# Dangerous dogs or dangerous owners?



## LucaTheDoberman

I heard the story in the news this week about the dog attack in a park in Chingford, London where a girl was bitten by a dog. Its yet another sad story giving dogs a bad name.
I've always been a believer of *nurture rather than nature*, i.e. its how you bring the dog up that effects whether its likely to bite or not. But is this always the case?

I've been on the receiving end of a very irate walker a couple of months ago. I was walking my 6 month old brown doberman, off the lead, in a very quiet and rural area when we came up behind a couple of walkers. As we got closer the gentleman walker, who was carrying a walking stick, turned round to me and said 'if your f***ing dog comes near me I'm going to cane his head in!'.  I was really *shocked* by this outburst and a little shaken, we passed them without saying much.

The more I thought about the guys reaction the more I understood why he had reacted like this. He was obviously* frightened of dogs* and rather than cower away he just got angry, For then on I have always put Luca on a lead if we come across walkers, which actually makes him look more dangerous. But he's not at all dangerous, he wouldn't hurt a fly. He's just got a really intense stare. I'm sure if he was fluffyer this wouldn't be a problem.

Anyone elses thoughts and experiences on the subject?


----------



## Wild Extreme

I had the same sort experience a few years ago when I had a gorgeous soft-as-a-brush 8 stone Rottie.. it was at the time when there was all the bad publicity about the breed. How to clear a ridiculously long queue at a campsite phone box in 2 seconds flat... stand in line with your dog! Worse case scenario all the campers on the site would have been licked to death! :nonod:


----------



## baileygirl

I personally know the dog and owner of this recent attack in Chingford. The papers have gone to town on him, but its a complete lie. Gary is the most lovely gentle man in the world. he rescued his staffy from an awful home where it was kept in a cage and never given love or walked. He had the dog not even a year. my son played with it in the summer, it was a lovely happy dog after Gary had nurtured and cared for it. the papers have made out is was in a park that the attack happened. it was not, it was in a forest where many dog walkers let their dogs off their leads for a run about. the father of the child is quoted as saying the dog circled his child then attacked like a shark & gary shouted cant you keep your child under control. I know that never in a million years would Gary say something like that. He loves kids & is a gentle & caring man. Another side of the story is that the dad punched the dog before it attacked (not that you will ever hear that) & the dog retaliated. Im sorry but why would you just not pick your kid up if she was scared of dogs? Gary has been absolutely distraught since Saturday, he cannt sleep, he is crying constantly, being sick & racked with guilt. He had to have his dog put down on Monday and now faces at least 6 months in prison. This is so wrong! He does not deserve this! I dont know what to do to help him. All he is guilty of is helping an abused dog, giving it a loving home and trusting it enough to let it have a run around the forest. He handed himself into the police straight away and has to live with what has happened to this little girl.


----------



## spinola syd

I read a lot of these 'oh my dog wouldn't hurt a fly' posts. I was walking on the local hills, which are a national park, this weekend. It had snowed and there were lots of people out skiing, sledging and watching their dogs hurtling around in the snow...perfect! Then it happened. A Land Rover Defender pulled up and a family got out, swearing and shouting at each other. They opened the back of the vehicle and a bull terrier leapt out, no lead, no harness, no muzzle. It barked two or three times as its owners shouted encouragement 'go on Daisy!'. It then ran straight at a young cocker spaniel and clamped its jaws around the poor creatures neck. The spaniel cried out in pain and fear but the beast had it on the floor and wasn't letting go. The poor dogs owners were horrified and tried to part the dogs but the bull terriers jaws were locked shut. It was a horrible sight as the spaniel struggled for its life. One bloke was trying to prise its jaws open while the spaniels owner screamed at someone to 'get it off her'. 

I couldn't watch any more but after about 5 minutes I saw the spaniel being carried back to the owners car. It looked dead to me. As the poor owner asked if the terriers owners had a licence for the beast he was just ignored. The last thing I heard was a woman from the Land Rover shouting in a strident voice full of indignation ' he wouldn't hurt a fly, he sleeps with our kids'.

A horrible story but totally true and an incident I am trying to forget but can't. Why in Gods name to people want to own these killing machines? They are bred for one thing only and enjoy doing it. The argument about no bad dogs, only bad owners is rubbish. These dogs should be illegal and all exisiting ones destroyed. Anyone who wants to own one of these appalling breeds should be automatically banned from dog ownwrship for life.

I am sure that I will now get the backlash from owners who have one of these dreadful creatures who 'is like part of the family and wouldn't hurt anyone'. Go and tell that to the family who took their puppy home with its neck broken.


----------



## Reiterin

Hello,

this is a terrible story and i'm feeling so sorry for the spaniel and its owner.

but I don't agree with you! There isn't any dogbreed on the world that should be banned. I think there are only bad owners!!!

as you've wrote, the terrieres familiy get of the car, shoutend. if someone shout and then let out the dog, i don't know what this poor dog has got a for bad live. i hope it gets away from this family.

so, i hope you understand what I try to say,

Reiterin


----------



## Rottsmum

Dogs are animals - they are not people. ANY dog of ANY breed is capable of attacking,biting, maiming and in the worst case scenario killing be it another animal or a human.

IMO most of these situations occur because of "operator error" i.e the human owner is an irresponsible knobhead - BUT - there are poorly bred dogs, nervy dogs & dogs that are not wired up quite right who can and do just snap in second & ultimately thats all it takes.


----------



## Nancy23

spinola syd said:


> I read a lot of these 'oh my dog wouldn't hurt a fly' posts. I was walking on the local hills, which are a national park, this weekend. It had snowed and there were lots of people out skiing, sledging and watching their dogs hurtling around in the snow...perfect! Then it happened. A Land Rover Defender pulled up and a family got out, swearing and shouting at each other. They opened the back of the vehicle and a bull terrier leapt out, no lead, no harness, no muzzle. It barked two or three times as its owners shouted encouragement 'go on Daisy!'. It then ran straight at a young cocker spaniel and clamped its jaws around the poor creatures neck. The spaniel cried out in pain and fear but the beast had it on the floor and wasn't letting go. The poor dogs owners were horrified and tried to part the dogs but the bull terriers jaws were locked shut. It was a horrible sight as the spaniel struggled for its life. One bloke was trying to prise its jaws open while the spaniels owner screamed at someone to 'get it off her'.
> 
> I couldn't watch any more but after about 5 minutes I saw the spaniel being carried back to the owners car. It looked dead to me. As the poor owner asked if the terriers owners had a licence for the beast he was just ignored. The last thing I heard was a woman from the Land Rover shouting in a strident voice full of indignation ' he wouldn't hurt a fly, he sleeps with our kids'.
> 
> A horrible story but totally true and an incident I am trying to forget but can't. Why in Gods name to people want to own these killing machines? They are bred for one thing only and enjoy doing it. The argument about no bad dogs, only bad owners is rubbish. These dogs should be illegal and all exisiting ones destroyed. Anyone who wants to own one of these appalling breeds should be automatically banned from dog ownwrship for life.
> 
> I am sure that I will now get the backlash from owners who have one of these dreadful creatures who 'is like part of the family and wouldn't hurt anyone'. Go and tell that to the family who took their puppy home with its neck broken.


HOW DARE YOU! that is extreamly unfair! yes if they are not controlled (as with most dogs) they can be dangerous but you have no right saying that! as most dog owner are extreamly carfull and keep there dogs well inline! why punish everyone who is responsable because of afew alfull people! punish them not us!!!!!!!!!


----------



## pixieloulou1982

Dogs have teeth. You never hear of "Dangerous tubby tabby scratched and attacked small child." But honestly, I know and have met far more aggressive cats than dogs. However, recently today I met a man with a staffy, sweet, lovely dog...heavy mouther however...could easily nip a child. The staffy disliked other dogs and the owner informed me it had attacked a lab a few months back. Said owner however did not have a muzzle and refused to have his dog muzzled. This is why I do believe where possible when getting a dog..know the history, know the parents and know what you are doing. I love staffy's but too many get them as trophy dogs. However, if I had a staffy personally, I would not walk it with out a muzzle due to wariness of it being too boisterous...they are strong little dogs and I am only small.


----------



## Supernovarolla

baileygirl said:


> I personally know the dog and owner of this recent attack in Chingford. The papers have gone to town on him, but its a complete lie. Gary is the most lovely gentle man in the world. he rescued his staffy from an awful home where it was kept in a cage and never given love or walked. He had the dog not even a year. my son played with it in the summer, it was a lovely happy dog after Gary had nurtured and cared for it. the papers have made out is was in a park that the attack happened. it was not, it was in a forest where many dog walkers let their dogs off their leads for a run about. the father of the child is quoted as saying the dog circled his child then attacked like a shark & gary shouted cant you keep your child under control. I know that never in a million years would Gary say something like that. He loves kids & is a gentle & caring man. Another side of the story is that the dad punched the dog before it attacked (not that you will ever hear that) & the dog retaliated. Im sorry but why would you just not pick your kid up if she was scared of dogs? Gary has been absolutely distraught since Saturday, he cannt sleep, he is crying constantly, being sick & racked with guilt. He had to have his dog put down on Monday and now faces at least 6 months in prison. This is so wrong! He does not deserve this! I dont know what to do to help him. All he is guilty of is helping an abused dog, giving it a loving home and trusting it enough to let it have a run around the forest. He handed himself into the police straight away and has to live with what has happened to this little girl.


Sorry, but I don't believe a word of your post. I feel more sympathy for the child who was savaged than your alleged friend. He should have had his dog on a lead. The father had every right to punch your friend's dog if he was attacking his child.

My son was almost killed by a dog when he was seven years old as we walked home from his school. I was holding his hand on a public footpath, talking about his day when a staff came out of nowhere, jumped on my son, knocked him to the ground and shook him by the throat like a rag doll. The cowardly owner grabbed him, put his lead on and ran off with the dog without even so much as an apology. My son had to have hospital treatment and is now terrified of dogs, something of which I'm trying to help him over come.

In no way was the dog provoked by either myself or my son. We had our backs turned to the animal and the first I became aware of the dog was when my son went flying to the ground.

I know that not all dog owners are irresponsible or place their dogs over the safety of children, but some of you do - and not only that, some of you even try to shove the blame onto the child who has been attacked or their parent. Which, to be perfectly frank, is disgusting. We all love our pets, but children come first. Dogs should be kept on their leads.


----------



## spinola syd

Reiterin said:


> Hello,
> 
> this is a terrible story and i'm feeling so sorry for the spaniel and its owner.
> 
> but I don't agree with you! There isn't any dogbreed on the world that should be banned. I think there are only bad owners!!!
> 
> as you've wrote, the terrieres familiy get of the car, shoutend. if someone shout and then let out the dog, i don't know what this poor dog has got a for bad live. i hope it gets away from this family.
> 
> so, i hope you understand what I try to say,
> 
> Reiterin


Hi There,

My point is that these breeds are naturally aggressive and have been bred for incredibly strong jaws and bite pressure. You very seldom hear of a lab or a goldie savaging someone, why is this.....media bias? Why would the media bother to target a specific breed? Of course there are bad owners, but bad owners plus yorkie equals a yappy nuisance, bad owners plus bull terrier equals potential killer. You have to ask why these dogs are favoured by the sort of people who want to make a statement about their own ferocity and aggressive nature? You carry a gun because you want to have, and be seen to have, the potential to kill. These dogs are dangerous weapons, at the very least licence them and confiscate/destroy if they are illegally owned.


----------



## smokeybear

spinola syd said:


> I read a lot of these 'oh my dog wouldn't hurt a fly' posts. I was walking on the local hills, which are a national park, this weekend. It had snowed and there were lots of people out skiing, sledging and watching their dogs hurtling around in the snow...perfect! Then it happened. A Land Rover Defender pulled up and a family got out, swearing and shouting at each other. They opened the back of the vehicle and a bull terrier leapt out, no lead, no harness, no muzzle. It barked two or three times as its owners shouted encouragement 'go on Daisy!'. It then ran straight at a young cocker spaniel and clamped its jaws around the poor creatures neck. The spaniel cried out in pain and fear but the beast had it on the floor and wasn't letting go. The poor dogs owners were horrified and tried to part the dogs but the bull terriers jaws were locked shut. It was a horrible sight as the spaniel struggled for its life. One bloke was trying to prise its jaws open while the spaniels owner screamed at someone to 'get it off her'.
> 
> I couldn't watch any more but after about 5 minutes I saw the spaniel being carried back to the owners car. It looked dead to me. As the poor owner asked if the terriers owners had a licence for the beast he was just ignored. The last thing I heard was a woman from the Land Rover shouting in a strident voice full of indignation ' he wouldn't hurt a fly, he sleeps with our kids'.
> 
> A horrible story but totally true and an incident I am trying to forget but can't. Why in Gods name to people want to own these killing machines? They are bred for one thing only and enjoy doing it. The argument about no bad dogs, only bad owners is rubbish. These dogs should be illegal and all exisiting ones destroyed. Anyone who wants to own one of these appalling breeds should be automatically banned from dog ownwrship for life.
> 
> I am sure that I will now get the backlash from owners who have one of these dreadful creatures who 'is like part of the family and wouldn't hurt anyone'. Go and tell that to the family who took their puppy home with its neck broken.


I am curious to some important missing details in the above story.

What did YOU do about it? Did you take a photo of the dogs, owner, car registration number? Did you report it to the police? Did you give a statement?

What contribution did YOU make to preventing recurrence.

There is no such thing as an "appalling breed" just dogs which are a) inappropriately bred b) inappropriately trained and c) inappropriately owned and/or a combination of all three.

There are REAMS of reports re ALL sorts of breeds biting people and killing dogs including gundogs, you just do not happen to hear of all of them as they do not fit the bill in order to arouse the "professionally outraged".

If you refer to the APBC you will see that the breed referred most often to their members for aggression is the Labrador!

Bull Terriers are legal breeds so no legislation other than that which already exists is required.

However what IS needed is people to report every instance rather than just come on a forum and rant.


----------



## RockRomantic

spinola syd said:


> I read a lot of these 'oh my dog wouldn't hurt a fly' posts. I was walking on the local hills, which are a national park, this weekend. It had snowed and there were lots of people out skiing, sledging and watching their dogs hurtling around in the snow...perfect! Then it happened. A Land Rover Defender pulled up and a family got out, swearing and shouting at each other. They opened the back of the vehicle and a bull terrier leapt out, no lead, no harness, no muzzle. It barked two or three times as its owners shouted encouragement 'go on Daisy!'. It then ran straight at a young cocker spaniel and clamped its jaws around the poor creatures neck. The spaniel cried out in pain and fear but the beast had it on the floor and wasn't letting go. The poor dogs owners were horrified and tried to part the dogs but the bull terriers jaws were locked shut. It was a horrible sight as the spaniel struggled for its life. One bloke was trying to prise its jaws open while the spaniels owner screamed at someone to 'get it off her'.
> 
> I couldn't watch any more but after about 5 minutes I saw the spaniel being carried back to the owners car. It looked dead to me. As the poor owner asked if the terriers owners had a licence for the beast he was just ignored. The last thing I heard was a woman from the Land Rover shouting in a strident voice full of indignation ' he wouldn't hurt a fly, he sleeps with our kids'.
> 
> A horrible story but totally true and an incident I am trying to forget but can't. Why in Gods name to people want to own these killing machines? They are bred for one thing only and enjoy doing it. The argument about no bad dogs, only bad owners is rubbish. These dogs should be illegal and all exisiting ones destroyed. Anyone who wants to own one of these appalling breeds should be automatically banned from dog ownwrship for life.
> 
> I am sure that I will now get the backlash from owners who have one of these dreadful creatures who 'is like part of the family and wouldn't hurt anyone'. Go and tell that to the family who took their puppy home with its neck broken.


are you actually serious? 
i have two bull breeds and i'm sorry to disappoint you but they are a loving loyal breed. im disgusted with you, maybe a pet forum is not for you to be on. I'm disgusted and i'm hoping your just a troll with nothing better to do.

i sympathise with the spaniels owners, but to judge an entire breed all because on one dog with what sounds like poor owners is ridiculous.

my godson and my staff, my staff my godson calls his best friend










deffo a killing machine.


----------



## RockRomantic

spinola syd said:


> Hi There,
> 
> My point is that these breeds are naturally aggressive and have been bred for incredibly strong jaws and bite pressure. You very seldom hear of a lab or a goldie savaging someone, why is this.....media bias? Why would the media bother to target a specific breed? Of course there are bad owners, but bad owners plus yorkie equals a yappy nuisance, bad owners plus bull terrier equals potential killer. You have to ask why these dogs are favoured by the sort of people who want to make a statement about their own ferocity and aggressive nature? You carry a gun because you want to have, and be seen to have, the potential to kill. These dogs are dangerous weapons, at the very least licence them and confiscate/destroy if they are illegally owned.


ever been bitten by a yorkie?  it bloody hurts.

and as for the rest of your drivel, you can say that about ANY breed, especially large ones.


----------



## Colette

Deja vu....

I'm sure I've read that exact same story a few times, all by people who claimed to have witnessed the event in person... 

Did the incident take place under a bridge perhaps? :


----------



## Jugsmalone

spinola syd said:


> I read a lot of these 'oh my dog wouldn't hurt a fly' posts. I was walking on the local hills, which are a national park, this weekend. It had snowed and there were lots of people out skiing, sledging and watching their dogs hurtling around in the snow...perfect! Then it happened. A Land Rover Defender pulled up and a family got out, swearing and shouting at each other. They opened the back of the vehicle and a bull terrier leapt out, no lead, no harness, no muzzle. It barked two or three times as its owners shouted encouragement 'go on Daisy!'. It then ran straight at a young cocker spaniel and clamped its jaws around the poor creatures neck. The spaniel cried out in pain and fear but the beast had it on the floor and wasn't letting go. The poor dogs owners were horrified and tried to part the dogs but the bull terriers jaws were locked shut. It was a horrible sight as the spaniel struggled for its life. One bloke was trying to prise its jaws open while the spaniels owner screamed at someone to 'get it off her'.
> 
> I couldn't watch any more but after about 5 minutes I saw the spaniel being carried back to the owners car. It looked dead to me. As the poor owner asked if the terriers owners had a licence for the beast he was just ignored. The last thing I heard was a woman from the Land Rover shouting in a strident voice full of indignation ' he wouldn't hurt a fly, he sleeps with our kids'.
> 
> A horrible story but totally true and an incident I am trying to forget but can't. *Why in Gods name to people want to own these killing machines? They are bred for one thing only and enjoy doing it.* The argument about no bad dogs, only bad owners is rubbish. These dogs should be illegal and all exisiting ones destroyed. Anyone who wants to own one of these appalling breeds should be automatically banned from dog ownwrship for life.
> 
> I am sure that I will now get the backlash from owners who have one of these dreadful creatures who 'is like part of the family and wouldn't hurt anyone'. Go and tell that to the family who took their puppy home with its neck broken.


So I take it you have owned a bull breed to make the statement "They are bred for one thing and enjoy doing it." Clearly you have not owned a bull breed as you would not say that.

I own two of those so called killing machines. One, an American Bulldog, goes to doggy day camp where he plays with toy breeds to large breeds. So not so much of a killing machine is he?

My other killing machine is 12 years old, has never attacked another dog and has never bitten anyone. He is one of the most friendliest dog I have owned. Before him I owned another SBT called Suki and again, she did not ever bite anyone nor attack another dog.

Get your facts straight before coming on here and spouting crap like that.


----------



## RockRomantic

Colette said:


> Deja vu....
> 
> I'm sure I've read that exact same story a few times, all by people who claimed to have witnessed the event in person...
> 
> Did the incident take place under a bridge perhaps? :


Dunno why but this actually tickled me


----------



## tashi

spinola syd said:


> I read a lot of these 'oh my dog wouldn't hurt a fly' posts. I was walking on the local hills, which are a national park, this weekend. It had snowed and there were lots of people out skiing, sledging and watching their dogs hurtling around in the snow...perfect! Then it happened. A Land Rover Defender pulled up and a family got out, swearing and shouting at each other. They opened the back of the vehicle and a bull terrier leapt out, no lead, no harness, no muzzle. It barked two or three times as its owners shouted encouragement 'go on Daisy!'. It then ran straight at a young cocker spaniel and clamped its jaws around the poor creatures neck. The spaniel cried out in pain and fear but the beast had it on the floor and wasn't letting go. The poor dogs owners were horrified and tried to part the dogs but the bull terriers jaws were locked shut. It was a horrible sight as the spaniel struggled for its life. One bloke was trying to prise its jaws open while the spaniels owner screamed at someone to 'get it off her'.
> 
> I couldn't watch any more but after about 5 minutes I saw the spaniel being carried back to the owners car. It looked dead to me. As the poor owner asked if the terriers owners had a licence for the beast he was just ignored. The last thing I heard was a woman from the Land Rover shouting in a strident voice full of indignation ' he wouldn't hurt a fly, he sleeps with our kids'.
> 
> A horrible story but totally true and an incident I am trying to forget but can't. Why in Gods name to people want to own these killing machines? They are bred for one thing only and enjoy doing it. The argument about no bad dogs, only bad owners is rubbish. These dogs should be illegal and all exisiting ones destroyed. Anyone who wants to own one of these appalling breeds should be automatically banned from dog ownwrship for life.
> 
> I am sure that I will now get the backlash from owners who have one of these dreadful creatures who 'is like part of the family and wouldn't hurt anyone'. Go and tell that to the family who took their puppy home with its neck broken.


Sorry but you have seen only this one dog attack, most bull terriers have the sweetest nature and NO I do not own one but have grown up with terriers some of them working terriers - this is a case of bad owner not in control of their dog !

They are definately not an appalling breed, they can be quite comical. I am sure if you go through the search engine on petforum you will find photos of english bulls and staff bulls with kids and in various 'loving' situations


----------



## tashi

spinola syd said:


> Hi There,
> 
> My point is that these breeds are naturally aggressive and have been bred for incredibly strong jaws and bite pressure. You very seldom hear of a lab or a goldie savaging someone, why is this.....media bias? Why would the media bother to target a specific breed? Of course there are bad owners, but bad owners plus yorkie equals a yappy nuisance, bad owners plus bull terrier equals potential killer. You have to ask why these dogs are favoured by the sort of people who want to make a statement about their own ferocity and aggressive nature? You carry a gun because you want to have, and be seen to have, the potential to kill. These dogs are dangerous weapons, at the very least licence them and confiscate/destroy if they are illegally owned.


Sadly although I own golden retrievers - due to the irresponsible breeding of both labs and goldens they can be as nasty as terriers  I have 3 friends who each own boarding kennels and these two breeds are the worst they have in for boarding, one golden you could never ever turn your back on, you could never make eye contact, you would go in looking over his head and reverse back out still looking over his head !!!!! Sadly puppy farm bred and eventually pts when he bit his young child round the throat :nonod:

Any breed of dog either bred irresponsibly, not socialised from a young age or in the hands of the wrong person can be 'dangerous'.

May I just add welcome to the forum but please think before you speak


----------



## Guest

spinola syd said:


> They opened the back of the vehicle and a bull terrier leapt out, no lead, no harness, no muzzle. It barked two or three times as its owners shouted encouragement 'go on Daisy!'.


afraid what you witnessed wasn`t something that would be encouraged by responsible bull terrier owners , what you witnessed was the local chav element of society[if i can call them that] demonstrating `how ard` their dog was , which is shameful behaviour that sets responsible owners in a very bad light.



spinola syd said:


> Why in Gods name to people want to own these killing machines? They are bred for one thing only and enjoy doing it. The argument about no bad dogs, only bad owners is rubbish. These dogs should be illegal and all exisiting ones destroyed. Anyone who wants to own one of these appalling breeds should be automatically banned from dog ownwrship for life.


realised crossed wires but anyway! i think your view is really blinkered in view of your hateful posts towards certain breeds. can i ask , do you own a dog ? 



spinola syd said:


> My point is that these breeds are naturally aggressive and have been bred for incredibly strong jaws and bite pressure. You very seldom hear of a lab or a goldie savaging someone, why is this.....media bias? Why would the media bother to target a specific breed? Of course there are bad owners, but bad owners plus yorkie equals a yappy nuisance, bad owners plus bull terrier equals potential killer. You have to ask why these dogs are favoured by the sort of people who want to make a statement about their own ferocity and aggressive nature? You carry a gun because you want to have, and be seen to have, the potential to kill. These dogs are dangerous weapons, at the very least licence them and confiscate/destroy if they are illegally owned.


now your reading into media hype , they don`t have `incredibly strong jaws` other breeds put their bite pressure to shame , as this video demonstrates
[youtube_browser]vbwMs7cjK0Y[/youtube_browser]

class is dismissed


----------



## Mese

You shouldnt condemn a whole breed just because some humans have deliberately , or by ignorance , instilled , or allowed by lack of knowledge , aggression into their dogs
Im willing to bet that the dogs that do attack are either not bred very well or have been abused by humans in the past and are nothing less than victims themselves

Thats not to say I dont sympathise with any human victims , I do and would hate anything of the kind to happen to my family or anyone I knew
But if it did happen I wouldnt go on a hate campaign against that breed of dog
I may hate what that particular dog did but I would be rational enough to see that it really wasnt the dogs fault at all , but whoever owned that dog. 
It would be them who had the responsibility to ensure the public safety , and it would be them I would be going after , not the dog

Someone on here was talking about a rescue dog that attacked a little girl and said the owner was a nice guy etc ... he may be a nice man , but he is definately at fault in letting a formerly abused dog offlead around people , theres no way he could know what could trigger his formerly abused dog to attack , so he should have taken steps to ensure that could never happen ... his dog should have been onlead and under control at ALL times

So again , ignorance causes an attack and a whole breed becomes a target


----------



## Guest

spinola syd said:


> My point is that these breeds are naturally aggressive and have been bred for incredibly strong jaws and bite pressure. You very seldom hear of a lab or a goldie savaging someone,


 Well thats because people suck at identifying breeds. If it bites its IDd as a bully breed even if its a lab. Happens here in the US all the time. And sadly, there are some badly bred, unsocialized labs and goldens out there who will happily bite you - hard, just for looking at them.

Where breeds historically used for fighting have the advantage is that they were also specifically bred for NOT redirecting on humans. You know, the whole PIT bull part meant the dogmen had to get in the pit with the dogs and separate them when the fight was over. Dogs who went after the humans tended to be culled really fast. 
The TRUTH is, bully breeds, while they tend to have really high prey drive, and yes, also can be rather dog aggressive, are almost never human aggressive. Thats never what they were bred for. Your dobie though was definitely bred to attack and bite humans. Chew on that tidbit 



spinola syd said:


> Of course there are bad owners, but bad owners plus yorkie equals a yappy nuisance, bad owners plus bull terrier equals potential killer.


Wrong again. Talk to the family who lost their baby to a pomeranian attack. Yes, you read that right, a pomeranian killed a 6 week old baby. ALL dogs with teeth and jaws that open and close can bite and do some pretty bad damage.



spinola syd said:


> You have to ask why these dogs are favoured by the sort of people who want to make a statement about their own ferocity and aggressive nature?


LOL, you own a doberman!!! A dog originally bred to protect Mr. Karl Dobermann as he was out collecting taxes, then used as a war dog and police dog. So, you own a protection dog of war, what does that say about YOU?

Prey drive does not equal human aggression. When a greyhound chases and kills a rabbit, does that make him an aggressive killer? Of course not. So why should it be any different with other breeds?


----------



## Kiwi

smokeybear said:


> If you refer to the APBC you will see that the breed referred most often to their members for aggression is the Labrador!
> QUOTE]
> 
> Sorry to interrupt but could this be because Labs are one of the most popular breeds and there are, therefore, more of them? :blush:


----------



## delca1

Unless you have all the _true_ facts about a dog attack then you should not judge.

Go back to the tale of Gelert... found in a room with an upturned crib and lots of blood, his owner killed the dog with his sword only to discover a dead wolf and an unharmed baby. 
Makes you think, its not always how it looks.


----------



## hawksport

ouesi said:


> The TRUTH is, bully breeds, while they tend to have really high prey drive, and yes, also can be rather dog aggressive, are almost never human aggressive. Thats never what they were bred for. Your dobie though was definitely bred to attack and bite humans. Chew on that tidbit


As much as I love them, if there were as many badly bred, badly reared and badly owned Dobermanns about as there are Bull breeds we would be in serious trouble


----------



## canuckjill

Even my rough collie is capable of doing serious harm, I think alot has to do with socialization starting at a young age and good parentage. And don't forget socializing a puppy then stopping at 6 months isn't enough you need to keep up with the socialization..


----------



## Guest

Oops! Sorry spinola syd, looks like you don't have a dobie, got you confused with the op (sorry OP too!)

Not gonna change anything in my post though, as other than mistaking the breed you own, it all still applies to your ignorant statements about bully breeds.


----------



## Guest

hawksport said:


> As much as I love them, if there were as many badly bred, badly reared and badly owned Dobermanns about as there are Bull breeds we would be in serious trouble


That's one of the many things that gets me about all the BSL BS going around. People fail to realize that despite the fact that some of these dogs are so abused it would make your toes curl, they STILL refuse to harm humans.

AVA (warning, not for the squeamish)
This is just one of HUNDREDS of examples of bait dogs being rescued and treated for horrific injuries. Despite the dreadful pain this dog is obviously in, she allows her wounds to be treated and handled many times a day without ever attempting even a low growl. 
The Michael Vick pitbulls who suffered unpseakable abuse at the hands of humans, all but two were completely rehabilitated and live normal lives, posing no more threat to humans than any other fluffy fido out there.

I love my danes, but they were bred as guard dogs, war dogs and protection dogs. Abuse a dane and you will often get a man-biter. Same for other guardian breeds. People need to realize that its not the breed that's the problem, its the ignorance.


----------



## spinola syd

Firstly, can I apologise for any offence that I caused with my posting. I was actually upset by what I had seen and reacted with frustration at how a great day had been ruined by the incident.

To those of you on here who responded with intelligent counter argument or even some agreement, I thank you. I will research the facts further to review my knowledge and opinion.

To the others who responded with abuse, bigotry and the usual 'I don't agree with you so you're a liar and a troll' instead of engaging in a debate, I would point out that open forums allow for conversation and the opportunity to learn and educate, they also allow people to vent their bigotry and hatred of anyone who doesn't agree with their world view. I guess it's up to all of us to decide where we sit.

To the question 'what did I do?' - there were 20 people gathered around the 2 dogs, 3 guys trying to pry it's jaws open, one owner on the mobile phone to the police, another one writing down the car registration, 4 kids screaming and my girlfriend in tears and asking to go home just as our day out had started. I contacted the police when I got in and told them I would give a statement if they needed one and they were less than interested. Sorry if that falls short of your expectations. As to the charge that I am making it up.....why on earth would I?

Still, there was some debate in there so I'll stick around, unlike others on here, I might learn something.


----------



## sparrowsitn

To me there is no dangerous dogs. The problem is psychologically unstable owners and that affects the dog.


----------



## Shingara

all dogs are dangerous, just like all people are dangerous. we are the top predator for a reason, but its just the same with dogs and people if you are brought up you should be fine if your dragged up in most cases you wont.

Its the owners of dogs that make dangerous dogs not the breed. Of course that isnt always the rule, if you kick a dog its more then likely going to bite you for it. always 2 sides to every story.


----------



## Lauren6

It comes back to the whole nature vs nurture thing, reminds me of a recent uni lecture, only that was on humans though not dogs


----------



## leanne562

personally i think the nature of the dog is ALL down to their owners and how they have been brought up! When i was 3 i got bit by a lab unprovoked, all i did was drop my biscuit, still have a scar to this day. Arent they supposed to be loving dogs?!!!
Iv seen horrible violent staffs and bull terriors but then i have met and look after my uncles massive staffy with the biggest head iv ever seen. anyway he was abused so my uncle took him away from it, to this day hes never attacked anyone and i trust him to play with my 4year old son (not alone though as with any dog!)
I was brought up wit a siberian husky called wolfe she was an absolute diamond! 
i honestly think owners are responcible for a dogs behaviour! unless the dog is provoked badly. If all dogs were trained correctly 90% of them would be freindly!


----------



## Clairey1234

i think it's the way they have been brought up. 
i also think the breeders can have a lot to do with it too!
my sister payed 500 for a 'pure bred' staffy. apparently fantastic blood line and everything.
only...as he grew, he looked as though he had pitbull in him!

he eventually turned on my sister. he was lovely with the kids, and with her bf. but he was constantly challenging her.
there was one point her bf had to pin him down, by practically sitting on him as he was trying to attack that badly.

the final straw was when he went for my sisters throat! luckily, he didn't quite manage to get there as her bf was there.

he had to be put to sleep  he was lovely too though. just this strange nasty unprovoked side to him was too much for anybody to deal with


----------



## rheasmum

> I couldn't watch any more but after about 5 minutes I saw the spaniel being carried back to the owners car. It looked dead to me. As the poor owner asked if the terriers owners had a licence for the beast he was just ignored. The last thing I heard was a woman from the Land Rover shouting in a strident voice full of indignation ' he wouldn't hurt a fly, he sleeps with our kids'.


Many people own staff/pitt types so they always get a lot of backing, at the end of the day they were bred for fighting and are responsible for many dog attacks, did anyone see the satff/pitt that attacked the police officers ? Where we walk our dogs many of the staff owners are coming out for summer


----------



## rheasmum

other owners in our local all have stories of young men with staffs types and attacks and often walk about in fear of meeting these dogs,, I have seen many nice staff types and owners. But yes they can get abit hyped evan the sweatest dog and often owners have careless attitude !! "well he wont start it but will finish it"mentality


----------



## kenrichatkins

Hi, for me it will always be depending by the way they have trained, if they were trained aggressive, then they would be as aggressive as they can and as they have trained good, then they will always be behave.


----------



## Lola71

Can i just bring to your attention the results of the American Temperment Test Society who state that any breed of dog with a result of 80% plus is classed as a good tempered breed....the staffordshire bull terrier scores a respectable 85.3% whilst may smaller and popular breeds score well under the 80%

Calling all bull terriers killing machines etc is hardly going to get you a respectful debate is it?


----------



## Lola71

spinola syd said:


> Firstly, can I apologise for any offence that I caused with my posting. I was actually upset by what I had seen and reacted with frustration at how a great day had been ruined by the incident.
> 
> To those of you on here who responded with intelligent counter argument or even some agreement, I thank you. I will research the facts further to review my knowledge and opinion.
> 
> To the others who responded with abuse, bigotry and the usual 'I don't agree with you so you're a liar and a troll' instead of engaging in a debate, I would point out that open forums allow for conversation and the opportunity to learn and educate, they also allow people to vent their bigotry and hatred of anyone who doesn't agree with their world view. I guess it's up to all of us to decide where we sit.
> 
> To the question 'what did I do?' - there were 20 people gathered around the 2 dogs, 3 guys trying to pry it's jaws open, one owner on the mobile phone to the police, another one writing down the car registration, 4 kids screaming and my girlfriend in tears and asking to go home just as our day out had started. I contacted the police when I got in and told them I would give a statement if they needed one and they were less than interested. Sorry if that falls short of your expectations. As to the charge that I am making it up.....why on earth would I?
> 
> Still, there was some debate in there so I'll stick around, unlike others on here, I might learn something.


And im sorry, but i, for one, do not accept your apology for any offence you may have caused by implying that people on a pet discussion should be banned from having dogs for life for choosing a breed which is recognised by the Kennel Club as being a good family breed and i like your comment about a forum being used to vent 'bigotry and hatred'....yep thats exactly what you did!


----------



## elmthesofties

Owners, definitely.
What annoys me is that if someone has a dangerous dog, they can get another. I personally think that if anyone is ever found to own more than 2 very dangerous dogs, they should be permanently banned from keeping the vast majority of dog breeds. (maybe allowed to keep toy dogs, seeing as they probably won't bother training them to be agressive) After all, dogs had to die. Why should more need to suffer the same fate?

Another thing that annoys me? There is a lovely lady who lives in the area who's got the most GORGEOUS staffie type dog. It's wonderful. Very obediant and friendly. But as soon as people see it? "Oh my goodness! That elderly woman has got an incredibly agressive dog! It's going to kill us all! Look at the way it's viciously attacking that child... look! Look! It's going to kill it with it's wagging tail! Look how it sits there, planning the attack, while that child is pulling the dog's ears!" Yeah. That happens often.
But the great dane? Oh no, it's fine. It's only killed a couple of dogs and seriously injured some people. It's only alive because the woman who owns it is married to a high ranking police officer. But it's fine, because great danes are stereotypically friendly dogs.


----------



## ilovethesun

Hi,

I've been reading this thread with interest.

We had a male shar pei who we had to have put down due to dog-dog aggression. He was only 2 years old.

Here is the background.

We spent nearly 4 years searching for a good breeder as I'm sure most people will be aware of the problems with this breed. We thoroughly researched the breed and attended many shows and met many breed specialists before deciding on this breed. Anyway, eventually the time came and we took home our gorgeous 8 week old puppy. He never had any problems with skin/eyes or ANY health issues. We visited 4 times before buying him and saw Mum, Dad, aunties, uncles etc and went to numerous shows and got references from vets and judges.

From day one we socialised socialised socialised! Carrying our pup around and introducing him to everyone and everything.

We then attended puppy school, junior school and senior school and worked on training every single day.

He was neutered.

However, he started around the age of 12 months to show aggression towards other dogs (growling, no attacks or biting). We immediately sought professional help and worked 1-1 with a dog behaviourist right up until we had him put down a year later. We worked with 3 different vets and had input from numerous behaviourists and trainers.

We even flew to Holland to seek help from a shar pei specialist.

We had conversations with behaviourists in the USA who specialised in aggression and shar pei.

In short, we did EVERYTHING possible. However, this was not enough and he got worse and worse. We had all medical tests done to rule out brain tumour, thyroid etc. There was nothing left to do and on the advice or the vets, behaviourist and his breeder we devastatingly had him put to sleep.

The breeder was MORTFIED and immediately neutered EVERY single dog in that line, even though in 30 years they had never had a problem with temperament. The breeder was in floods of tears and supported us throughout.

We will never get another dog as could not go through this again.

My point being I do not think it is always the owner who is to blame when it comes to dog aggression.


----------



## Rafa

I feel very sorry about these attacks and any attack on child or dog is appalling for all involved.

However, you cannot tar a whole breed with one brush. We have a three year old JRT and a 13 year old Staffy bitch. I have to watch my Jack for stealing from the Staffy or having a snap at her sometimes and not once has the Staffy ever retaliated, she turns her head away.

She is without doubt the sweetest natured dog I have ever come across in forty years.

I have a friend whose horse suddenly attacked her one day in the stable. She had owned him for twenty years and he had never shown any aggression or even bad manners.

Would you say then all horses should be destroyed?

Every case or incident has to be judged on it's own merits.


----------



## Guest

ilovethesun said:


> Hi,
> 
> I've been reading this thread with interest.
> 
> We had a male shar pei who we had to have put down due to dog-dog aggression. He was only 2 years old.
> 
> Here is the background.
> 
> We spent nearly 4 years searching for a good breeder as I'm sure most people will be aware of the problems with this breed. We thoroughly researched the breed and attended many shows and met many breed specialists before deciding on this breed. Anyway, eventually the time came and we took home our gorgeous 8 week old puppy. He never had any problems with skin/eyes or ANY health issues. We visited 4 times before buying him and saw Mum, Dad, aunties, uncles etc and went to numerous shows and got references from vets and judges.
> 
> From day one we socialised socialised socialised! Carrying our pup around and introducing him to everyone and everything.
> 
> We then attended puppy school, junior school and senior school and worked on training every single day.
> 
> He was neutered.
> 
> However, he started around the age of 12 months to show aggression towards other dogs (growling, no attacks or biting). We immediately sought professional help and worked 1-1 with a dog behaviourist right up until we had him put down a year later. We worked with 3 different vets and had input from numerous behaviourists and trainers.
> 
> We even flew to Holland to seek help from a shar pei specialist.
> 
> We had conversations with behaviourists in the USA who specialised in aggression and shar pei.
> 
> In short, we did EVERYTHING possible. However, this was not enough and he got worse and worse. We had all medical tests done to rule out brain tumour, thyroid etc. There was nothing left to do and on the advice or the vets, behaviourist and his breeder we devastatingly had him put to sleep.
> 
> The breeder was MORTFIED and immediately neutered EVERY single dog in that line, even though in 30 years they had never had a problem with temperament. The breeder was in floods of tears and supported us throughout.
> 
> We will never get another dog as could not go through this again.
> 
> My point being I do not think it is always the owner who is to blame when it comes to dog aggression.


Hi, so sorry about the loss of your dog 
Just for my own education, can you tell me what techniques you tried? Did his aggression ever include human aggression or was it always dog aggression?


----------



## ilovethesun

Hi,

We tried every technique possible by the end!

Had some success, albeit sketchy, with re-conditioning, counter conditioning - look at me, throwing treats onto the ground, parallel walking and desensitising.

His aggression was mainly towards other dogs but was sometimes directed towards humans, very unpredictably. For example, a man where I worked who our dog LOVED went out of the office for lunch and when he came back in my dog went for him. Whereas 15 mins before they'd been playing happily. 

We did so so much to try to help our dog, spending thousands of pounds and probably even more hours, however, in the end it was decided he just wadn't safe and to not put him to sleep would be irresponsible.


----------



## elmthesofties

ilovethesun said:


> Hi,
> 
> We tried every technique possible by the end!
> 
> Had some success, albeit sketchy, with re-conditioning, counter conditioning - look at me, throwing treats onto the ground, parallel walking and desensitising.
> 
> His aggression was mainly towards other dogs but was sometimes directed towards humans, very unpredictably. For example, a man where I worked who our dog LOVED went out of the office for lunch and when he came back in my dog went for him. Whereas 15 mins before they'd been playing happily.
> 
> We did so so much to try to help our dog, spending thousands of pounds and probably even more hours, however, in the end it was decided he just wadn't safe and to not put him to sleep would be irresponsible.


Could something have happened one day? Did you ever hire a pet sitter?
Somebody I knew got a labrador and trained it VERY well. However, they had several 'grown up' children and often worked nights. The dog was sometimes left with these teenagers, and late at night, the dog would often be tortured. Unfortunately the dog was always agressive during the night time and around teenagers after getting such treatment, and had to be pts. I'm NOT trying to accuse you of torturing your dog, but could something which wasn't your fault have caused it?

Very sorry to hear about your loss.


----------



## monkeymummy32

As the mummy of a 2 year old boy, I find it quite scary when we're walking in the park and an unleashed dog runs up to us, more so if it happens to be a staffie/rottweiler/other big dog. I completely understand that just because a dog might be a staffy or a rottweiler, for example, this doesn't mean it wants to eat my son. However, from a mothers perspective, we don't know your dog like you do, so it's better to be safe than sorry. I just feel that some dog owners get annoyed when parents whisk a child out of the dogs way or cross the street, as though it in someway we're accusing their dog of being viscious/being bad owners. It's simply just a risk that some parents aren't willing to take given the bad press that some breeds receive.


----------



## Jugsmalone

monkeymummy32 said:


> As the mummy of a 2 year old boy, I find it quite scary when we're walking in the park and an unleashed dog runs up to us, more so if it happens to be a staffie/rottweiler/other big dog. I completely understand that just because a dog might be a staffy or a rottweiler, for example, this doesn't mean it wants to eat my son. However, from a mothers perspective, we don't know your dog like you do, so it's better to be safe than sorry. I just feel that some dog owners get annoyed when parents whisk a child out of the dogs way or cross the street, as though it in someway we're accusing their dog of being viscious/being bad owners. It's simply just a risk that some parents aren't willing to take given the bad press that some breeds receive.


If you met me when out walking my big dog you wouldnt worry at all, as I always put him on a lead where small children are concerned. Its not because he's no good with children (he's brill with kids BTW), its because I understand that a big dog can be scary for both parent and child and paretns tend to feel more comfortable with him being on lead.


----------



## russelgrane

LucaTheDoberman said:


> I heard the story in the news this week about the dog attack in a park in Chingford, London where a girl was bitten by a dog. Its yet another sad story giving dogs a bad name.
> I've always been a believer of *nurture rather than nature*, i.e. its how you bring the dog up that effects whether its likely to bite or not. But is this always the case?
> 
> I've been on the receiving end of a very irate walker a couple of months ago. I was walking my 6 month old brown doberman, off the lead, in a very quiet and rural area when we came up behind a couple of walkers. As we got closer the gentleman walker, who was carrying a walking stick, turned round to me and said 'if your f***ing dog comes near me I'm going to cane his head in!'.  I was really *shocked* by this outburst and a little shaken, we passed them without saying much.
> 
> The more I thought about the guys reaction the more I understood why he had reacted like this. He was obviously* frightened of dogs* and rather than cower away he just got angry, For then on I have always put Luca on a lead if we come across walkers, which actually makes him look more dangerous. But he's not at all dangerous, he wouldn't hurt a fly. He's just got a really intense stare. I'm sure if he was fluffyer this wouldn't be a problem.
> 
> Anyone elses thoughts and experiences on the subject?


Dogs can be dangerous if you are stranger to them, but if they are train well then they will help you out in many ways. some dangerous breeds of dogs are also trained for doing regular choirs also.


----------



## sparrowsitn

ilovethesun said:


> Hi,
> 
> I've been reading this thread with interest.
> 
> We had a male shar pei who we had to have put down due to dog-dog aggression. He was only 2 years old.
> 
> Here is the background.
> 
> We spent nearly 4 years searching for a good breeder as I'm sure most people will be aware of the problems with this breed. We thoroughly researched the breed and attended many shows and met many breed specialists before deciding on this breed. Anyway, eventually the time came and we took home our gorgeous 8 week old puppy. He never had any problems with skin/eyes or ANY health issues. We visited 4 times before buying him and saw Mum, Dad, aunties, uncles etc and went to numerous shows and got references from vets and judges.
> 
> From day one we socialised socialised socialised! Carrying our pup around and introducing him to everyone and everything.
> 
> We then attended puppy school, junior school and senior school and worked on training every single day.
> 
> He was neutered.
> 
> However, he started around the age of 12 months to show aggression towards other dogs (growling, no attacks or biting). We immediately sought professional help and worked 1-1 with a dog behaviourist right up until we had him put down a year later. We worked with 3 different vets and had input from numerous behaviourists and trainers.
> 
> We even flew to Holland to seek help from a shar pei specialist.
> 
> We had conversations with behaviourists in the USA who specialised in aggression and shar pei.
> 
> In short, we did EVERYTHING possible. However, this was not enough and he got worse and worse. We had all medical tests done to rule out brain tumour, thyroid etc. There was nothing left to do and on the advice or the vets, behaviourist and his breeder we devastatingly had him put to sleep.
> 
> The breeder was MORTFIED and immediately neutered EVERY single dog in that line, even though in 30 years they had never had a problem with temperament. The breeder was in floods of tears and supported us throughout.
> 
> We will never get another dog as could not go through this again.
> 
> My point being I do not think it is always the owner who is to blame when it comes to dog aggression.


I sincerely believe that sacrificing the dog was not a good option, if I have a dog that does not have good relations with other dogs, I put a muzzle and let the other approaches but never would sacrifice my best friend for that.


----------



## Alberi

so very very sad


----------



## ilovethesun

Do you live in a city? We had NO option, you cannot leave your front door without meeting people and dogs (despite us walking him at 5am and very late at night). He shook off 3 different types of muzzles, shar pei are notoriously hard to fit a muzzle. As I type, two roads away a staffy shook off a muzzle and mauled a king charles to death on his owners doorstep for last week, I would never be so irresponsible to risk that happening. Our dog has bitten humans and went for a child. We had no option but to do what any responsible dog owner would do, even though it broke our hearts.


----------



## spinola syd

Lola71 said:


> And im sorry, but i, for one, do not accept your apology for any offence you may have caused by implying that people on a pet discussion should be banned from having dogs for life for choosing a breed which is recognised by the Kennel Club as being a good family breed and i like your comment about a forum being used to vent 'bigotry and hatred'....yep thats exactly what you did!


What a shame. Still I suppose that your sense of outrage at my remarks is extended to all of the other posters on this thread and across this forum who express similar views. In fact to pretty much everyone who doesn't share your view. I don't 'hate' the owners of these dogs, I don't even hate the dogs, I expressed quite clearly that I was more than happy to review my opinions based on the responses from (some) of the posters, not the behavior of a bigot. If someone expresses a different view or a passionate standpoint, it doesn't make them bigoted. It's only bigotry if you refuse to change your opinion of anything and everything that does not agree with your view of the world. How would you view your response to my apology based on that description?......


----------



## Gruggly

I'm a strong believer of the fact that its never the dogs fault, always the owner.
And it basically works like this, the dog learns how to demonstrate authority through the owner, so if you shout at the dog, it will bark at other dogs/people that it feels it is higher than, and if you physically abuse your dog, it will think that's an acceptable way to show dominance over something, whether it be a other dog, a child, or even a fully grown man.

I also think part of the problem is that people with little to no experience with dogs often go with dogs that they cannot handle; for example a lot of people get staffs which are a high energy strong willed dog and if you don't know how to take controll of that, then it will be in controll of you. And please don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that staffs are a nasty breed, I have a friend with two of them and they are lovely, yet I also have another friend who thinks hitting his dog when it doesn't do what he wants is the way to train it, and this has ended up with 3 cats being killed (when the dog had no interest in them before) another dog being attacked whilst on the lead and a man outside a pub getting bitten on the leg for no reason atall.


----------



## Gruggly

I have two boxer puppies, both were attacked by a sandy coloured lab completely unprovoked, they didn't even know it was there, so it is the owner, not the breed. I know people with staffs that are lovely and good with other dogs, but I also know of a guy with a staff that kills anything that moves and has bit a man for no reason. And this is because of how the dog is treated; not because it's a staff


----------



## Pixieandbow

delca1 said:


> Unless you have all the _true_ facts about a dog attack then you should not judge.
> 
> Go back to the tale of Gelert... found in a room with an upturned crib and lots of blood, his owner killed the dog with his sword only to discover a dead wolf and an unharmed baby.
> Makes you think, its not always how it looks.


Which is exactly the same as the tale of Saint Guinefort apart from Guinefort being a French greyhound


----------



## Wiz201

ilovethesun said:


> Hi,
> 
> I've been reading this thread with interest.
> 
> We had a male shar pei who we had to have put down due to dog-dog aggression. He was only 2 years old.
> 
> Here is the background.
> 
> We spent nearly 4 years searching for a good breeder as I'm sure most people will be aware of the problems with this breed. We thoroughly researched the breed and attended many shows and met many breed specialists before deciding on this breed. Anyway, eventually the time came and we took home our gorgeous 8 week old puppy. He never had any problems with skin/eyes or ANY health issues. We visited 4 times before buying him and saw Mum, Dad, aunties, uncles etc and went to numerous shows and got references from vets and judges.
> 
> From day one we socialised socialised socialised! Carrying our pup around and introducing him to everyone and everything.
> 
> We then attended puppy school, junior school and senior school and worked on training every single day.
> 
> He was neutered.
> 
> However, he started around the age of 12 months to show aggression towards other dogs (growling, no attacks or biting). We immediately sought professional help and worked 1-1 with a dog behaviourist right up until we had him put down a year later. We worked with 3 different vets and had input from numerous behaviourists and trainers.
> 
> We even flew to Holland to seek help from a shar pei specialist.
> 
> We had conversations with behaviourists in the USA who specialised in aggression and shar pei.
> 
> In short, we did EVERYTHING possible. However, this was not enough and he got worse and worse. We had all medical tests done to rule out brain tumour, thyroid etc. There was nothing left to do and on the advice or the vets, behaviourist and his breeder we devastatingly had him put to sleep.
> 
> The breeder was MORTFIED and immediately neutered EVERY single dog in that line, even though in 30 years they had never had a problem with temperament. The breeder was in floods of tears and supported us throughout.
> 
> *We will never get another dog as could not go through this again.*
> 
> My point being I do not think it is always the owner who is to blame when it comes to dog aggression.


I wouldn't base your experience just from one breeder and one dog. Its just simply bad luck, I'm sure you won't get another dog like that.


----------



## angelablack12

I agree, you did everything you could possibly do for your dog, you were just very very unlucky x


----------



## sskmick

spinola syd said:


> Hi There,
> 
> My point is that these breeds are naturally aggressive and have been bred for incredibly strong jaws and bite pressure. You very seldom hear of a lab or a goldie savaging someone, why is this.....media bias? Why would the media bother to target a specific breed? Of course there are bad owners, but bad owners plus yorkie equals a yappy nuisance, bad owners plus bull terrier equals potential killer. You have to ask why these dogs are favoured by the sort of people who want to make a statement about their own ferocity and aggressive nature? You carry a gun because you want to have, and be seen to have, the potential to kill. These dogs are dangerous weapons, at the very least licence them and confiscate/destroy if they are illegally owned.


Your first post incensed me, I own a SBT. However trying to read what you are actually getting at, I agree with you 100%. The powerful breeds do unfortunately attract the wrong type of owners.

My dog has been attacked numerous times none of the attacking dogs have been a powerful breed. They have been with owners who are not sterotyped thugs just ordinary people with an ordinary family pets, who believe it is okay to let their pooches off the lead. One owner had the audacity to say to me it was my fault as her dog has never done that before, (my dog was on the lead and hers was off the lead, it was her dog that approached us and instigated the attack) she proceeded to say it is because I am a silly old woman who doesn't know what I have, I have a dangerous breed. My answer to that was I know exactly what I have and I have papers to prove it, unlike you who has a vicious mongrel just like its owner.

Just for clarity my dog has been off lead with up to 25 dogs on forum walks without incident. He has also been walked occasionally during a forum walk on the lead without incident. I stand by what I say there is no bad dogs only bad owners.

I do agree with licensing owners but for "all dog owners", at the end of day we have a register for sex offenders, children at risk registers - why not have a register for dog owners.

Unfortunately according to statistics the breed with the highest incidents of attacks (bites) is the Labs/Retrievers. I was gobsmacked, but logically it makes sense as they are one of the most common/popular breeds - which opens the flood gates for irresponsible breeding.

You can't judge a book by its cover either. I did to be fair, a young lad jeans round his bum, hoodie a large Staffie type cross (Pit Bull as the layman call them) and I instantly thought, I'm in trouble. I was on the path which was adjacent to a field. I walked onto the field to give this lad a wide berth and he followed me. We spoken and it turned out he got the dog advertised free to a good home. He was shocked that there were no questions asked they just handed the dog to him. The dog was in a state being almost bred to death. He lifted her front paws to expose the neat undercarriage. His words were she had tits bigger that Jordans, I took her to the vets she had mastitis (not sure of the spelling) and after treatment look at her now. He took the dog off the leash, and ran off down the field and she ran with him the two were inseparable.

There are statistics for the breeds that have killed a person too and you would be surprised at which breeds have been responsible. The UK doesn't have such information available, I found the statistics on an American website in or around 2007.


----------



## smokeybear

Saying there are no bad dogs only bad owners is at best naive and at worst, very dangerous.

Does that mean there are no bad people only bad parents?

Just like people, animals can be born with or develop mental health conditions which affect their behaviour.

It also puts an unbearable level of guilt onto dog owners.

Your beliefs, however misplaced, do not change the facts.

There is plenty of science to support these facts too, here is but one example of many

Behavioral assessment of child


----------



## FEJA JUODAS

the catchphrases i am thinking about...

there no dangerous dogs just dangerous owners 

or there are no bad dogs just bad owners

occasionally if not proven the case adding instead of the word owners ...breeders...

well it sounds good, moves blame totally from the dog to the owner...or breeder...implies nothing else is in the caracter of the dog meaning willfullness or just nervy or agressive behaviour part of the dogs nature is to blame for anything the dog does that is by humans considered bad...

and explaining all that interpretation i see in what i write a problem with that assumption...we are assuming that the definition of what is GOOD or BAD is understood..and AGREED TO ! .not just by the DOG but by HUMANS !humans have to AGREE to the behaviour they are trained to follow and adhere to ! dogs ? by obeying if trained are thought to be in agreement but if untrained in specifics ? and what if they obey but dont agree just do it for treats or out of habits taught ? do they not have minds and thoughts of their own that we cannot understand ? we humans love to interpret things to say we understand them ! but we reason like humans the dog is not a human. 


now i point out that just to use an example some humans might think jumping on people dogs in excitement is bad..but other humans find this ok good acceptable...

the next point is what can the DOG think is GOOD or BAD ? how can a DOG have the SAME AS HUMANS EVALUATION of GOOD and BAD ? these are CONCEPTS that are then interpreted into judgements of specific behaviours in our human minds that WE by communicaiton and habits we have share and can understand...

a DOG does not unless we can read its mind think like a human...we BEST GUESS its mental state from our interpreation of its behavoiur

and WE decide to call it BAD for example if it disobeys our orders or keeps jumping on people or couches or chasing cats when we have in our opinion made it understandable enough to him by training that such things are what us humans call BAD !

and i suggest that even the CONCEPT OF DEATH is different to a DOG tha a HUMAN ! we do not know if a dog understands what DEATH is as we do or not ! i am thinking of how children take time to understand this death concept and many times i think of my dogs as children with minds of a child for say tings like not understanding the dangers of crossing the road...running off after a cat accross a road...things like that...

now the to me and most reasonable people reading the unfortunate failures of GREAT efforts made in education of a dog the um what was it...ouf...i am not good with names...some ah yes SHAR PEI dog...well nothing could be done the OWNER from just reading how she or he writes seems to me very balanced caring not off the wall in tone and logic used...not highly emotive...i am judging her or him yes or trying to ...to be able to say or think well from what i understand the owner did MORE than what certainly I with any of my dogs everthing was done to train this dog well...and nor does the breeder behaviour or selection of the dog pup sold seem the issue here...

so ? this case and a couple of other to me reasonable accounts of dogs just attacking for NO GOOD REASON a child held walking with its mother holding her hand....

oh and DO not use another catchphrase often used to EXCUSE or EXPLAIN dogs to us bad behaviour by saying...DOGS DONT ATTACK FOR NO REASON as if humans wild animals organisations start wars steal things or kill people for NO REASONS....every living thing has a REASON for doing it but that does not EXCUSE it in the MORAL JUDGEMENT system of humans !

so ....other than the possibility or EXCUSE for a dog of MENTAL ILLNESS which is a genetic thing but NOT a BREEDERS FAULT i dare to stress as it can be NATURAL ACCIDENT as it is in humans...unless anyone thinks dogs cant have mental problems...
so MENTAL ILLNESS is an unsaid additional reason i say to not accept the slogan of THERE ARE NO BAD DOGS ONLY BAD OWNERS !!! it is putting BLAME on the OWNERS where it is NOT the owners fault obviously if the dog is mental !!!

so...the FINAL option other than mental illness to dispute blaming owners or breeeders is that THE DOG IS BAD in our human judgement terms for behaviour that cannot be achieved in the dog by education or training !

the dog JUST DOES NOT RESPOND to training and KEEPS Doing the unacceptable BAD behaviour in human eyes due to its nature ! 

and of COURSE the DOG will have its REASONS for this BAD BEHAVIOUR but that does not excuse it in our human world ! 

strong willed may be a term to describe or classify such a dog in this last case maybe ??? TOO STRONG WILLED a dog ???? with resistance to training so great that it is unmanageable in our human acceptable behaviour expectations of it ?


Dog may just have personalities that are DIFFICULT and UNACCEPTABLE in our human world ?? not due to BAD TRAINING OF BAD OWNERS or BAD BREEDING OF BAD BREEDERS or MENTAL ?

because i suggest that there are 2 OTHER POSSIBILITIES to the generalisation that THERE ARE NO BAD DOGS JUST BAD OWNERS !!! 

the OTHER POSSIBILITIES are MENTAL DOGS or just OVER WILLFUL DOGS ! that just will not in any reasonable way behave to our required expectations of them ! 

I dont know if a dog understands death ! if it knows at what point in its biting it is just harming or at the point of killing anything !

this to me is of interest as i cannot attribute HUMAN MORAL VALUES to the mind of a dog who does not understand DEATH as I do....does not understand GOOD AND BAD as i do ! and does not understand IMPULSE BEHAVIOUR is NEVER ACCEPTABLE in some behaviour to us humans who do not stop it walking around on its own will generally for much of the time but expect the dog to understand that NO TO GET THAT PIE YOU MAY NOT PLAYBITE OR USE YOUR TEETH to get at it ! to be able to know the dog will NEVER take such a DECISION we would have to be certain the dog had NEVER EVER USED ITS TEETH on a human ever ! and tested that many times to be even fairly confident ! 

and i am making a terrible assumption even in that statement myself ! that a dog is going to understand that even if starving hungry it must not do what its instinct or mind or reasoning of a dog tells it to do which is use its teeth to get what it wants ! and understand the damage even death it is causing to do so is wrong ! 

to know the mind of a dog who does not communicate in our language is not possible. we best guesss dogs even if canine experts who can achieve much more obviously than the average uneducated in dog training persons like me.

so the concept of GOOD and BAD dogs or owners is not an adequate and simple as that answer to what are more than those factor possibilities for any behaviour said to be to us humans good or bad..

ps cats come to mind...our dogs can learn many things to be trained in that cats cannot. they have minds of their own that are stronger maybe than dogs for that is one possibility trying to understand WHY there is a difference. a cat is an instinctive KILLER for sure ! not just for food people interpret when they have plenty of it but still catch and kill birds etc. we are not going to say CATS ARE BAD or their OWNERS or BREEDERS are bad for that behaviour...it is in the instinct mindset of the cat quite simply that is NOT UNDERSTOOD by us humans we just best guess it. and i think we best guess dogs too even if they are easier to train than cats. btw...both dogs and cats descend in the evolution from the same animal a catlike animal.and i dont think cats have the same thought or understanding of DEATH that humans have any more than dogs do...no one can know that we only interpret and observe...does a dog or cat understand DEATH as we do ? not likely

excuse me it is too late to be thinking and writing this and thank you to my dogs who distracted me...the subordinate male dog just growled and aggresed slightly my female for going near his dish...Then started eating it himself although he had not been about to eat until he saw her go for the food. i dont understand why...he is defending his food he didnt want to eat until she went near it. sigh. BEDTIME ! I TOOK THE FOOD OFF HIM ! no growls but I AM HEAD OF THE HOUSEHOLD HERE ! and i like to remind my dogs that sometimes ! lol :

ppss morning all if anyone reads...and i say after reading canine experts modern views that are reasonable also to tell us stop thinking PACK WOLF DOG for all behaviour of dogs and ALPHA notions attributed....yes i read the suggested books on that and thought about the canine more experienced and educated than me thoughts on this...please note I HAVE LEARNT to STOP using the word PACK and used the word HEAD OF THE HOUSEHOLD ! a HUMAN society term ! just saying or meaning i want my animals dogs cats goats bulls cows i am around to consider me dIFFERENTLY to their species ! to protect myself and BE IN CHARGE ! sometimes according to canine theory i used violence that does not work being told GENTLE training is better so i am doing things wrong ESPECIALLY WITH CATS ! smacking my cat for peeing on the floor lightly did NOT make it understand my vet told me in fact i ended up with a RAVING TIGER CLAWS IN MY FACE attempts ! FEROCIOUS ! and only when the CAT decided to in human terms FORGIVE ME did it come and demand pets from me again as IT decided not ME ! lol lol !!! excuse me i am not good at CAT training either and applied DOG treatments that did work and nearly had my eyes out !

pppsss and i agree i MUST add having said smacks to my dogs work that reading canine experts views that using violence on dogs to teach them makes them more risky to be aggressive themselves in other situations that yes I SEE THE LOGIC and DANGER in that which can explain unexpected aggression in dogs sometimes.

nb...irrelevant here to the dog issue but if useful and i should go on the CAT threads i know...my vet gave as EXPLANATION, REASON for the cat peeing STRESSS ! even though it did not SEEM stressed in the being agitated to me sense to know that...the facts...adult cat from refuge taken into home with 2 adult dogs learnt to TOLERATE the dogs but NEVER PLAYED as i saw the previous kitten did with them and TOOK SWIPES in secret at them for NO REASON as they did not aggress it just as they PASSED BY ! and the vet explained an ADULT cat unused to dogs gets STRESSED at its TERRITORY being invaded by animals it does not like so gets problems like PEEING IN THE WRONG PLACES to show it to us humans not DELIBERATELY sending a message to us but just doing behaviour that we dont understand.

SOME adult cats i add might not ADAPT ! not ALL but more likely i add not wanting people to be put off taking in adult refuge cats if they dont get on with dogs not met ! 

BLAME SMOKEY BEAR ! for putting by his or her post now i went back to recall the NAME not being good at that mentally...BLAME SMOKEY BEAR FOR SETTING OFF THIS POST OF MINE !!!! and suggesting then me agreeing THERE ARE NO DANGEROUS DOGS ONLY BAD OWNERS is not the whole truth ! lol !!!! LETS BLAME SMOKEY BEAR !!! lol! oh SHUT UP Feja owner you are being CHILDISH now having FUN ! shut UP ! ( childish is the EXCUSE i use, others might interpret it more that I AM A NUTTER ! and both or only one of those REASONS could be valid ! lol ) we all have moments of TEMPORARY INSANITY i think the techie term to give a REASON for some unexplained human behaviour is !!! and hey ! THAT IS VERY TRUE of HUMANS and maybe also for DOGS and CATS etc ! TRYING TO EXCUSE OR DEFEND IDEA of PERMANENT NUTTER status based on isolated mad-dog to use an expression behaviour !

I WILL shut up on my last maybe perceived by some CHILDISH idea and belief that I THINK DOGS have a SENSE OF HUMOUR too and that they UNDERSTAND MY HUMOUR LAUGHTER sometimes ! i interpret that thinking i see them wagging tails even SMILING when i laugh they SEEM happy i am happy..or being nuts ! lol !

Thank GOD for my dogs for that ! humans are far less TOLERANT sometimes hey ! HILARIOUS ! to me excuse me SHUT UP feja owner.


----------



## Pixieandbow

smokeybear said:


> Saying there are no bad dogs only bad owners is at best naive and at worst, very dangerous.
> 
> Does that mean there are no bad people only bad parents?
> 
> Just like people, animals can be born with or develop mental health conditions which affect their behaviour.
> 
> It also puts an unbearable level of guilt onto dog owners.
> 
> Your beliefs, however misplaced, do not change the facts.
> 
> There is plenty of science to support these facts too, here is but one example of many
> 
> Behavioral assessment of child


This is very true. I've never understood why people fail to accept that dogs (like people) all have different personalities. If they didn't then what would be the point in choosing puppies, matching the right dogs with the right owners etc.

If 1 in 3 people suffer mental illness at some point does that mean 1 in 3 families are 'bad' families? Of course not...some people just are susceptible to mental health problems.

Surely the same is true of dogs isn't it?


----------



## ItsonlyChris

:wink5: I've only seen two Staffies(sp?) up close and the first one was lovely, she was really strong so it was hard to play with her since I was young but she was really nice, turns out my grandmothers husband would beat the dog for weeing on their bed whilst left alone. Don't even want to call him my grandfather, he would batter the dog from what I've been told. 

I keep my puppy away from him if I can, even if he's fine and she's sat near his foot, I'll call her over and we'll play.

He's really jealous that we have a dog and he doesn't but the fact that they almost had a puppy is shocking.

The second Staffy I've seen attacked a small dog, a Whippet maybe? Anyway, it was horrible, I was in a state of shock since it was the first time I've seen something like that and it was pretty much at my feet, if you're at your computer right now, stretch your legs as far as you can away from you and the fight was probably where your feet are.

I've had a massive rant about this on another topic though, long story short, the person holding the dog was a girl about 14, she put the lead on the floor to have her chips and the dog attacked the Whippet as it went past and everyone backed the girl up because we have scummy men here who think with their willies.

In all fairness, the dog was on a harness but the girl should have kept the dog at her side rather than drop the lead and even then I would put the blame on her parents since by the looks of what happened they couldn't have expressed enough how badly things could have gotten and since we live in a place where loads of dogs are they must have known what would happen. That's just me presuming things though, maybe the dog was a little angel at home.



On the other hand, we took in an old stray Jack Russell when I was about 7 (11 years ago) and he was really aggressive and he kept running away and thinking back on it now, he could have easily attacked another dog, since he did try from what I remember. I was only 7 and things were still nice and cheerful and I didn't know people abused dogs so I didn't think about the dogs past.

Anyway, Eddy the Jack Russell was really aggressive, can't remember how long we had him but he eventually ran away and 11 years later I'm sure he would have passed away. 

Keep in mind, that was 11 years ago and he would have been just as bad as a Staffy in regards to how aggro he would get from the way Staffies are portrayed. I have no idea what happened to him, my parents say he ran off and I'm taking their word for it. He even went to bite us at times so I suppose it's for the best. I just hope he didn't harm any other dogs.



So... enough about that.

I think it's the way a dog is brought up that will reflect in how the dog behaves but at the same time the different traits a dog, or a breed, might have would probably be a contributing factor in the way the dog behaves.

Sorry about a massive bloomin monologue but I get carried away when I'm typing/writing and find it really hard to cut things short, I'm doing it again here.

I'm not even sure I covered everything I wanted to.


Welcome to the forums to the newer members I spotted here :wink5:


----------



## smokeybear

This seem very sensible to me, not hysterical but a balanced view of the actual factgs ......................

What Causes Fatal Dog Attacks & How Can We Prevent Death by Dogs?


----------



## missylou

Most breeds I've owned people would class as 'thug dogs' yet I've only have bad experiences with so called family pets.

I have been bitten by two Labradors, a golden retriever, a border collie and a jack Russell.

One of my previous Staffies was attacked by three seperate Labradors, two border collies, 3 Yorkshire terriers and a cocker spaniel.

When the 3 Yorkshire terriers attacked him he was off lead and luckily got them off and could easily outrun them. The owner had the cheek to say in her exact words 'that thing should be on a lead' as my poor dog was trying to outrun her little yappers. Lets say she got a few choice words that I shouldn't be proud of but I was fuming.

My boy was once left in my spare room with my mini lol rabbit I came back in and they were curled up asleep together, he could be left with puppies, older dogs, kittens, cats, rabbits, guinea pigs, ducks and pigs haha he didn't have a bad bone in his body my 3 year old sister at the time could take a bone off him and command him to leave what he was playing with or hand it to her and go to his bed. I brought him up this way but it makes me mad when I would get tarred with the same brush as these idiots that own the breed


----------



## Lauza420

Hi there spinol_syd I completely disagree.. A jack Russell killed a baby last year...my point is no matter the size or breed every dog has the potential to do damage if not given the proper training "bull terriers" or "dangerous weapons" you say are the most loyal loving dogs if properly socialised and trained. Ive had them all my life. The problems lie in bad breeding and bad ownership. And for your information labradors can be very snappy its well known so stop believing the stereotype. Have u even been in contact with a bull terrier who is properly trained and socialised????? I'm guessing not because if you had you would seen they are the most loyal loving wanting to please breed....people who slam stereotyped breeds annoy me any dog can do damage remember that!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Sparkle22

spinola syd said:


> Hi There,
> 
> My point is that these breeds are naturally aggressive and have been bred for incredibly strong jaws and bite pressure. You very seldom hear of a lab or a goldie savaging someone, why is this.....media bias? Why would the media bother to target a specific breed? Of course there are bad owners, but bad owners plus yorkie equals a yappy nuisance, bad owners plus bull terrier equals potential killer. You have to ask why these dogs are favoured by the sort of people who want to make a statement about their own ferocity and aggressive nature? You carry a gun because you want to have, and be seen to have, the potential to kill. These dogs are dangerous weapons, at the very least licence them and confiscate/destroy if they are illegally owned.


My family rescued a golden retriever once, we had him about 2 days after he was extremely aggressive towards young children coupled with severe resource guarding, you couldn't even walk past without him rushing towards you to try and bite you. 
I have come across aggressive Labrador retrievers also.

My answer?
Ban all retrievers!
They are big, strong dogs and obviously VERY dangerous.

As a child, I was almost bitten by an old cocker spaniel while visiting a friend, the mum locked him away and admitted he had shown aggression before.
Shortly after having a baby, me, him and the grandparents went for a nice leisurely walk.
Two springer spaniels ran out of their garden, across the road and straight towards my baby in his stroller where they locked eyes with him and stalked forward growling and snarling.
The owner tried to call them to no avail, so grabbed them and then beat them before commenting that 'they wouldn't have hurt you anyway'
Then our neighbours got a springer, we couldn't go in our garden anymore as it would throw itself against the fence snarling and barking which was very frightening.
On another occasion, my aunt, who is very sick so perhaps the dog picked up on this was walking down an alleyway when a cocker spaniel (on lead) lunged at and attempted to bite her.

Clearly, spaniels are a very dangerous group of breeds and therefore they should all banned.

As a teenager, I rode horses.
I was leading a horse at my riding school to the arena when a standard poodle appeared and stood very confidently, staring me in the eyes, growling and barking.
My dad's parents rescued a small poodle once that was incredibly aggressive, they took it to the vet to be put down as it was so vicious but the vet rehomed it himself as it was physically healthy.

I am sure you agree, that these instances serve as proof that poodles, as a breed, are pretty untrustworthy and should be banned aswell.

And finally, throughout my life I have come across numerous aggressive small dogs, namely chihuahuas, yorkies and jack Russell's.
In fact, I was babysitting once. The guy had two dogs, an elderly retriever and an adult jack Russell.
The retriever approached me so I stroked him, out of nowhere, the jack appeared and bit my hand.
NO provocation whatsoever, I didn't even see it coming.

So I think its fair to say, pretty much all small terriers and chihuahuas are a no no too. 
Let's not forget also, that young children have been killed by tiny dogs so the size isn't that important in terms of dangerousness really.

I have met one aggressive german shepherd but she was a heavily abused rescue so who knows what could have happened to her.

I never met an aggressive bull breed or Rottweiler or Akita and I've met many.

Look hard enough and you'll find someone who has had a bad experience with every breed, banning them is pointless. 
You'd end up with no dogs at all.

Bull terriers jaws don't lock either, that has been well and truly proven.


----------



## jessdarcy

LucaTheDoberman said:


> I heard the story in the news this week about the dog attack in a park in Chingford, London where a girl was bitten by a dog. Its yet another sad story giving dogs a bad name.
> I've always been a believer of *nurture rather than nature*, i.e. its how you bring the dog up that effects whether its likely to bite or not. But is this always the case?
> 
> I've been on the receiving end of a very irate walker a couple of months ago. I was walking my 6 month old brown doberman, off the lead, in a very quiet and rural area when we came up behind a couple of walkers. As we got closer the gentleman walker, who was carrying a walking stick, turned round to me and said 'if your f***ing dog comes near me I'm going to cane his head in!'.  I was really *shocked* by this outburst and a little shaken, we passed them without saying much.
> 
> The more I thought about the guys reaction the more I understood why he had reacted like this. He was obviously* frightened of dogs* and rather than cower away he just got angry, For then on I have always put Luca on a lead if we come across walkers, which actually makes him look more dangerous. But he's not at all dangerous, he wouldn't hurt a fly. He's just got a really intense stare. I'm sure if he was fluffyer this wouldn't be a problem.
> 
> Anyone elses thoughts and experiences on the subject?


There is no doubt people are scared of certain dogs due to their bite tendencies and unfortunately Doberman is one of them. As there are lot of cases in recent past of dog bites and most of the time it was doberman and Pitbull.

It is the responsibility of dog trainer or owner to control their dogs from causing any harm to people. Not every dog is bad, but at the same time not every dog can be left unattended.


----------



## Blaise in Surrey

I find myself really torn over this question..... My starting point is that I would never 'trust' a dog - it's a dog, an animal, and its behaviour will never be entirely predictable, especially around other animals and, sometimes, children.

I then think of the experiences I've had: when I had a border collie there was a GSD that consistently attacked him (eventually there was a court order that the GSD must be muzzled); the only dog that has ever bitten me was a yorkshire terrier, and that was when I put a leaflet through his letter box . One of the softest dogs (belonging to someone else) that I've ever encountered was a rottweiler - her owner had to really keep an eye on her as, when on a walk, if she saw me in the distance she would do anything possible to come and say hello. 

And yet......... I have an instinctive wariness around 'bull-type' breeds. Is this just bad publicity? I don't think so, because I've felt this way for many, many years. It probably wasn't helped by an old family story........

My maternal grandparents had a staffy; she was brindle (she died way before I was born, but there is one, very faint, photograph) and apparently adored everyone in the family. I have no idea if she was walked much, or how she was 'brought up'. The story is told that, one night, when my mother and her sister were in their late teens, my mother came back to the family home at the 'right' time, but her rather wayward sister decided to stay out later. When she eventually returned home she knew that she would be in trouble, so crept in as quietly as she could. The staffy, suspecting an intruder, leapt at her and, with paws on her shoulders, applied her teeth to my aunt's neck! Fortunately she managed to gasp the dog's name and the dog, mortified, dropped to the ground.

But then, I'd want my poodles to do that to an intruder, so......... 

One question to those of you who know these breeds: is it true that once they bite, they don't let go? And if so, why is that, when other breeds' jaws can be forced apart? Is it an anatomical thing?

Thanks in advance, and thanks for managing to read this far!


----------



## lostbear

baileygirl said:


> I personally know the dog and owner of this recent attack in Chingford. The papers have gone to town on him, but its a complete lie. Gary is the most lovely gentle man in the world. he rescued his staffy from an awful home where it was kept in a cage and never given love or walked. He had the dog not even a year. my son played with it in the summer, it was a lovely happy dog after Gary had nurtured and cared for it. the papers have made out is was in a park that the attack happened. it was not, it was in a forest where many dog walkers let their dogs off their leads for a run about. the father of the child is quoted as saying the dog circled his child then attacked *like a shark & gary shouted cant you keep your child under control.*
> 
> Obviously knows he was in the wrong and is trying to make things out as being totally the other person's fault.
> 
> I know that never in a million years would Gary say something like that. He loves kids & is a gentle & caring man. Another side of the story is that* the dad punched the dog before it attacked (not that you will ever hear that) & the dog retaliated.*
> 
> Why the hell did he do that? Obviously one of these "macho" areseholes - or has the story not been quite told to you accurately? I'd be surprised if a dog bit one person when it was beaten by another.
> 
> Im sorry but *why would you just not pick your kid up*
> 
> Not advisable to do this - just stop them doing anything that will attract/excite a dog e.g. screaming or running, and keep them by you
> 
> if she was scared of dogs? Gary has been absolutely distraught since Saturday, he cannt sleep, he is crying constantly, being sick & racked with guilt.* He had to have his dog put down on Monday and now faces at least 6 months in prison. *
> 
> I am so sorry he felt he had to part with his dog. Why is he going to get a prison sentence, though? If the dog is not a banned breed, and has not shown aggression how could he know? This seems very unfair.
> 
> This is so wrong! He does not deserve this! I dont know what to do to help him. All he is guilty of is helping an abused dog, giving it a loving home and trusting it enough to let it have a run around the forest. He handed himself into the police straight away and has to live with what has happened to this little girl.


This is the first time, I think, that we've heard one of these stories from the other side, so to speak. If what you have told us is true, and having a staffie myself, and knowing the breed, I can believe that it is, then what has happened is horrendous. The father is the one who caused the attack (but of course,now comes out like a hero because he saved his child from the dog - which would never had bitten the poor little thing if the dad hadn't been aggressive), the child may now be scarred, and will almost certainly be terrified of dogs for the rest of her life, a good dog has died, and a man who just wanted a loving companion is apparently going to end up in jail.

The jail sentence seems particularly brutal - could there be any other factors that are affecting this? e.g. was the dog found to be a pit-bull type when the guy went to the police?

I met a family earlier this year with a pit bull (and it obviously was a pit bull) who had got it from a rescue centre and had been told it was a staffie. It was only as he grew that his genetic inheritance became obvious, and the family went to the police and had him registered, tattooed, castrated, muzzled and everything. Their only regret was that they could never let this big softie off to have a good run. Can't see why else a jail sentence could be merited if your account is accurate.


----------



## lostbear

spinola syd said:


> I read a lot of these 'oh my dog wouldn't hurt a fly' posts. I was walking on the local hills, which are a national park, this weekend. It had snowed and there were lots of people out skiing, sledging and watching their dogs hurtling around in the snow...perfect! Then it happened. A Land Rover Defender pulled up and a family got out, swearing and shouting at each other. They opened the back of the vehicle and a bull terrier leapt out, no lead, no harness, no muzzle. It barked two or three times as its owners shouted encouragement 'go on Daisy!'. It then ran straight at a young cocker spaniel and clamped its jaws around the poor creatures neck. The spaniel cried out in pain and fear but the beast had it on the floor and wasn't letting go. The poor dogs owners were horrified and tried to part the dogs but the bull terriers jaws were locked shut. It was a horrible sight as the spaniel struggled for its life. One bloke was trying to prise its jaws open while the spaniels owner screamed at someone to 'get it off her'.
> 
> I couldn't watch any more but after about 5 minutes I saw the spaniel being carried back to the owners car. It looked dead to me. As the poor owner asked if the terriers owners had a licence for the beast he was just ignored. The last thing I heard was a woman from the Land Rover shouting in a strident voice full of indignation ' he wouldn't hurt a fly, he sleeps with our kids'.
> 
> A horrible story but totally true and an incident I am trying to forget but can't. Why in Gods name to people want to own these killing machines? They are bred for one thing only and enjoy doing it. *The argument about no bad dogs, only bad owners is rubbish*. These dogs should be illegal and all exisiting ones destroyed. Anyone who wants to own one of these appalling breeds should be automatically banned from dog ownwrship for life.
> 
> I am sure that I will now get the backlash from owners who have one of these dreadful creatures who 'is like part of the family and wouldn't hurt anyone'. Go and tell that to the family who took their puppy home with its neck broken.


This is a horrific account, and I can understand that you are shocked and angry - but you are wrong.

Everything comes down to the owner. The fact that these half-wits let an unrestrained dog even travel in a car, let alone encourage it to jump out into a car park, and then refused to take any responsibility for what happened to that poor spaniel tells you EXACTLY what type of owner they are!

I hope that the dog's owners were not too shocked to take registration details, and get the names of a couple of witnesses, because these bar stewards need to be taken to court.

Horrible, horrible thing to happen - but not the dog's fault. The owners are obviously scum!


----------



## lostbear

spinola syd said:


> Hi There,
> *
> My point is that these breeds are naturally aggressive and have been bred for incredibly strong jaws and bite pressure*. You very seldom hear of a lab or a goldie savaging someone, why is this.....media bias? Why would the media bother to target a specific breed? Of course there are bad owners, but bad owners plus yorkie equals a yappy nuisance, bad owners plus bull terrier equals potential killer. You have to ask why these dogs are favoured by the sort of people who want to make a statement about their own ferocity and aggressive nature? You carry a gun because you want to have, and be seen to have, the potential to kill. These dogs are dangerous weapons, at the very least licence them and confiscate/destroy if they are illegally owned.


They are NOT "naturally aggressive" - on the contrary - they tend to be as soft as the proverbial, but you are right that they are powerful.

As are rotties, german shepherds, labradors and so on and so forth. They are favoured by idiots because they look mean, and they take a lot of punishment _without retaliating._ These people often abuse their dogs physically - they don't want one that will take a lump out of them!


----------



## lostbear

ouesi said:


> Well thats because people suck at identifying breeds. If it bites its IDd as a bully breed even if its a lab. Happens here in the US all the time. And sadly, there are some badly bred, unsocialized labs and goldens out there who will happily bite you - hard, just for looking at them.
> 
> Where breeds historically used for fighting have the advantage is that they were also specifically bred for NOT redirecting on humans. You know, the whole PIT bull part meant the dogmen had to get in the pit with the dogs and separate them when the fight was over. Dogs who went after the humans tended to be culled really fast.
> The TRUTH is, bully breeds, while they tend to have really high prey drive, and yes, also can be rather dog aggressive, are almost never human aggressive. Thats never what they were bred for. Your dobie though was definitely bred to attack and bite humans. Chew on that tidbit
> 
> Wrong again. Talk to the family who lost their baby to a pomeranian attack. Yes, you read that right, a pomeranian killed a 6 week old baby. ALL dogs with teeth and jaws that open and close can bite and do some pretty bad damage.
> 
> LOL, you own a doberman!!! A dog originally bred to protect Mr. Karl Dobermann as he was out collecting taxes, then used as a war dog and police dog. So, you own a protection dog of war, what does that say about YOU?
> 
> Prey drive does not equal human aggression. When a greyhound chases and kills a rabbit, does that make him an aggressive killer? Of course not. So why should it be any different with other breeds?


Lovely explanation.


----------



## lostbear

elmthesofties said:


> Owners, definitely.
> What annoys me is that if someone has a dangerous dog, they can get another. I personally think that if anyone is ever found to own more than 2 very dangerous dogs, they should be permanently banned from keeping the vast majority of dog breeds. (maybe allowed to keep toy dogs, seeing as they probably won't bother training them to be agressive) After all, dogs had to die. Why should more need to suffer the same fate?
> 
> Another thing that annoys me? There is a lovely lady who lives in the area who's got the most GORGEOUS staffie type dog. It's wonderful.* Very obediant and friendly. But as soon as people see it? "Oh my goodness! That elderly woman has got an incredibly agressive dog! It's going to kill us all! Look at the way it's viciously attacking that child... look! Look! It's going to kill it with it's wagging tail! Look how it sits there, planning the attack, while that child is pulling the dog's ears!" Yeah. That happens often.
> But the great dane? Oh no, it's fine. It's only killed a couple of dogs and seriously injured some people. It's only alive because the woman who owns it is married to a high ranking police officer.* But it's fine, because great danes are stereotypically friendly dogs.


This p1sses me off as well. One of the worst people for verbally abusing staffies and their owners is a neighbour of mine. SHe had an akita which killed two dogs, and that she then never dared let off lead. After the akita died, she moved onto something more manageable - a pack of jack russell terriers (3) of the little buggers.

They haven't killed anything, but she daren't let them off lead because they go in as a pack at every other dog they see, ANother neighbour also has three J's and they are happy but lovely.

Let's have a think, now. What do this dog aggressive akita, and these dog aggressive JRT's have in common?

No - nope - can't think of anything. Maybe it will come to me.


----------



## lostbear

ilovethesun said:


> Hi,
> 
> I've been reading this thread with interest.
> 
> We had a male shar pei who we had to have put down due to dog-dog aggression. He was only 2 years old.
> 
> Here is the background.
> 
> We spent nearly 4 years searching for a good breeder as I'm sure most people will be aware of the problems with this breed. We thoroughly researched the breed and attended many shows and met many breed specialists before deciding on this breed. Anyway, eventually the time came and we took home our gorgeous 8 week old puppy. He never had any problems with skin/eyes or ANY health issues. We visited 4 times before buying him and saw Mum, Dad, aunties, uncles etc and went to numerous shows and got references from vets and judges.
> 
> From day one we socialised socialised socialised! Carrying our pup around and introducing him to everyone and everything.
> 
> We then attended puppy school, junior school and senior school and worked on training every single day.
> 
> He was neutered.
> 
> However, he started around the age of 12 months to show aggression towards other dogs (growling, no attacks or biting). We immediately sought professional help and worked 1-1 with a dog behaviourist right up until we had him put down a year later. We worked with 3 different vets and had input from numerous behaviourists and trainers.
> 
> We even flew to Holland to seek help from a shar pei specialist.
> 
> We had conversations with behaviourists in the USA who specialised in aggression and shar pei.
> 
> In short, we did EVERYTHING possible. However, this was not enough and he got worse and worse. We had all medical tests done to rule out brain tumour, thyroid etc. There was nothing left to do and on the advice or the vets, behaviourist and his breeder we devastatingly had him put to sleep.
> 
> The breeder was MORTFIED and immediately neutered EVERY single dog in that line, even though in 30 years they had never had a problem with temperament. The breeder was in floods of tears and supported us throughout.
> 
> We will never get another dog as could not go through this again.
> 
> My point being I do not think it is always the owner who is to blame when it comes to dog aggression.


SOme dogs, like some people, are occasionally wrongly wired, for want of a better term. But this is rare, and only becomes common when they are negligently bred when the problem is discovered. I am so pleased that you had a responsible breeder. This trait could so easily have got into the breed.


----------



## lostbear

ilovethesun said:


> Hi,
> 
> We tried every technique possible by the end!
> 
> Had some success, albeit sketchy, with re-conditioning, counter conditioning - look at me, throwing treats onto the ground, parallel walking and desensitising.
> 
> His aggression was mainly towards other dogs but was sometimes directed towards humans, very unpredictably. For example, a man where I worked who our dog LOVED went out of the office for lunch and when he came back in my dog went for him. Whereas 15 mins before they'd been playing happily.
> 
> We did so so much to try to help our dog, spending thousands of pounds and probably even more hours, however, in the end it was decided he just wadn't safe and to not put him to sleep would be irresponsible.


May I ask - did you have a post-mortem? (Appreciate that you may just have cut your losses, expense-wise, as you had invested a lot of money) I just wondered if he might have had a brain tumour or an over-production of testosterone or something.

I think you did the right thing, and acted very responsibly BTW.


----------



## lostbear

smokeybear said:


> Saying there are no bad dogs only bad owners is at best naive and at worst, very dangerous.
> 
> Does that mean there are no bad people only bad parents?
> 
> Just like people, animals can be born with or develop mental health conditions which affect their behaviour.
> 
> It also puts an unbearable level of guilt onto dog owners.
> 
> Your beliefs, however misplaced, do not change the facts.
> 
> There is plenty of science to support these facts too, here is but one example of many
> 
> Behavioral assessment of child


I agree - but a good owner, aware that they had a "bad" dog, would take the appropriate precautions - muzzling, leashing - euthanasia if necessary.

Sadly we aren't allowed to do this with 'orrible people!


----------



## lostbear

BlaiseinHampshire said:


> One question to those of you who know these breeds:* is it true that once they bite, they don't let go? And if so, why is that, when other breeds' jaws can be forced apart? Is it an anatomical thing?*
> 
> Thanks in advance, and thanks for managing to read this far!


Like any dog in a fight, staffies are reluctant to let go when they have a hold - because that would allow the other dog to grab them! However, like any dog their jaws can be forced apart (bloody hard work, though) - best option in any dog fight situation if one dog has a hold on another is to have someone get a good grip on BOTH dogs. Whichever dog has the hold, cut off its airway - push its face into the other dog, cover its nose, choke it, whatever - it will have to release to breathe. Pull dogs apart then and then only.

NEVER try to pull any dog off another when it has a hold - all you will do is rip lumps out of the other dog's flesh (or person's, if it comes to that). Breaking up a dog fight if you are on your own is much harder, as often the dog which was bitten will turn around and try to grab the one that has just released it (and which you are holding).. It's usually a bite born of panic and terror, but obviously continues the fight - and one of the few times I have ever been bitten has been in such a situation.


----------



## Blaise in Surrey

Thanks lostbear


----------



## spinola syd

Lauza420 said:


> Hi there spinol_syd I completely disagree.. A jack Russell killed a baby last year...my point is no matter the size or breed every dog has the potential to do damage if not given the proper training "bull terriers" or "dangerous weapons" you say are the most loyal loving dogs if properly socialised and trained. Ive had them all my life. The problems lie in bad breeding and bad ownership. And for your information labradors can be very snappy its well known so stop believing the stereotype. Have u even been in contact with a bull terrier who is properly trained and socialised????? I'm guessing not because if you had you would seen they are the most loyal loving wanting to please breed....people who slam stereotyped breeds annoy me any dog can do damage remember that!!!!!!!!!


It's been well over 2 years since I made my original post and I have checked in every so often to view the 'debate'. In my original post I predicted that the majority of responses would be from the 'I've got one of these dogs and they wouldn't hurt a fly' brigade and that proved to be true. There have also been a number of responses from the 'do you own one of these dogs/do you know a breeder etc.' group. Sadly, there have been a few from the 'I disagree so you are an idiot' bunch, but they exist everywhere and so can be largely ignored.

I thought long and hard about whether to post again as it will not actually change any of the opinions on this forum and then I read the quantity of 'likes' against my posts and also the more thoughtful responses of a number of people and decided to have one last go......

Firstly, the title of the thread includes the word 'dangerous'. We are not really talking about nips, scratches or even '3 Yorkies chasing my dog!'.

Secondly, since posting I have been listening to national (UK) radio and tv and there have been 5 incidents in the last 30 months where there has been substantial damage and/or death to children where dogs have been involved. In all 5 cases the breed quoted was 'Bull Terrier' or 'American Bull breed'. I'm sure that there will be responses that claim that this is media bias but these people can never explain why the media would want or even care to be biased. There have been no reports of serious damage or death from any other breed (I can't find any reference to the Jack Russell killing reported by Lauza420).

Thirdly, The phrase 'stereotypical' keeps showing up. Stereotypes evolve largely through continued and consistent usage fuelled by persistent occurrences (eg. alcohol fuelled English louts misbehaving in Spain). The reason that the stereotypical view of Bull breeds is that they are dangerous is that there have been consistent and continuing incidents that reinforce this view.

Finally, I would refer to the National Rifle Association, in America particularly. The constant refrain after every fatal shooting in the States is 'guns don't kill people, people kill people'. Yes, of course the real problem is the dim witted owners who choose these dogs as a symbol of aggression and power but you will never change the attitude of these people as you will never change the attitude of gun owners in the States. You either ban the carrying of guns or you accept that the wrong people will value them for the wrong reasons and some will use them for the wrong reasons.

Please note that if you are thinking of responding to this post, I have not insulted anyone, I have not attacked the credibility or motivation of any of the responders to my post and I am not anti dogs or their owners. I am just interested in the debate rather than side issues.


----------



## lilythepink

spinola syd said:


> It's been well over 2 years since I made my original post and I have checked in every so often to view the 'debate'. In my original post I predicted that the majority of responses would be from the 'I've got one of these dogs and they wouldn't hurt a fly' brigade and that proved to be true. There have also been a number of responses from the 'do you own one of these dogs/do you know a breeder etc.' group. Sadly, there have been a few from the 'I disagree so you are an idiot' bunch, but they exist everywhere and so can be largely ignored.
> 
> I thought long and hard about whether to post again as it will not actually change any of the opinions on this forum and then I read the quantity of 'likes' against my posts and also the more thoughtful responses of a number of people and decided to have one last go......
> 
> Firstly, the title of the thread includes the word 'dangerous'. We are not really talking about nips, scratches or even '3 Yorkies chasing my dog!'.
> 
> Secondly, since posting I have been listening to national (UK) radio and tv and there have been 5 incidents in the last 30 months where there has been substantial damage and/or death to children where dogs have been involved. In all 5 cases the breed quoted was 'Bull Terrier' or 'American Bull breed'. I'm sure that there will be responses that claim that this is media bias but these people can never explain why the media would want or even care to be biased. There have been no reports of serious damage or death from any other breed (I can't find any reference to the Jack Russell killing reported by Lauza420).
> 
> Thirdly, The phrase 'stereotypical' keeps showing up. Stereotypes evolve largely through continued and consistent usage fuelled by persistent occurrences (eg. alcohol fuelled English louts misbehaving in Spain). The reason that the stereotypical view of Bull breeds is that they are dangerous is that there have been consistent and continuing incidents that reinforce this view.
> 
> Finally, I would refer to the National Rifle Association, in America particularly. The constant refrain after every fatal shooting in the States is 'guns don't kill people, people kill people'. Yes, of course the real problem is the dim witted owners who choose these dogs as a symbol of aggression and power but you will never change the attitude of these people as you will never change the attitude of gun owners in the States. You either ban the carrying of guns or you accept that the wrong people will value them for the wrong reasons and some will use them for the wrong reasons.
> 
> Please note that if you are thinking of responding to this post, I have not insulted anyone, I have not attacked the credibility or motivation of any of the responders to my post and I am not anti dogs or their owners. I am just interested in the debate rather than side issues.


when you take into account of how many of these bull breed dogs there are in the UK, the ones doing the damage are thank fully in a minority and plenty are in good family homes.

Not all owners who choose bull breeds are dim witted owners. The bullmastiff girl we have now is a powerful dog but she is also the most gentle and laid back large dog anybody could wish for. She could seriously pack a punch if she decided to....hopefully we have done our job well and this won't ever happen.

I love staffies. They tick all the boxes for me, its just such a shame that they tick boxes for people who shouldn't have fleas, let alone a dog .


----------



## 8tansox

spinola syd said:


> I read a lot of these 'oh my dog wouldn't hurt a fly' posts. I was walking on the local hills, which are a national park, this weekend. It had snowed and there were lots of people out skiing, sledging and watching their dogs hurtling around in the snow...perfect! Then it happened. A Land Rover Defender pulled up and a family got out, swearing and shouting at each other. They opened the back of the vehicle and a bull terrier leapt out, no lead, no harness, no muzzle. It barked two or three times as its owners shouted encouragement 'go on Daisy!'. It then ran straight at a young cocker spaniel and clamped its jaws around the poor creatures neck. The spaniel cried out in pain and fear but the beast had it on the floor and wasn't letting go. The poor dogs owners were horrified and tried to part the dogs but the bull terriers jaws were locked shut. It was a horrible sight as the spaniel struggled for its life. One bloke was trying to prise its jaws open while the spaniels owner screamed at someone to 'get it off her'.
> 
> I couldn't watch any more but after about 5 minutes I saw the spaniel being carried back to the owners car. It looked dead to me. As the poor owner asked if the terriers owners had a licence for the beast he was just ignored. The last thing I heard was a woman from the Land Rover shouting in a strident voice full of indignation ' he wouldn't hurt a fly, he sleeps with our kids'.
> 
> A horrible story but totally true and an incident I am trying to forget but can't. Why in Gods name to people want to own these killing machines? They are bred for one thing only and enjoy doing it. The argument about no bad dogs, only bad owners is rubbish. These dogs should be illegal and all exisiting ones destroyed. Anyone who wants to own one of these appalling breeds should be automatically banned from dog ownwrship for life.
> 
> I am sure that I will now get the backlash from owners who have one of these dreadful creatures who 'is like part of the family and wouldn't hurt anyone'. Go and tell that to the family who took their puppy home with its neck broken.


I'm sorry for the Spaniel that was attacked, but I'm sorry, your sheer ignorance is astounding. Do not clump all dog owners as one, we're not, we all have different dogs, we are all aware that all dogs are capable of attacking any dog/person, we just make sure to do our best to minimise the risk by training our dogs, protecting our dogs and avoiding stupid people who have no flippin' idea.....

Go and have a think about your comments - then come back and apologise for your stupidity. This is a great forum with many breeds of dogs on it, you never know, you might even learn something positive if you stick around.:yesnod:


----------



## Guest

spinola syd said:


> It's been well over 2 years since I made my original post and I have checked in every so often to view the 'debate'. In my original post I predicted that the majority of responses would be from the 'I've got one of these dogs and they wouldn't hurt a fly' brigade and that proved to be true. There have also been a number of responses from the 'do you own one of these dogs/do you know a breeder etc.' group. Sadly, there have been a few from the 'I disagree so you are an idiot' bunch, but they exist everywhere and so can be largely ignored.
> 
> I thought long and hard about whether to post again as it will not actually change any of the opinions on this forum and then I read the quantity of 'likes' against my posts and also the more thoughtful responses of a number of people and decided to have one last go......


Actually well-reasoned, thoughtful replies have been known to change a view point or two. If the person isnt sticking their fingers in their ears and singing la la la la la I cant hear you that is. 



spinola syd said:


> Firstly, the title of the thread includes the word 'dangerous'. We are not really talking about nips, scratches or even '3 Yorkies chasing my dog!'.


Wait, how is "3 yorkies chasing my dog" not dangerous? Maybe my dog is elderly or infirm. Maybe my dog is as small as a yorkie. Is the owner of these yorkies able to call the dogs back? Are the dogs under control?



spinola syd said:


> Secondly, since posting I have been listening to national (UK) radio and tv and there have been 5 incidents in the last 30 months where there has been substantial damage and/or death to children where dogs have been involved. In all 5 cases the breed quoted was 'Bull Terrier' or 'American Bull breed'. I'm sure that there will be responses that claim that this is media bias but these people can never explain why the media would want or even care to be biased. There have been no reports of serious damage or death from any other breed (I can't find any reference to the Jack Russell killing reported by Lauza420).


 lilythepink makes a great point, sheer numbers will skew the statistics. Here in my neck of the woods youre most likely to get bitten by a lab mix. There are some badly bred, badly kept lab mixes out there who will just as happily bite you as look at you, but the reality is, the vast majority of the dogs in this area are some sort of random lab mix, so if youre going to encounter a dog its most likely going to be one of these. Stands to reason that these mixes top the bite list too. In contrast, a cane corso temperament is far sharper than your run-of-the-mill lab mix, but the odds of encountering a cane are pretty slim, so they dont top the bite list. 
If I lived in norther Canada in snow country, the dog most likely to bite me would be a husky mix. Same reasons.
And yes the media is totally biased. Probably for the simple reason that they need to sell stories and vicious pitbull stories sell. About 3 years ago a few states away a little boy was killed by a furry retriever-looking mixed breed dog. The story ran locally for a few days, never made the national news. That same week another boy had his ear badly bitten by a bully breed. That story ran for weeks in the national news sparking more debate about BSL laws etc. There are innumerable examples of this sort of media bias.



spinola syd said:


> Thirdly, The phrase 'stereotypical' keeps showing up. Stereotypes evolve largely through continued and consistent usage fuelled by persistent occurrences (eg. alcohol fuelled English louts misbehaving in Spain). The reason that the stereotypical view of Bull breeds is that they are dangerous is that there have been consistent and continuing incidents that reinforce this view.


Stereotypes are also fueled by plain old ignorance. Like the stereotype that black people are less intelligent than white people. Like the stereotype that women are the weaker sex (put a man through child birth and get back to me).



spinola syd said:


> Finally, I would refer to the National Rifle Association, in America particularly. The constant refrain after every fatal shooting in the States is 'guns don't kill people, people kill people'. Yes, of course the real problem is the dim witted owners who choose these dogs as a symbol of aggression and power but you will never change the attitude of these people as you will never change the attitude of gun owners in the States. You either ban the carrying of guns or you accept that the wrong people will value them for the wrong reasons and some will use them for the wrong reasons.


Oh dear gawd, you cant really be comparing a living, breathing, sentient being to an inanimate object can you? 
But lets take your comparison seriously for a minute. So lets say we ban all bully breeds. Hey, thats been mostly done in the UK for over 20 years right? So, pitbulls in the UK are banned. Hows that working out? Has the public at large been safer because of the ban? Are fewer people bitten by dogs as a result of the ban? Where are the statistics that prove that BSL actually works to keep the public safe? There are none. Why? Because banning a certain breed would be like banning only one type of gun. Like saying all remington guns are banned, but you can still have glocks and smith&wessons and winchesters. 
Fortunately dogs are not guns so please, lets not suggest that ALL dogs be banned


----------



## lostbear

lilythepink said:


> *when you take into account of how many of these bull breed dogs there are in the UK, the ones doing the damage are thank fully in a minority and plenty are in good family homes.
> *
> Not all owners who choose bull breeds are dim witted owners. The bullmastiff girl we have now is a powerful dog but she is also the most gentle and laid back large dog anybody could wish for. She could seriously pack a punch if she decided to....hopefully we have done our job well and this won't ever happen.
> 
> I love staffies. They tick all the boxes for me, its just such a shame that they tick boxes for people who shouldn't have fleas, let alone a dog .


I would add, that whenever an attack occurs, the immediate assumption by media etc is that it is a bull breed. A baby was killed by a "Staffie-type" in Wales a few months ago - then it turned out that the "staff" was a "husky-type" (the second most demonised type of dog, I think).

By then, the media had gone wild with pictures of snarling staffies (never get the photos of the dog curled up on the carpet babysitting a litter of kittens, as our old boy used to do, or even just a dog standing looking alert and friendly - no, it's get the archive pictures of a vicious bastard dog out). Same with the huskies, or whatever breed they're picking on - almost always a photo with all teeth and laid back ears.

There's nothing like objective reporting, is there?

I wonder what happened regarding that baby's death - there was something that didn't ring try about it, and suddenly it disappeared from the news. I know that both the family dogs were destroyed, but police were investigating further, I think.


----------



## StormyThai

spinola syd said:


> It's been well over 2 years since I made my original post and I have checked in every so often to view the 'debate'. In my original post I predicted that the majority of responses would be from the 'I've got one of these dogs and they wouldn't hurt a fly' brigade and that proved to be true. There have also been a number of responses from the 'do you own one of these dogs/do you know a breeder etc.' group. Sadly, there have been a few from the 'I disagree so you are an idiot' bunch, but they exist everywhere and so can be largely ignored.
> 
> I thought long and hard about whether to post again as it will not actually change any of the opinions on this forum and then I read the quantity of 'likes' against my posts and also the more thoughtful responses of a number of people and decided to have one last go......
> 
> Firstly, the title of the thread includes the word 'dangerous'. We are not really talking about nips, scratches or even '3 Yorkies chasing my dog!'.
> 
> Secondly, since posting I have been listening to national (UK) radio and tv and there have been 5 incidents in the last 30 months where there has been substantial damage and/or death to children where dogs have been involved. In all 5 cases the breed quoted was 'Bull Terrier' or 'American Bull breed'. I'm sure that there will be responses that claim that this is media bias but these people can never explain why the media would want or even care to be biased. There have been no reports of serious damage or death from any other breed (I can't find any reference to the Jack Russell killing reported by Lauza420).
> 
> Thirdly, The phrase 'stereotypical' keeps showing up. Stereotypes evolve largely through continued and consistent usage fuelled by persistent occurrences (eg. alcohol fuelled English louts misbehaving in Spain). The reason that the stereotypical view of Bull breeds is that they are dangerous is that there have been consistent and continuing incidents that reinforce this view.
> 
> Finally, I would refer to the National Rifle Association, in America particularly. The constant refrain after every fatal shooting in the States is 'guns don't kill people, people kill people'. Yes, of course the real problem is the dim witted owners who choose these dogs as a symbol of aggression and power but you will never change the attitude of these people as you will never change the attitude of gun owners in the States. You either ban the carrying of guns or you accept that the wrong people will value them for the wrong reasons and some will use them for the wrong reasons.
> 
> Please note that if you are thinking of responding to this post, I have not insulted anyone, I have not attacked the credibility or motivation of any of the responders to my post and I am not anti dogs or their owners. I am just interested in the debate rather than side issues.


Some interesting facts for you...

A study carried out on 6000 dogs and their owners, the study involved two groups, the first involved 11 different breeds and the second involved 33 breeds.
The results from both studies had similar results, and are as followed:


Dachshunds
Chihuahua
Jack Russell
Australian Cattle Dog
Cocker Spaniel
Beagle
Border Collie
Pit Bull Terrier
Great Dane
English Springer Spaniel

Many statistics involving dog bites will not be a true representative of what actually happens due to either mistaking the breed or not reporting the incidence in the first place..

My point being....all dogs have teeth, all dogs are capable of biting, all dogs are capable of killing. 
Shall we just kill all dogs and be done with it?

As for the comparison with gun crime...well guns are banned in the uk, in fact carrying any offensive weapon is illigal.....how's that working out for our knife crime numbers? oh yes...around 1000 a month are stabbed in London alone....


----------



## Guest

StormyThai said:


> Many statistics involving dog bites will not be a true representative of what actually happens due to either mistaking the breed or not reporting the incidence in the first place..
> 
> My point being....all dogs have teeth, all dogs are capable of biting, all dogs are capable of killing.


Statistics are funny little numbers, they rarely tell the whole story, and need to be looked at in context with real thought.

The truth is, dogs are ubiquitous in modern society. Youd be hard pressed to go one day without encountering a dog, and most of us live with one or more in our homes.

What we really need to be noticing is that the actual incidence of damage done by dogs on humans is massively low. Even lower when you consider how common it is for humans to be in contact with dogs. Cows kill more people than dogs do, and no one lives with a cow in their home. Heck, if you want to talk statistics, more kids are killed by their parents than by dogs OR cows. Actually, the numbers for children killed by parents, especially a male parent is depressingly high. Should we ban parents to keep kids safe? Thats what I mean about looking at statistics intelligently and not from an emotional, reactionary place.


----------



## StormyThai

ouesi said:


> Statistics are funny little numbers, they rarely tell the whole story, and need to be looked at in context with real thought.
> 
> The truth is, dogs are ubiquitous in modern society. Youd be hard pressed to go one day without encountering a dog, and most of us live with one or more in our homes.
> 
> What we really need to be noticing is that the actual incidence of damage done by dogs on humans is massively low. Even lower when you consider how common it is for humans to be in contact with dogs. Cows kill more people than dogs do, and no one lives with a cow in their home. Heck, if you want to talk statistics, more kids are killed by their parents than by dogs OR cows. Actually, the numbers for children killed by parents, especially a male parent is depressingly high. Should we ban parents to keep kids safe? Thats what I mean about looking at statistics intelligently and not from an emotional, reactionary place.


I agree 

I was actually thinking when reading this thread that maybe humans need banning...Well, we do an awful lot of damage to all species...sooooooo

lol


----------



## StormyThai

lostbear said:


> I would add, that whenever an attack occurs, the immediate assumption by media etc is that it is a bull breed. A baby was killed by a "Staffie-type" in Wales a few months ago - then it turned out that the "staff" was a "husky-type" (the second most demonised type of dog, I think).
> 
> By then, the media had gone wild with pictures of snarling staffies (never get the photos of the dog curled up on the carpet babysitting a litter of kittens, as our old boy used to do, or even just a dog standing looking alert and friendly - *no, it's get the archive pictures of a vicious bastard dog out)*. Same with the huskies, or whatever breed they're picking on - almost always a photo with all teeth and laid back ears.
> 
> There's nothing like objective reporting, is there?
> 
> I wonder what happened regarding that baby's death - there was something that didn't ring try about it, and suddenly it disappeared from the news. I know that both the family dogs were destroyed, but police were investigating further, I think.


Sometimes they don't even bother to go for the vicious ones...It still makes me chuckle (at the picture, not the incident) when they bring out the sneezing staffy pics :lol:


----------



## sskmick

Personally I wouldn't own a dangerous dog irrespective of breed.

The problem with the media is that if you look back over time there was a witch hunt for the GSD, the only incidents of a dog attacks being reported was that of the GSD, it then moved to Rottweilers the joke back then was what's the difference between a Social Worker and a Rottweiler? You have a chance of getting your kids back off a Social Worker. Sick I know.

It is now the Bull breeds that there is a media witch hunt for. Unfortunately I know of several severe dog attacks being caused by non-bull breeds but that isn't sensationalism as they are wanting to brand all Bull Breeds as "Pit Bull" or "Pit Bull Type" so it never makes the papers.

Just watch this space the next breeds will be the Mastiffs. I say this because they are becoming very popular and obviously the more chance there is of an incident, because some people get these powerful breeds either for the wrong reasons or haven't a clue about the breed, "just looks good" and this is a recipe for disaster. These type of owners are setting the dog up to fail.

I do admire people who choose to work with such dogs in the hope of turning them round, no doubt some have succeeded but personally I would not own either an aggressive dog or one that has allegedly been rehabilitated. 

If a person chooses to keep a dog that is aggressive towards people a responsible owner would take all necessary measures to safeguard the dog and Jo Public against such an incident occurring.


----------



## spinola syd

8tansox said:


> I'm sorry for the Spaniel that was attacked, but I'm sorry, your sheer ignorance is astounding. Do not clump all dog owners as one, we're not, we all have different dogs, we are all aware that all dogs are capable of attacking any dog/person, we just make sure to do our best to minimise the risk by training our dogs, protecting our dogs and avoiding stupid people who have no flippin' idea.....
> 
> Go and have a think about your comments - then come back and apologise for your stupidity. This is a great forum with many breeds of dogs on it, you never know, you might even learn something positive if you stick around.:yesnod:


Can I direct you to my most recent post on this subject (10.07.14) as I think it deals with your use of phrases like 'sheer ignorance' and 'your stupidity'....

I do not 'clump all dog owners as one'......you will also note that I have 'stuck around' for several years reading this post and many others and I have learnt many things, some positive and some not. One of the main things that I have learned is that there are a lot of people out there who enjoy making others unhappy with unpleasant and aggressive statements without actually bothering to read what they post. Your problem, not mine.


----------



## spinola syd

ouesi said:


> Actually well-reasoned, thoughtful replies have been known to change a view point or two. If the person isn't sticking their fingers in their ears and singing "la la la la la I can't hear you" that is.
> 
> Wait, how is "3 yorkies chasing my dog" not dangerous? Maybe my dog is elderly or infirm. Maybe my dog is as small as a yorkie. Is the owner of these yorkies able to call the dogs back? Are the dogs under control?
> 
> lilythepink makes a great point, sheer numbers will skew the statistics. Here in my neck of the woods you're most likely to get bitten by a lab mix. There are some badly bred, badly kept lab mixes out there who will just as happily bite you as look at you, but the reality is, the vast majority of the dogs in this area are some sort of random lab mix, so if you're going to encounter a dog it's most likely going to be one of these. Stands to reason that these mixes top the bite list too. In contrast, a cane corso temperament is far sharper than your run-of-the-mill lab mix, but the odds of encountering a cane are pretty slim, so they don't top the bite list.
> If I lived in norther Canada in snow country, the dog most likely to bite me would be a husky mix. Same reasons.
> And yes the media is totally biased. Probably for the simple reason that they need to sell stories and vicious pitbull stories sell. About 3 years ago a few states away a little boy was killed by a furry retriever-looking mixed breed dog. The story ran locally for a few days, never made the national news. That same week another boy had his ear badly bitten by a bully breed. That story ran for weeks in the national news sparking more debate about BSL laws etc. There are innumerable examples of this sort of media bias.
> 
> Stereotypes are also fueled by plain old ignorance. Like the stereotype that black people are less intelligent than white people. Like the stereotype that women are the weaker sex (put a man through child birth and get back to me).
> 
> Oh dear gawd, you can't really be comparing a living, breathing, sentient being to an inanimate object can you?
> But let's take your comparison seriously for a minute. So let's say we ban all bully breeds. Hey, that's been mostly done in the UK for over 20 years right? So, pitbulls in the UK are banned. How's that working out? Has the public at large been safer because of the ban? Are fewer people bitten by dogs as a result of the ban? Where are the statistics that prove that BSL actually works to keep the public safe? There are none. Why? Because banning a certain breed would be like banning only one type of gun. Like saying all remington guns are banned, but you can still have glocks and smith&wessons and winchesters.
> Fortunately dogs are not guns so please, let's not suggest that ALL dogs be banned


Hi There,

Thanks for your thoughtful reply and also for not falling into the stereotype of just abusing me and my opinions because you disagree. I take your general point about the fingers in the ears but assure you that it doesn't apply to me. If you read the last 2 years of posts on this thread you will see that I have listened, responded and modified my opinions based on intelligent comments by thoughtful individuals.

Just to clarify.....I was comparing the '3 Yorkies chasing my dog' with a death or maiming of a human child and my point was that there is a scale of 'dangerous'. Of course if we own dogs we expect them to act like dogs and that includes a wide scope of good and bad behaviour. It is when they inflict life threatening damage to humans, especially children, that I feel there is a need for control over and above what we have now.

I think that you live in North America (maybe Canada?) and I don't have any experience of your media to comment on bias or otherwise. Here in the UK, the death or maiming of a child by any breed would be considered news and would be reported equally I think. Maybe I'm being naïve, but I think we have a reasonably responsible press if you disregard the tabloid newspapers and stick to the BBC.

I don't think it was necessary to bring racism into your argument as this is no-where near the point that I was making. We could have a discussion regarding the difference between stereotypes and bigotry all day but the intention of my point was that a number of stereotypes come into existence due to persistent behaviour and witnessed incidents.

Finally, your counterpoint regarding gun ownership is key I think. If a gun is used for recreation, sport, defence etc. then I can see the point. There are certain guns that are designed and owned for the specific purpose of making a statement about the owner and will be owned and used by the people who this image appeals to. If you accept that you simply will never stop these people from wanting to make these statements about themselves and owning/using these guns what other option do you have other than to ban the guns?

By the way, banning Bull Breeds in the UK has never actually happened in reality. The politicians talked about and passed some toothless laws but the people who wanted to own them still got hold of them and the attacks still happen. The press refer to them as a 'banned breed' but no-one asks how they came into existence.....If we really wanted to ban them we need a much more aggressive law and a much more consistent interpretation of it.

Hope this clarifies my thoughts a little?


----------



## StormyThai

spinola syd said:


> By the way, banning Bull Breeds in the UK has never actually happened in reality. The politicians talked about and passed some toothless laws but the people who wanted to own them still got hold of them and the attacks still happen. The press refer to them as a 'banned breed' but no-one asks how they came into existence.....If we really wanted to ban them we need a much more aggressive law and a much more consistent interpretation of it.
> 
> Hope this clarifies my thoughts a little?


There is only one bull breed banned in the UK, which is the Pit bull Terrier.

BSL bans 4 breeds in total:

Pit Bull Terrier
Japanese Tosa
Dogo Argentino
Fila Braziliero

It is an ill thought out legislation that was a knee jerk reaction from the government so they could be seen to be doing something..

BSL does not work, why you ask?

Because dog attacks have zero to do with the breed (or shape) of the dog....There are many factors that come into play when it comes to serious dog attacks, genetics, training (or lack there of), previous experiences (be that being beaten by the owner or attacked by another dog), lack of socialisation, poor handling.....etc......etc....etc.....and the list goes on.....But to say that one whole breed (or group of breeds as you seem to be generalising) is naive at best...

For example

Boy, 3, left with horrific facial injuries as Labrador savages him at Poole Harbour | Mail Online

Boy, 9, had half of his ear chewed off after he was mauled by his teacher's Labrador on school trip | Mail Online

Henley on Thames News | Mother's arm ripped open by Labrador attack in front of children

Pet Jack Russell that killed eight-day-old boy 'had escaped through stair gate to attack child' | Mail Online

Jack Russell cross bites one week old child in 'jealousy' attack | Mail Online

Harry Harper death: 'Placid' Jack Russell fatally bit baby in the head then curled up next to him in carry cot | Mail Online

Those right there are just a few that I pulled off google that don't involve bull breeds of any kind....

Targeting breeds does not work, we have had BSL for over a decade and it has proven time and time again that it does not work, and it never will work....once we eradicate all the bull breeds do you really think that it will be the end for dog attacks? Truthfully and honestly?

Even the RSPCA know it is a load of tosh
Don&#039;t Believe the &#039;Type&#039;! - Breed specific legislation - Dog ownership - Campaigns

There is a HUGE media bias in the UK when it comes to dog attacks.....they may report other attacks but the style of writing is completely different...and that's without taking into consideration the mistaken breed ID's. You can not look to the media to get a true representation of dog attacks...

Blame the deed, not the breed....


----------



## lilythepink

StormyThai said:


> There is only one bull breed banned in the UK, which is the Pit bull Terrier.
> 
> BSL bans 4 breeds in total:
> 
> Pit Bull Terrier
> Japanese Tosa
> Dogo Argentino
> Fila Braziliero
> 
> It is an ill thought out legislation that was a knee jerk reaction from the government so they could be seen to be doing something..
> 
> BSL does not work, why you ask?
> 
> Because dog attacks have zero to do with the breed (or shape) of the dog....There are many factors that come into play when it comes to serious dog attacks, genetics, training (or lack there of), previous experiences (be that being beaten by the owner or attacked by another dog), lack of socialisation, poor handling.....etc......etc....etc.....and the list goes on.....But to say that one whole breed (or group of breeds as you seem to be generalising) is naive at best...
> 
> For example
> 
> Boy, 3, left with horrific facial injuries as Labrador savages him at Poole Harbour | Mail Online
> 
> Boy, 9, had half of his ear chewed off after he was mauled by his teacher's Labrador on school trip | Mail Online
> 
> Henley on Thames News | Mother's arm ripped open by Labrador attack in front of children
> 
> Pet Jack Russell that killed eight-day-old boy 'had escaped through stair gate to attack child' | Mail Online
> 
> Jack Russell cross bites one week old child in 'jealousy' attack | Mail Online
> 
> Harry Harper death: 'Placid' Jack Russell fatally bit baby in the head then curled up next to him in carry cot | Mail Online
> 
> Those right there are just a few that I pulled off google that don't involve bull breeds of any kind....
> 
> Targeting breeds does not work, we have had BSL for over a decade and it has proven time and time again that it does not work, and it never will work....once we eradicate all the bull breeds do you really think that it will be the end for dog attacks? Truthfully and honestly?
> 
> Even the RSPCA know it is a load of tosh
> Don't Believe the 'Type'! - Breed specific legislation - Dog ownership - Campaigns
> 
> There is a HUGE media bias in the UK when it comes to dog attacks.....they may report other attacks but the style of writing is completely different...and that's without taking into consideration the mistaken breed ID's. You can not look to the media to get a true representation of dog attacks...
> 
> Blame the deed, not the breed....


I so agree with the legislation being no good. When pitbulls were banned in UK, every moron causing trouble on a street corner seemed to have one...cos if they were bad enough to be banned they are good enough to make some muppet look big and strong and don't mess with me mentality.

I like pitbulls, they tick lots of boxes for me and its a shame they are persecuted and seized as they are.


----------



## spinola syd

StormyThai said:


> There is only one bull breed banned in the UK, which is the Pit bull Terrier.
> 
> BSL bans 4 breeds in total:
> 
> Pit Bull Terrier
> Japanese Tosa
> Dogo Argentino
> Fila Braziliero
> 
> It is an ill thought out legislation that was a knee jerk reaction from the government so they could be seen to be doing something..
> 
> BSL does not work, why you ask?
> 
> Because dog attacks have zero to do with the breed (or shape) of the dog....There are many factors that come into play when it comes to serious dog attacks, genetics, training (or lack there of), previous experiences (be that being beaten by the owner or attacked by another dog), lack of socialisation, poor handling.....etc......etc....etc.....and the list goes on.....But to say that one whole breed (or group of breeds as you seem to be generalising) is naive at best...
> 
> For example
> 
> Boy, 3, left with horrific facial injuries as Labrador savages him at Poole Harbour | Mail Online
> 
> Boy, 9, had half of his ear chewed off after he was mauled by his teacher's Labrador on school trip | Mail Online
> 
> Henley on Thames News | Mother's arm ripped open by Labrador attack in front of children
> 
> Pet Jack Russell that killed eight-day-old boy 'had escaped through stair gate to attack child' | Mail Online
> 
> Jack Russell cross bites one week old child in 'jealousy' attack | Mail Online
> 
> Harry Harper death: 'Placid' Jack Russell fatally bit baby in the head then curled up next to him in carry cot | Mail Online
> 
> Those right there are just a few that I pulled off google that don't involve bull breeds of any kind....
> 
> Targeting breeds does not work, we have had BSL for over a decade and it has proven time and time again that it does not work, and it never will work....once we eradicate all the bull breeds do you really think that it will be the end for dog attacks? Truthfully and honestly?
> 
> Even the RSPCA know it is a load of tosh
> Don't Believe the 'Type'! - Breed specific legislation - Dog ownership - Campaigns
> 
> There is a HUGE media bias in the UK when it comes to dog attacks.....they may report other attacks but the style of writing is completely different...and that's without taking into consideration the mistaken breed ID's. You can not look to the media to get a true representation of dog attacks...
> 
> Blame the deed, not the breed....


Thanks for your post, some very good information and opinion. I will read the links that you posted. :thumbsup:


----------



## StormyThai

lilythepink said:


> I so agree with the legislation being no good. When pitbulls were banned in UK, every moron causing trouble on a street corner seemed to have one...cos if they were bad enough to be banned they are good enough to make some muppet look big and strong and don't mess with me mentality.
> 
> I like pitbulls, they tick lots of boxes for me and its a shame they are persecuted and seized as they are.


You know what?

I had never seen an American pit in the flesh until AFTER BSL came into effect.

It could be due to a location move on my part, but I have strong beliefs that the rise of the pit in this country is mostly due to them being made illegal...heck, I hadn't even heard of the Fila Braziliero until BSL came in...

The only thing that BSL achieves is giving these breeds a status symbol for the undesirables and allow breedisum to become rife, and on top of that makes every responsible bull owner (although lets be frank, they don't even need any bull breed in them to be targeted, just the "right" shape) walk on tenterhooks hoping that their dog isn't the next one to be targeted :nonod:


----------



## lilythepink

I so agree with you. I have always liked staffies from being a child....but so many out there that you see in the wrong hands and so many being bred in the wrong hands and no way would I give my money to muppets like that.

One of my daughters has a Great dane and wanted a companion staffy to go with him. Wants a well bred pup that has been bred properly....and is she struggling to find one.

BYB staffy pups were selling for £30 here last summer. sad.

I see a man on a car boot sale often with a brindle and white American Bulldog. ...so he says. I have no idea what kind of dog it is...gorgeous. so laid back and doesn't react to people or dogs.


----------

