, one doberman, two gsds and 3 babies killed by 3 varying breeds. Excluding the infant deaths which are tragic MOST dog fatalities in the UK are caused by dogs who are known man work breeds, molossers or bull breeds. There are no poodles, no herding dogs, no sighthounds, no companion breeds. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_Kingdom

Is it breed or is it the type of owner those large breeds attract?

There is a pattern, if you look closely enough. In the early 80's it was Rotts, GSDs and Dobermans, in the late 80's/early 90's it moved to bull breeds, in the 2010's there was a brief spike in attacks by northern/spitz type breeds as people attempted to create "direwolves" as seen in GoT, lockdown saw a move towards XL bully types.

Some countries, counties and states have managed to put measures in place which have reduced the number of bites/fatalities. All of these sucessful measures have a greater emphasis on responsible ownerhsip than on breed. Studies have shown that education can reduce dog bites by 80%, whereas banning breeds has been shown to reduce dog bites by precisely fuckall.

Could you link these studies please? I’d be interested to see what measures counties in the UK have put in place that have managed to reduce the number of fatalities and dog bites and what agencies were involved in these initiatives. If you could also link the studies in how to educate hapless breeders I’d appreciate it.

Given the number of XL bullies recently transported to Scotland without home checks I think the Scottish Government should take note of these studies already carried out of they’re effective.

Increase in attacks, but not in deaths. There are no wolf hybrid/husky death increases apart from infants and it does not reflect the increase in ownership as it should. Likewise for lurchers, lurchers got very popular among a type around a decade ago, there are no deaths by them. It's 100% the breed.

@oakleaffy I think it was you who recommended that Panorama episode to me? Just watched it and the Jack Lis case is heartbreaking. His poor, poor mother. I can't even imagine what she went through and still goes through.

I mentioned it earlier in the thread. It’s an awful watch.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1288786/Familys-border-collie-leaps-car-mauls-baby.html

Just one of many incidents of border collie attacks.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2004206/Cameron-Whithers-8-lucky-alive-Border-Collie-mauls-head.html

And another collie

Lurchers became popular with drug dealers and criminals? Really?

I've known them have a rise in popularity in hare coursing but not as protection/status dogs.

Either way, if the aim of BSL was to reduce the number of people killed by dogs, then it has failed. It failed in 1993 in the UK, it has failed in every other country which has tried it and there is no evidence to suggest that ammending it again will have different result.

@LessonsLearnedInLife A lot of the sources I use I'm getting from essays I wrote for Uni. I no longer have access to the Uni's scientific library but the source for education reducing dog bites I have down as When dogs bite: what you don't know can kill dogs. DVM Newsmagazine 1998, Overall, K.

Maybe one of the vets on here still has access to this article?

I believe the article focused on educating children in dog behaviour rather than breeders but I do agree we need tighter controls around the breeding of all domestic/companion animals.

I also, personally believe that tighter controls on breeding would reduce dog attacks but my interest when I was studying was more focused on BSL and the impact breed has on aggression so most of my sources relate to that rather than breeding.

I remember amongst the homeless and Bus dweller populations, 1990's especially, Lurchers 'dogs on a string' were massively popular.
There was some nonsense around that the government paid the owners £7 a week per dog to keep them.. that was enough to keep a single Lurcher in food back then, but I don't think the dole paid for people's dogs.

They were almost always gentle shy dogs as well.

Then the 'Bull' type became popular. {Staffies}..and then the really large mauler types.
Dogs definitely seem to come in 'Fashions'.

Re fashion for 'Lurchers'...they could {and do} do a thing called 'Bitey face'..it looks menacing, sounds menacing, but is entirely harmless.
Kind of like ''Mouth wrestling '' , often accompanied by an EEEeeeeeeEEEEEEEiiiiiiiEEEEEEEEiiiiiiieeee sound.
Whippets do it too.

Pic from online of 'Bitey face' Edit...dog on left looks like a Staffie X

Yes, this!
Long dogs (lurchers, greyhounds etc), are well known amongst the owners that know them that "bitey face" is a thing.... as is the sight hound "smile"..... they lift their lips up and give a big grin.... no aggression at all.

@Frequency Lurchers were very popular amongst beggars/ Squatters/ homeless and bus dwellers - many of whom were drug users
1990's.

Lurchers for some reason seemed to be the 'Dog of choice' at least in the South West.

@YeOldeGreyhound First time I witnessed 'Bitey Face' I was surprised- {no internet back then} - I didn't even know it was a 'thing!'..I heard a commotion and clashing teeth, but the hounds seemed to be liking it..so I let them carry on.

It was called 'Mouth sparring' by some people{How did we manage without the internet!?}
Also grabbing mouthfuls of cheek and ear- and mock ''going for the neck''
But no one gets hurt, it's just posturing with a very loose body language, and no more than a few grammes of pressure behind the 'bite'

Some Greyhounds collect for a dog charity locally, and they are very peaceful boys.

No animal should be abused, but I don't find that view and the view that the ban is good incompatible.

Assuming the original owners couldn't keep the rehomed-and-abused dogs due to not being able to afford housing that would allow them etc, then they could have rehomed the dogs as soon as the ban was warned of months ago. They could have had the dogs euthanised, which would have been a kinder end.

People who are scared of these dogs and want them banned, are not the ones shipping them off to unknown circumstances at the last minute. They're not the ones trading them around, breeding and beating them.

These animals have been irresponsibly bred from the start over here and almost all I've seen have had their ears illegally mutilated - who has funded those practises? The people who apparently "love" them. Just like the people who "loved" french and british bulldogs when they were en vogue were funding the extremely contorted bodies that made their "beloved" pets struggle to function and sometimes require surgery to breathe.

I don't like frenchies or XLs, but I've never harmed one the way the people who "love" them do.

@oakleaffy I can say with some degree of expertise that anyone who buys a lurcher or bull lurcher (the brindle one) for protection has clearly never met a lurcher.

The child is the only one of those animals I own and the only one who has ever shown any aggression

It was Jack Lis's savage death that made me 'wake up' to the brutality of these large Pit Bull crosses, and in UK especially how hideously inbred they are.

Mia Derouen's death was so traumatic that hardened American coppers needed counselling.
That dog was related to the one that slaughtered Jack Lis.

Once these XL's turn, they are just too powerful for anyone to stop them.

Other, smaller dog breeds have killed babies and toddlers, but Pits and Pit crosses far outweigh the deaths and serious injuries to children and adults worldwide .

Here is the link again, if people haven't seen the programme.
So cruel to the dogs as well {appalling conformation in some of them}.

Lurchers are hopeless as guards. Good as hot water bottles though.
I had men throughout my Lurcher's life try to physically take her from me - she was like ''😟'' -for some reason they really wanted her, over many years- {she was spayed so zero use for breeding} ..even in the least couple of weeks of her life a lorry pulled up ''How much for the dog, love?'...I said she was ill {about 12, osteosarcoma} but he said ''I'll get a litter out of her first'' {pic as a younger dog}

{...at TWELVE?..just shows how they don't give a shit about the dogs}

Even now, the sound of a Toyota Pickup truck turns my stomach.

My friend has a Bull Lurcher from Dog's trust..

@oakleaffy Those dogs aren't mine and the guy they do belong to is not the type of man anyone would snatch a dog from plus the child is usually with him and she bites

I do know people have offered him money for the sandy lurcher and his whippet. I assume the bull lurcher looked as daft as he actually was to the type of people who would stop someone in the street and offer them money for their pet.

The small black one below was mine and I was frequently offered money for her because she was small and agile. No one appeared off put by the fact she was scared of small furries including cats, rabbits and hares. Luckily no one tried to snatch her. We were followed home once. They only stopped following me after I called H to come and meet me after telling him what was going on.

They want them for hare coursing and rabbiting, btw, coz hunting smaller animals with bigger animals is well 'ard

The dog ate cannabis, and then was found dead. There is nothing in the article to say that a 'vigilante mob' took out the dog. Probably don't sell the dog you can't be fecked registering and insuring to someone for £400 who will then feed it drugs.....

The main differences I'm noticing between the border collies in the posted articles & XL bullies is that yes, they are injuring young children & not acceptable, but XLs are killing children, other peoples' pets & even grown men.
They're even killing the people who should be the ones a dog should love & trust the most- their owners.
Bully people need to stop pretending their dogs (collectively, as a 'breed') have some long, rich & wonderful history that needs preserving.
They are a newly created breed, bred by literally the dregs of the dog breeding world, marketed as a 'companion' but repeatedly demonstrating that they are pretty much the opposite of this.
Compare their 'work' to that of other emergent breeds such as silken windhounds, a project started in the 1980s which has resulted in a 'mini borzoi' that makes a lovely pet or sport dog, & they aren't making the papers.
If they truly wished to create a more biddable companion breed descending from the APBT the traits they'd select for would decreased dog aggression, general temperament & health.
Not size, muscle mass & fancy colours.
They'd not be outcrossing with molossers, literally the worst type if the goal is a friendly companion suitable for the average pet home.
Even then, the results would depend on a lot of time (most likely decades) & financial investment, thorough record keeping, networking with other breeders who share a common goal, health testing, temperament testing, maintaining contact with puppy buyers, & most importantly good dogs with excellent health, temperament & conformation for both foundation & infusion stock.
American bullies in any size have none of this care from their breeders so the result is an inbred, unhealthy, volatile breed that's no use as a pet, has no value as a working or sport dog so really has no reason to be continued.
And love them or loathe them, even actual APBTs (as opposed to generic bull breed mixes) have found a niche outside of their original purpose in their COO- as catch dogs, hog dogs & they excel at sports like weight pull.