A fourteen year old girl has been killed...

[JustGiveMeFiveMinutes]

...mauled to death by four dogs.

RIP

Moomins I agree with you too, but whilst so many idiots in this country put human life on the same level as their dogs then more people will be attacked/killed and nothing will change. When will our government act? Dogs in suburban areas should be on leads at all times and nobody should have staffies/mastiffs/alsatians, they are guard dogs for a reason ffs, I don't care how fluffy/nice the owner thinks they (always uttered by the owner after the latest attack on a child) are when they are a threat to anyone else and although I don't trust any dog, these are the dogs responsible for attacks/deaths.

I'm a vet, and had an interesting discussion with my boss today about how the 'dangerous' breeds have evolved over his 40 years in practice. It used to be German Shepherds then Rotties and Dobermanns, now it's SBTs and Bull breeds. I agree with several posters who've said the latest 'hard' breed is the Akita/ husky/ malamute. For this reason banning breeds is pointless. There are many 'staffs' around that have more than a whiff of pit bull about them. The only people that have benefitted from banning pit bulls are the lawyers arguing the toss about what constitutes one.
On the general scale of how wary I'd be of an unknown dog, Staffies would be low on the list, most of them are everybody's pal. Much more likely to be bitten by a Collie or a terrier. Part of the problem is the breed characteristic of being tenacious though - other breeds might nip but would not continue to attack.
The pack mentality is a massive part of the problem, it's only 'discredited' as someone else mentioned, as a theory about dogs asserting authority in a human household, a group of dogs will act co-operatively in ways a single dog wouldn't.
I welcome compulsory microchipping of all dogs but doubt it will make much difference unless it is vigorously enforced. I think the return of expensive dog licensing, compulsory basic training for all dogs owners , licenses being more expensive for entire animals specifically selected for breeding with all others being neutered in their first year, compulsory 3rd party insurance and much heavier penalties for the owners when these terrible tragedies occur is long overdue. Enforcement to be funded through revenues from dog licenses. I agree that only the owners who are responsible in the first place will comply, but if funds are used to pay for more dog wardens then the irresponsible owners can be better policed. Our council currently has a single dog warden covering a large area - totally inadequate for the size of the task.
I am sick of the attitude that it is a right to own an animal and when something goes wrong it is up to the vet/ the PDSA/ the RSPCA / a rescue to pick up the pieces. Owning a pet is a privilege, not a right, and comes with heavy responsibilities. If toughening up means people can't thoughtlessly acquire 5 dogs and then breed more - good.

Well said.

That was very well put Bakingtins. Nice to hear a professional viewpoint from someone who works with animals and I agree that would be the way forward with dog wardens.

I haven't read every post yet, so sorry if I'm repeating, but I believe that licencing is the way forward.
Every dog should be bred by a licenced breeder and sold only to those with a licence.
The money raised by licences would pay for the administration and policing, similar to the DVLA.
It should not be restricted to specific breeds. There should be a limit of 2 or 3 dogs per household.
Dogs should have check ups every year, without which the licence cannot be renewed, similar to the way in which MOTs are needed for car tax.
I own a lovely Golden Retriever and have children. I word never leave my toddler alone in a room or the garden with my dog.
Licences should be free for dogs for deaf or blind people. Everybody else pays. No exception.

Oops, maybe I should have flipped the thread rather than only reading the first half of the replies. Have just seen Bakingtins post. I completely agree with it.

Lindsey (Handbook of Applied Dog Behaviour and Training, Blackwell, 2001) has a very comprehensive survey of the literature on dog aggression and the two characteristics that stand out in dog to human aggression are entire male dogs and a genetic history of aggression.

He also notes that statistically the breed trends for aggression vary depending on the popularity of breeds with a certain type of owner who wants a 'matcho' dog, suggesting that it is not Dobermans, GSDs, Rotties or pitt-bulls that become progressively more or less aggressive, but rather that particular breeds become more or less popular with a kind of owner who selects and reinforces aggressive behaviours to the detriment of socialisation and reward-based training.

The problem is man made so the solution should focus on us not the dogs, with more education to ensure more responsible breeding and ownership of dogs.

Im new to mumsnet... First of all R.I.P to Jade & my thoughts are with the family and friends at this time. But after reading many different story's and peoples opinions The owner did lock her dogs away and people were informed that she was weary of one of the dogs 'the pack leader' so why has a girl entered the home on her own when no one is there. The dogs on instinct will protect there territory and the pack leader will bite first the others in the dog world do what they are told. Can i just add the fifth dog was a shiz su (sorry my spelling is awful) not a dangerous breed. I don't think you can really point the blame at any one in this case but the owner should have taken better precautions if she believed her dogs were dangerous and the neighbors postmen etc should have complained! But so many people are now talking about banning these breeds I have two children and a staffordshire bull terrier if i saw any kind of aggression he would be gone i love my dog but my children will always come first but he has a very calm and gentle nature. Banning a breed will not solve anything but people need educating before owning powerful breeds we also have a 13year old staffordshire bull terrier in 13 years she has never put a foot wrong all she wants is love!! Other dogs do attack just people dont report them or they do and the media dosent report it as they are desperate to deem all are dogs dangerous. What has happened is a tragedy and being a mum i could not imagine the pain i would feel if this was my child but owning five dogs in such a small house and never walking them in my eyes is silly especially four very powerful breeds. I just hope that the law changes in a good way and makes the world a safer place for us all to bring our children up.

It is absolutey horrible,but too many people are jumping into conclusion.
From what I just read here I am really surprised how many of you are quite uneducated when it come to judge dogs vs owners.It looks like none of you know those breeds or even have/had a dog yet everybody is ready to comment,in a nasty way sometimes...
I have both breeds,those deemed 'agressive' and those who suppose to be 'gentle',tiny little yorkie type,which I am worried the most as she is the one that will bite.
The rather large staffie is a picture of calmness,really gentle and considerate and he is the one who was bitten by dogs you mentioned as 'safe' :inc labrador,golden retriver,fox terrier,jack russel.Petrifying experience for me as an owner,as my dog even big and 'dangerous' (in people's eyes) never tried to retaliate.
So those who say it is NOT a dog it is an owner are right,plus in this case it was PACK of dogs,who had no training and daily exercise..it was jus a matter of time for this to happen.
PS.For those thinking this type of dogs are owned by 'morons',we both finished unis...