Illegal dog?

[Toomanyweeks]

I recently discovered that my mum's husband's dog is possibly partly an illegal breed according to his son- part pitbull I think. He seems a little unpredictable but friendly enough, however I am not willing to have him around my children.

My mum and her husband don't see that there is a problem and they are adamant that he is not illegal and perfectly safe, but he is very muscular, extremely powerful and a little excitable.

They have recently taken him to the vet several times for an issue with his leg and he's on medication. The vet obviously hasn't flagged anything up in terms of his breed when they've treated him so I'm wondering if he is safe afterall?

Banned dogs are not unsafe, just like non banned dogs are not safe. The banned list is a farce, albeit only 4 breeds on it last time I looked.
Each dog is an individual, no dog is safe just because it's not a certain breed. Likewise no dog is unsafe just because it is a certain breed.

Not all pit bulls are dangerous dogs, and not all dangerous dogs are pit bulls.

However, you are quite within your rights not to want the dog around your children, especially as you describe him as unpredictable (how does this manifest? If for instance it's just jumping up for attention, it might mean that he's too boisterous to be around young children but in no way dangerous)

The dangerous dogs act is hugely controversial and a vet is not required to report a suspected illegal dog (good thing too - else people would avoid taking them to the vet).

If you really believe this dog to be a pit bull type then you can contact the local police and ask about their dog legislation officer. I would, however, urge caution. This is likely to seriously damage your relationship with your mum, and it's a course of action I would only take if I thought the dog posed a serious threat to humans. It's not a course of action I'd take for a dog described as "friendly enough" and "excitable".

Do a dog dna test to rule it out.

This.
Also don't ever allow an excitable dog around any children. Aggression, if it happens, is usually when a dog is allowed to be in an excitable state.

A muscular,
Powerful
Excitable
Unpredictable dog is not a dog to be trusted.

extremely powerful and a little excitable.

No to that.

Is it an XL bully type?

Banned doesn't mean unsafe. Keep your kids away because he's unpredictable, not because of his breed.

DNA tests are not legally admissible for pitbull typesin the U.K.

Banned breeds are banned because they have the capability to seriously harm or kill.

Oh god, I would keep away from it yourself too.

Pretty much all dogs have that capacity though don't they.

No. I mean you can say they do but statistically it's all the same dogs. Labs and Doodles are everywhere but they don't feature in the dog bite death statistics.

No way would I go near a Pitbull, let alone allow my children. Way to risky.

You are making an assumption that the dog is part 'pitbull' from hearsay and therfore could be illegal. There are many dogs in this country that are 'pitbull', and fall into the category known as a 'type' - they are not American Pit Bulls (a banned breed), but they look a certain way, and that is to their detriment.

We have a ridiculous, antiquated law in this country known as the Dangerous Dogs Act. On that list are 4 banned breeds, the American Pit Bull (breed) being one of them. This law, which was put in place in 1991, has done nothing to stop dog attacks on people. It also doesn't distinguish from an American Pit Bull, the way a dog looks (pitbull 'type') and it doesn't even consider ancestry. The RSPCA, many dog charities and established professionals within the field all argue that this law is outdated and not fit for purpose.

You are making the right call that you should not have your children around this dog, unsupervised. That extends to any dog though.

To add, although I've never had the privilege of meeting an American Pit Bull, for obvious reasons, I've heard the majority are fantastic with children. They are generally non-aggressive. Unless, of course, they have been brought up with abuse, neglect and a much let down from their human owners.

Banned breeds are banned because they have the capability to seriously harm or kill.

But there are plenty of non-banned breeds who have the same capabilities.

Look on the list of dogs who have killed people in this country - it features plenty of legal breeds including a Jack Russell who killed a newborn baby.

It's not as straightforward as saying "x is banned therefore it's dangerous". It also ignores the fact that the dangerous dogs act works by type - so any dog that fits the physical "criteria" of a pitbull can be banned, even if it has no pitbull in its' DNA.

I know of a litter of puppies years ago at a rescue, they were crossbreeds technically but out of that litter one pup had to be PTS because it was Pit Bull "typed", whereas a sibling was just fine and went on to be adopted.

A dangerous dog is dangerous because of it's owners. It's the owners that need to be held to account, not the breed.

That might have been the case if it was any sort of well thought out ban.

It isn’t though.

Look on the list of dogs who have killed people in this country - it features plenty of legal breeds including a Jack Russell who killed a newborn baby.

The list is almost all big, powerful status digs. Yes there's one Jack Russell. But it's not the norm. And if you look at other countries it's the same. Rotties, bully breeds, guard dogs and sled dogs.

Turns out big, powerful working breeds don't make very good pets for most people. And yes for experienced owners, who train and exercise their dogs properly, and parent properly, they are fine. But allowing their sale to arseholes and inexperienced idiots means there awful continue to be deaths.

My point was that banning certain breeds clearly doesn't do anything to stop people getting killed or attacked by dogs. Take Pitbulls as the obvious example - they were banned so now people breed "XL bullies" instead.

Dogs with no illegal breed in them have been seized under the Dangerous Dogs' Act because they fit a random series of measurements. It's an incredibly flawed and outdated piece of legislation that does absolutely nothing to address the core issues around dog breeding, training and ownership.

Oh yes the DDA is terrible legislation. Both goes too far and not far enough which is quite the feat.

Yes I'm an ideal world all owners would be responsible and good but they arnt so there has to be a law that these strong jaw heavy muscle type dogs are banned. It's not fair but it probably has prevented a lot of deaths. These type of dogs fall into the wrong hands for obvious reasons

There will always be exception to the rule. A jack Russel killing a baby would be a very rare occurrence and no baby should ever be left alone with any dog anyway. The point is a banned breed has the jaws and power to kill an adult that is why they have to banned because people can't be trusted to raise them properly so they don't present a danger to the public

Ultimately the breeding is irrelevant, if you don't feel like it is safe to be with your children then that is down to you regardless of what they think. Owners all too often downplay their dogs behaviour. Any dog has the capacity to injure child give the right circumstances. That may be through aggression, fear, dominance or over excited boisterous playing.

I have just read the list of dogs and their victims. The vast majority are xl bully's mastiff types husky German shepherd American bulldogs The jack russel was left alone with a new born baby and the next door neighbour described it as small but vicious ! Most of these deaths are babies and children. Also elderly people It's really shocking to read