XL Bully attack | 8 year old boy seriously injured

[ThisOldThang]

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/schoolboy-8-seriously-injured-after-28610020

"A schoolboy is in a serious condition in hospital after being mauled by what is believed to be an XL bully.

Merseyside Police were called to Wadham Road in Bootle just after 5.20pm on Saturday following reports a dog had bitten an eight-year-old boy to the head in the communal area of flats nearby.

The boy was rushed to hospital with serious head injuries and required emergency surgery. He remains in hospital in a serious but stable condition."

IMHO the ban doesn't go anywhere near far enough and all XL Bullys need to be put to sleep.

AIBU?

@Missingmyusername Yes, I watched the video. It made me uncomfortable too. That dog could easily open its jaw wide enough to fit a human head inside. Why ANYONE (including the man in the video) would choose to have a dog like that is beyond me. Yes, play fighting it, and allowing it to lick his face made me cringe.

However, the point of me sharing it was that he clearly has an awareness of the needs of this type of dog, and explains the danger e.g. bite force (similar to a lion) how they can easily become psychologically dominant and start making their own decisions (and not good ones). I

did find him a irritating in terms of his attitude of 'I can handle a dog like this but most people can't' . When it comes down to it, no human could pull a dog that size and strength off someone if it came down to an attack (and these dogs are basically hard wired to guard) .

I didn't post it as an advert for Cane Corsos, quite the opposite. A young lad (3 year old) on a farm not that far away from me died a couple of years back after a Cane Corso living at the same address savaged him.

In my view, all of these dogs who can inflict such massive damage should not be allowed to be kept in the community. There are reasons we can't have pet tigers, and these animals are the same. Not suitable for the domestic environment.

I feel sorry for the dogs, and for the vets.

Safety has to come first, though.

The breed should never have been created in the first place.

Or if it's only in your head.

What an eloquent and thoughtfully put together argument.
Says it all really 🙄

In my view, all of these dogs who can inflict such massive damage should not be allowed to be kept in the community. There are reasons we can't have pet tigers, and these animals are the same. Not suitable for the domestic environment.

Yep.

I absolutely agree. Dogs that have a massive potential for damage should not exist within the community purely to serve the vanity or preference of an individual. This whole argument of but a jack russel etc...is nonsense. If pit nutters start that argument the obvious response is "ok you insist any dog can attack...in that case it makes sense not to have freaking giant ones that 3 men with shovels can't defend themselves against"

And on the subject of jack russels being highest on the bite list...let's specifically NOT cross them with bull dogs to make them stronger & bigger! Which is how pit bulls were created

It's bred into pitbulls not to show any warning before launching an attack & not to back down once they start. Due to the selective process that took place through their breed development. All of this makes the XL a ridiculous "pet" when the pitbull is banned and an XL is just a massive pit...with mastiff thrown in

It’s obvious and yet adults keep them around their children

Beyond belief

Hopefully not ! I know dog owners and non dog owners alike who are beginning to object to people bringing dogs everywhere. For instances the dog friendly trial totally failed in a major shopping centre in Glasgow. Many of those against it from the outset were dog owners themselves. https://news.sky.com/story/amp/silverburn-shopping-centres-dog-friendly-scheme-in-glasgow-to-end-after-low-uptake-and-complaints-about-mess-12806658

The protections are there under law and government requirements. The question here should be how better to enforce them. Not how to change them.

I already avoid Starbucks for this reason if im working around meetings. Not only because I can't take a call with a pug yapping but I don't want to be forced to bear witness to the devolution of humankind by being in the company of a furbaby in a bobble-hat slurping a puppacino

This person trots out the same line on every thread about XL bullies. Apparently all working dogs (police, guide dogs, sheepdogs) should be smaller and less snappy than your average chihuahua!

👏🏻😂

Did any of those breeds have a track record as bad as the XLBs have had? I know in the past those breeds have been regarded as dangerous at various times, but I don’t remember there being anything like the number of deaths and attacks caused by those dogs as there have been by XLBs. We’re only in February and there have already been at least 3 attacks this year that have made the news, one of them fatal.

I understand adults wanting to take risks for themselves, but I don’t think adults with children should be able to take that risk on behalf of the children.

Thanks for posting this story, it gives me hope 💗

It's more nonsense word salad isn't it!
Yhe idea that an animal can be innocent or guilty is a nonsense since animals are not capable of making moral choices.
Large numbers of animals are euthanized daily in order to satisfy our desires for gustatory pleasure, why is a dog a fur baby when other animals are something that you cook and eat?

I agree but as the pp said that is indeed the reasoning behind it. It’s always tricky when it comes to children in these situations as unfortunately the law only extends so far with a lot of public health measures.

For example it’s illegal to smoke in most public enclosed spaces due to the risk of passive smoking, but I don’t think it’s against the law to smoke in a tiny airless room with your baby sleeping in your own home.

More generally it is a shame what some kids are exposed to compared to others.

I'm sorry but they all need to be pts now

What was very interesting in the Cane Corso video was also the point he made about continual socialisation - long, long after being a puppy, and exposure to thousands of events and experiences where they teach the dog, there is no threat here (showed dog at gym, with people running around). He's aware of the responsibility to ongoing training.

Makes it all the more chilling that some of these dogs (Xl's but also Rottweilers featuring heavily in the fatal wiki bite chart) are kept penned up, in small houses, not exercised, not taken for walks - so all those thousands of training and socialising points are missing. Dogs hard wired for aggression, poorly kept and trained which then break free and go on a rampage. It's a perfect storm.

The further down the socioeconomic scale you are the greater is the need to get some status, some kudos for yourself.
That is why low functioning people with little money are attracted to dangerous animals.

Trying to give a different perspective here.
I am a dog trainer. I train people to train their dogs for dog agility.
I am 100% not a fan of xl bullies , and have none in my groups as they are not a suitable breed physically for this sport.
The majority of my clients have the type of dogs that would be suitable for most pet homes.
There are one or two dogs who while fitting within the average category in terms of breed, are hugely more challenging than most. They are very fortunate to be in the homes that they are in, as most people would have rehomed or pts.
I have one client who has a breed unsuitable for a pet home. This particular dog exceeds everything else in terms of training level due to the work put in by the owner.
I am a believer in genetics, and I don't think anyone who is not should be in charge of an xl bully.
Out of all my clients I consider only one would be suitable to give an xl bully a home that would guarantee the safety of family and public.
Yet the average xl bully owner seems to be the type at the opposite end of the spectrum.
This is the problem.
I feel desperately sorry for any dog in a home not fulfilling it's needs.
However tipping point for certain breeds and the consequences that follow are the issue here.

Yet the average xl bully owner seems to be the type at the opposite end of the spectrum
Anyone genuinely in a position to provide a suitable environment for such an animal is highly unlikely to want one. (partly because they have become a hallmark for criminality and antisocial behavior)
The antisocial criminal types who want them will, by definition, not to be suitable owners.
It's a big old dismemberment & disfiguring catch 22.

I am a believer in genetics, and I don't think anyone who is not should be in charge of an xl bully.

Wanting an XL bully kind of proves you shouldn't have one, really.