A fourteen year old girl has been killed...

[JustGiveMeFiveMinutes]

...mauled to death by four dogs.

RIP

Wannabe - I think it is similar to the 'broken windows' theory of crime - people who commit low level crimes of littering and vandalism are more likely to commit more serious crimes. So I think the ones who just let their dogs crap everywhere and run about are more likely to be back yard breeders, and just general crap owners.

So if we came down hard on every example of irresponsibility I think it could help with a general shift in attitudes. You will always have idiots I accept but hopefully less of them, or more willingness/ability by the authorities to prosecute them and stop them keeping any animal.

I don't know. How many people use the phone while driving?

Articbunny, how awful for you and your DD.
That is my worst nightmare and exactly why I get so annoyed about posters posting ridiculous poems etc and still blithely banging on about owners/breeds "I've got a staffy and it is soft as shit" etc

I don't give a flying fuck.

Anyone who uses a phone whilst driving is an irresponsible, criminal fool - as the law reflects because it will imprison you for it. I would bet those who regularly use their phone whilst driving are arrogant and irresponsible in many other ways.

Cautionary whale - that is a brilliant article and says it all. But shows that to deal with dangerous dogs you need to deal with dangerous owners and it is always the easy knee jerk reaction to 'ban the breed'.

I wish people would stop going on about labradors.

I don't particularly like any dog but I've never read a story about labradors owned by a bunch of lowlife ripping a child to shreds in their filthy council house....and let's be honest that's what the dog attacks like the ones that happened to Jade always are.

Labradors are lovely! We had a rescue one and he was extremely aggressive and bit anyone that went near him. We didn't keep him long and the dog handler said that he had been chained up as a guard dog and really badly treated. We just couldn't handle him but the poloce hanbdler actually took him on aaN alkthoiugh he was not suitable to be aroiund kids, he could handle him.

Generally people keep the 'toughy' breeds as guard dogs, dogs to scare/untimidate others with, or because they love the breed. Sadly, its just the last group that actually give a monkeys about the dog. Technically, you could 'bree out' aggression in such dogs but there will alkways be people who want aggressive, fighting dogs.

People keep saying 'only XX deaths over XX years...'. That's not really relevant - how many serious attacks, kids with ears and fingers bitten off?

Just googled labradors and unfortunately there are some horrific cases.

If anything I would speculate that there's a certain amount of under-reporting of bites by dangerous dogs. After all, the people most likely to be bitten are the owners and owners' families. If the bite were relatively minor and you knew that your dog was a dubious/dangerous breed and likely to be put down if the bite got to the ears of the authorities, would you seek medical attention? I bet lots of people wouldn't.

Yes, labradors on the whole have lovely temperaments but they are still dogs, and big ones with powerful jaws at that. I say that as a labrador owner and lover. He is fairly patient but like all animals he has his boundaries. You cannot 100% trust any dog.

At least if attacked by lab or jack russel u stand a bloody chance of not being killed would you stand a chance with staff , pitbull, doberman mastiff or rotweiler DO NOT THINK SO.

^ People keep saying 'only XX deaths over XX years...'. That's not really relevant - how many serious attacks, kids with ears and fingers bitten off? ^

Good point. Every year, 6 and a half THOUSAND people require hospital treatment after being bitten by a dog. Half of those need plastic surgery, and almost a quarter need facial surgery. This is a massive, massive problem and it is getting worse - year on year, there are more people who are attacked in this way. Which kind of puts the witless "Oh my staffie is lovely" comments into perspective. Dogs are dangerous.

All dog owners think their dogs are lovely.

'He's only playing with yer' were the last words said to me by the owner of a doberman before it sunk its teeth into me and I went to hospital for seven stitches after it chased me while I was out running.

You think you would have a chance against a Jack Russell? How many do you know? I wouldn't give myself much hope tbh. They are not called 'a big dog in a small body' for nothing.

But this rather emphasises the point that there is little validity in banning certain breeds.

I would like a law that ruled all dogs had to be muzzled in public.
Then even the out of control, not interested in recall, panics at the site of bicycles, killing cats sort of dogs could not do serious damage.

If a bunch of 'lowlives' got hold of a lab, didn't feed it, didn't exercise it, didn't socialise it, I bet it would behave exactly as the bull mastiff did. And they are big dogs.

I agree - all dogs are potentially dangerous but with the smaller breeds you have a chance of fighting them off.

But it is not 'witless' to say 'my staffy is lovely' . She is. Because I trained her, I socialised her. The problem is with the owners who create dangerous situations.

Just read that the owner of the dogs who killed Jade will not be charged as it happened on her home. I can understand she can't be charged under the Dangerous Dog Act but why can't she be charged with reckless manslaughter?

Is anyone suggesting dogs are not dangerous though really? Don't think anyone is actally disputing the fact that ALL dogs have the potential to be dangerous? Stating that their dog is lovely isn't actually denying that fact.

I might have read the thread incorrectly though so apologies if I have.

Even a 'well-trained' dog can turn. I agree with Nebulous - muzzle the fucking things - they are too unpredictable to do otherwise, and the priority should be public safety. Make people have them on leads. Microchip them. Control ownership.

When I am out with my elderly lagoubrious Staffie there is a Jack Russell we have to look out for, his owner leaves him out in the garden and he jumps over the fence and flings himself at my dog, all teeth and snarls if you go past. His owner takes the "what a character" approach.

Next door's jack Russell inflicted a very nast bite on my brother's nose when he was young and I'm sure they could kill a child.

Muzzling the dogs in public places would have had no bearing in this situation as she was in their home.

I have 4 dogs, Alaskan Malamute, Siberian Husky, Jack Russell and my mothers King Charles. The King Charles is old but has always been the one most likely to nip, followed by the JRT but only to other animals. I am a scientist, and yes genetics will play a part but the majority of this will be due to their lack of handling, they are powerful dogs, their jaw strength is huge and they can lock on. I do also think that people are often only breeding from the most aggressive lines...where as when you meet a dog of this nature that isn't they tend to be smaller and just a bit, well dumb really! We've had a staffie attack our Malamute, luckily she has very thick fur and skin and the dog did no damage and she didn't react to the dog as she is huge and could have seriously hurt it. But she is wary and we always walk her with a muzzle now just incase anything like that happens again. BUT I do think it would be unwise of anyone ever thinking its only certain breeds, any dog has the potential to seriously maim or kill and as such I would never leave any child on its own - but agree its shocking that this happened. My heart goes out to her family :(. They really should start licensing again.

No one could sensibly disagree with proposition that all dogs are potentially dangerous.

But read the Malcolm Gladwell article - it puts it far better than I can. But in a nutshell, dogs become dangerous due to a combination of temperament, treatment and environment. By far the most important element is their treatment. The real problem is the humans.

Apparently no one ever reported this woman whose dogs killed Jade even though she had five dogs cooped up in a back hard, no doubt slowly going mad through lack of exercise or any stimulation. That alone should have merited the dogs being removed from her.

Why do people need to have big and or powerful dogs?
I don't get it.

I also don't get why dog owners are always so defensive when a child is killed by proximity to an unnecessary, potential killer.
Large, powerful dogs kill.

They should be banned.

Yes, but it might make streets and other public places a bit safer. I am sick of cycling/running along paths and having some bloody out of control dog chasing after me and snapping at me. Dog owners seem to take the view that as long as there are no cars around they can let them run around and do what they like, including shitting all over the place as well, regardless of other people going about their daily business and hoping not to get attacked by some filthy crapping hound.

Small dogs kill also. Are you going to exempt guide dogs, farm dogs and police sniffer dogs? Or are you advocating simple cull of every dog in UK?

Does swearing really add to the reasoned arguement?

The dogs were in the home when they attacked so how would muzzling them when out have helped here?

What are the stats for the location of most attacks? Then you can have a reasoned discussion whether using muzzles is appropriate.