Davkaus Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Chindie said: Funnily enough labradors are the most common breed involved in dog attacks, and have killed people. They're also the most common breed Suspect they're rather further down the list when adjusted for attacks per dog But yeah, any dog can have violent episodes if they're trained badly, or even if they are well trained but are spooked. Not a compelling reason to allow these large and dangerous breeds though Edited February 7 by Davkaus 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seat68 Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 There is a wiki page of uk fatalities by dogs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_Kingdom#2020–present Quote Fatal dog attacks in the United Kingdom are usually measured in single figures per year. An increasing number of serious dog attacks (both fatal and non-fatal) was the catalyst for the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991,[1][2] which ultimately led to four breeds being banned: Pitbull, Japanese Tosa, Dogo Argentino and Fila Brasileiro.[3] Between 2021 and 2023, around half of fatal dog attacks were caused by a single breed, the American Bully XL, and in December 2023, they were the first breed to be added to the act since 1991, making it illegal to sell, breed, abandon or have a Bully XL in public without a lead and muzzle in England and Wales.[4] 2020 to present, American XL Bullys make up a significant number, approaching half of all fatalities. My disclaimer, I do no not think these should be banned, just relaying some data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted February 7 VT Supporter Share Posted February 7 2 minutes ago, Davkaus said: They're also the most common breed Suspect they're rather further down the list when adjusted for attacks per dog But yeah, any dog can have violent episodes if they're trained badly, or even if they are well trained but are spooked Exactly. Though they are a 'meaner' breed than understood. If you suddenly have a load of people getting dogs because they're fashionable, in a bad situation, and don't train them, lo and behold you're going to get a lot of dog attacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 Guns don’t kill people, pet owners do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted February 7 VT Supporter Share Posted February 7 I don't like dogs. There, I said it. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 From a practical point of view, if we want to make an impact on UK carbon footprint, let’s start phasing out large pets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted February 7 VT Supporter Share Posted February 7 9 minutes ago, Seat68 said: There is a wiki page of uk fatalities by dogs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_Kingdom#2020–present 2020 to present, American XL Bullys make up a significant number, approaching half of all fatalities. My disclaimer, I do no not think these should be banned, just relaying some data. The issue with that list, though, is the problem of what is and isn't an XL bully. Nobody can actually identify these animals, they aren't a registered breed. So all the 'XL bully ' cases there are creating an artificial category. A more accurate case would be to note what these dogs almost certainly are, which would give you 'Pitbull cross', 'Staffy cross', 'Rottweiler cross', etc etc. Then look back at the years before an XL bully was even a thing, and you see the same breeds over and over, the majority of which are all acceptable to own to this day. It's a moral panic. A marketing nightmare. A load of idiots got posing dogs for the street and cant handle them, the same breeds that occasionally hurt people 20, 30, 40 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 1 minute ago, Chindie said: The issue with that list, though, is the problem of what is and isn't an XL bully. Nobody can actually identify these animals, they aren't a registered breed. So all the 'XL bully ' cases there are creating an artificial category. A more accurate case would be to note what these dogs almost certainly are, which would give you 'Pitbull cross', 'Staffy cross', 'Rottweiler cross', etc etc. Then look back at the years before an XL bully was even a thing, and you see the same breeds over and over, the majority of which are all acceptable to own to this day. I’ve mentioned it a couple of times, the ban is on XL Bully type dogs. They aren’t pretending there is only 1 type, as you say there are several closely related variants under that banner. Quote New laws banning XL Bully type dogs have been laid in Parliament today, as the Government adds the breed to the list of dogs banned under the Dangerous Dogs Act. Gov.uk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 Are there any viable preferred options to banning dogs that have a disproportionate number of attacks? In principle I'd sort some kind of mandatory training (got a licence for that dog?) for certain characteristics, maybe even any dogs over x kilograms, but I don't think there's any way it's likely to be enforced Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted February 7 VT Supporter Share Posted February 7 9 minutes ago, Genie said: I’ve mentioned it a couple of times, the ban is on XL Bully type dogs. They aren’t pretending there is only 1 type, as you say there are several closely related variants under that banner. Gov.uk I know. The problem doesn't go away though. They've attempted to create a definition that captures what they think this is, but the definition they've created captures a variety of dogs, and actually doesn't capture some 'true' XL Bullies (for instance there are some XL bullies that are quite short, thus not meeting the definition but apparently are still dangerous according to their being 'a dangerous breed') and is so wide a definition that it can capture some breeds that aren't XL bullies at all and nobody thinks are. It's nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post sidcow Posted February 7 VT Supporter Popular Post Share Posted February 7 2 hours ago, Genie said: How many people have Jack Russell’s killed recently? If you really wound it up, is it capable of killing a grown man or woman? Nope. Little dogs are a nightmare, constantly snappping at my dog (Beagle) when we pass them on a walk. They can’t do anyone any serious harm though. Thats why XL bully’s are getting so much focus. They have the capacity to kill, and are killing. It's like the Gun Lobby argument. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Dogs don't kill people, bad owners kill people. Yeah? Well the big **** ridiculously muscly bred to be aggressive and fight with the tiny brain dog doesn't half bloody well help. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted February 7 VT Supporter Share Posted February 7 41 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: Guns don’t kill people, pet owners do. 2 minutes ago, sidcow said: It's like the Gun Lobby argument. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Dogs don't kill people, bad owners kill people. Yeah? Well the big **** ridiculously muscly bred to be aggressive and fight with the tiny brain dog doesn't half bloody well help. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted February 7 VT Supporter Share Posted February 7 You can't ban bad owners. That would be the ideal scenario obviously, but it's impossible to identify and ban those owners. Problem is a lot (not ALL, but a lot) of bad owners are attracted to these breeds for reasons we all know. So as we don't live in an ideal world, banning the dog is the only option we have. OK there are issues with identifying the breed, I'll let the dog people sort that bit out, but something needs to be done for sure. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 2 minutes ago, sidcow said: You can't ban bad owners. That would be the ideal scenario obviously, but it's impossible to identify and ban those owners. Problem is a lot (not ALL, but a lot) of bad owners are attracted to these breeds for reasons we all know. So as we don't live in an ideal world, banning the dog is the only option we have. OK there are issues with identifying the breed, I'll let the dog people sort that bit out, but something needs to be done for sure. Yep, and if whilst we’re throwing a blanket over several types of dangerous dogs to ban we also collect a type or 2 that aren’t that dangerous then I think it’s a side effect I can live with. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Paddywhack Posted February 7 Popular Post Share Posted February 7 None of these people would have been killed if they’d also been carrying an XL bully. 2 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 43 minutes ago, Davkaus said: maybe even any dogs over x kilograms U wot m8 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidcow Posted February 7 VT Supporter Share Posted February 7 3 minutes ago, Paddywhack said: None of these people would have been killed if they’d also been carrying an XL bully. All 4 year olds should take an XL Bully to school. Just in case. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 Ownership, ban someone from owning a dog and hey presto his girlfriend or his nan suddenly owns a poorly trained dog. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 Reform UK will be planning to not only reverse the ban on XL Bully type dogs if they get into power, but make it mandatory that every household has one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 We have digressed from what was the original point, frustration at the media reporting of these fatal attacks. I’m not sure what they are supposed to do differently? Pretend it didn’t happen. Say the person was killed by an animal but not mention what type of animal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts