Does something need to be done about dogs?

[Dis86]

Was going to create this thread a few days back after yet another child was killed by a dog however a further 3 attacks have taken place since then, including another child killed and 2 more seriously hurt.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-60907487

A quick read on the matter came up with this sentence "fatal dog attacks have been increasing significantly over time which was not attributable to the increase in number of dogs".

Now the number of deaths isn't massive but is still too high, the main issue is the numbers of people injured. Its estimated for each fatality there are 200000 bites and 40000 serious injuries.

It's also ignoring the fact that owners are often violent due to confrontation over their dogs (something I've personally experienced), and aspects of animal neglect and cruelty.

Do we need to look at dog ownership and something to ensure only the right people can have a dog? My thought is yes, but how could we do this?

 

[Dis86]

Without banning many breeds of dogs, which would be sad and wrong, I can’t see what can be done about it tbh.

dogs are as variable as humans. One can be as soft as a sack all it’s life while another can be a ticking time bomb. Even dog owner licenses wouldn’t stop dog attacks.

So why are attacks increasing at levels way beyond ownership numbers?

 

[Dis86]

Possibly a higher proportion of new dog owners are irresponsible.

Possibly but I will point out I've had issues across all age demographics.

For a bit of context I've been chomped at multiple times whilst out cycling as I used to do a heck of a lot of miles but mostly on cycle paths and shared spaces. I found the worst candidates to be older owners with 'little' dogs. Jack Russells and their various crosses being a particular menace as their owners frequently didn't bother or were unable to control them.

 

[Dis86]

It wouldn’t stop dog attacks. Do people with driving licenses never cause fatal crashes? Do people with gun licenses never kill people with their guns?

People without a licence are more likely to be involved in accidents and fatalities in particular.

 

[Dis86]

The owners of all these dogs involved in the attacks would probably get licenses very easily. But the dogs are still dangerous. The licensing argument is a totally pointless one. Many would just ignore it anyway.

So we just shrug our collective shoulders and sit happy with the knowledge that children are literally being torn to pieces?
Is it like a tax, or sacrifice?

 

[Dis86]

From a dogs point of view they are happily walking along and something unexpected comes whooshing up behind them.

I'm a dog owners and cyclist and I'm shocked at how.many cyclists don't make themselves known when approaching me from behind whilst I am walking my dog off the lead.

I often approached from the front.
Also to be clear, it's a cycle path, not a dog walking path therefore bikes should be expected by owners.
I might be wrong on this but also is it not a legal requirement to have your dog on a lead in a public space? We keep ours on a lead at all times unless we rent a free-run field.

 

[Dis86]

No, you just have to be in control of your dog.

Mine listens to commands and does what she is asked.

I wouldn't walk her on a dedicated cycle path but they are often right alongside pedestrian paths with only a painted line to divide them.

What do you do if she decides not to listen one day?

Our idiot never listens. He was even kicked out of puppy school for being untrainable.

 

[Dis86]

If it's a bike only path then I guess pedestrians and dogs shouldn't be on it, but most bike paths are shared use, meaning that cyclists should also be aware of pedestrians and dogs and not put them at risk.

I think you're misinformed about dogs having to be on a lead all the time - they should be under control, but not necessarily on a lead. Playing fetch in the park or letting dogs run around in the woods is perfectly legal.

But then how is the dog under control?

 

[Dis86]

From Google, its actually 'dangerously out of control' which is illegal, meaning your dog injures someone, or makes them worried it might injure them :
https://www.gov.uk/control-dog-public
Guess it's more lax than I thought! I thought it would be along the lines of 'a reasonable person would judge...'

Still a bit of a grey area I guess, as technically someone could be worried your dog would injure them even if it was on a lead walking nicely next to you. Bit of a judgement call.

It's very woolly! A few places say the only way you can ensure you don't fall foul if it is to have it in a lead but yeah, that's not specified within the law itself. The issue comes around people 'feeling as if it could attack'. My mum is one of those people who feels like every dog is trying to attack her all of the time.

NI is different though, it must be on a lead.

 

[Dis86]

People who call their dogs idiots should banned straight away from ownership

Whys that then?

 

[Dis86]

To be fair the statistics for fatal dog attacks show that yes whilst tragic are insanely rare. Should we be making every potentially lethal activity illegal? Because above dogs is pretty much everything else people do in their daily life. Except getting struck by lightning

Again, as I point out there are a significant number of attacks per fatality. The numbers are estimated at 40000 serious injuries and 200000 minor.

 

[Dis86]

where are you getting these number? Just out of curiosity because i've found none that come even close to that on any stats sites

Quite a few links from the wiki article on it as a starter for 10. There's also ONS data, NHS data and a couple of freedom of info requests.

 

[Dis86]

Almost all developed countries are already depopulating.

Incorrect. Birth rates have dropped below sustainable levels but their populations largely continue to grow due to immigration.

 

[Dis86]

how many rude boys and roadmen do you think own a lab or a jack Russell? they don't, they get dogs that look tough, aka bullies and train them to be aggressive etc and then the dog ends up rehomed by xyz and attacks a small child. It is not the dog.

Worth noting that Jack Russell's are up there for number of attacks, including fatals.

 

[Dis86]

Deaths by dogs over the years : https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/tran...spitalisationsfollowingadogbitefrom1981to2019

22 deaths from 2013 - 2019 from around 12.5 million dogs.

22 deaths in 6 years, sounds like an acceptable number eh?

 

[Dis86]

Almost 70x that amount were killed on the roads in 2020 (most of which in lockdown) alone. Just to put things into perspective.

There aren't killer dogs around every corner, the same way there isn't a paedophile on every street, it's just reported more and in your face due to media amplification.

Unfortunately cars are essential to the modern lifestyle in this country
Dogs aren't.
All deaths should be prevented where possible, not one of these deaths by dogs is justifiable.

 

[Dis86]

On average 30 people accidentally drown in a bath a year. A bath is not essential when we have showers. Should we start banning baths?

Your bath doesn't kill a random child.

 

[Dis86]

Well then Dis86, hazard a guess how many murders there were in the last 6 years? Happy to be PTS "just in case"?

Again, too many. It's already illegal to own people though.

 

[Dis86]

So as long as it's the owner of the bath that death doesn't matter?

It's preferable to an innocent third party.

 

[Dis86]

I love that so many of you lack ability to distinguish between animals and inanimate objects