But if people really cared about children. They'd make the sacrifice.
As others have said, it's never going to happen anyway. Something like 1/3 of houses have a dog. And many others would have a dog but can't due to living arrangements.
Does something need to be done about dogs?
- Thread starter Dis86
- Start date
But if people really cared about children. They'd make the sacrifice.
As others have said, it's never going to happen anyway. Something like 1/3 of houses have a dog. And many others would have a dog but can't due to living arrangements.
You tell me because like I said just making it illegal isn’t going to magically solve the problem either. I don’t necessarily having a problem with certain breed being banned as long as it’s sensible, but the problem will just shift to another breed. It’s not the dogs it’s a very small niche of people.
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 May 2013
- Posts
- 9,916
- Location
- M28
How does an electrician work from home? A mechanic? A bricklayer?
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 May 2013
- Posts
- 9,916
- Location
- M28
Or not because I'm not going to sit and list every job that can't be done from home. One expects posters on here to have some level of intelligence and work out for themselves that they might exist...clearly I was too hopeful.You just said 'people', might be helpful to be more specific next time
I think that in reality it would put a dent in the ownership figures for that breed if it was enforced.
It obviously wouldn’t work 100% but if it got to 60-70% effective that would be a big help.
Doesn’t really add up when you look at the data.
The BXL has suddenly (in under 3 years) accounted for 50% of all fatalities, compared to all other breeds.
Saying the problem would shift to another breed doesn’t add up, because those “other” breeds have for the most part already existed for decades or centuries and weren’t a problem.
This BXL is a new brand new, different problem and I suspect this time in 12 months - we’ll have seen more fatalities by this breed than ever before..
Last edited:
This problem hasn’t just existed since the BullyXL breed has come into fashion. To say the problem wouldn’t shift is incredibly naive.
To go from 3.3 deaths a year on average to suddenly 10 a year (2022) where the additional deaths are entirely caused by a single breed* is a new problem.
This year alone there have so far been 4x fatalities, 3 of them have been caused by a BXL………..
*Technically the BXL isn’t even a recognised breed.
This is what the United Kennel Club has to say about the characteristics of the breed.
Perhaps it’s not the dog but perhaps it’s the owner.
Its recognised in the United States (which is where the UKC are based) but it’s not a breed recognised officially here.
It only came into existence in the 1990s and came primarily from hip hop culture, it has no pedigree whatsoever.
It has no use as a working dog, no use as a companion or pet, no use other than to frighten people.
It’s an American breed that’s only just making its way over here so not surprising really.
Not sure if you’re right or just have a predisposition but this is how they are characterised.
Last edited:
To be honest - I ignore pretty much everything that America says about dogs and pets in general.
They have a terrible track record with animal welfare standards, especially with regard to ear cropping tail docking and general abuse.
I’m terms of predisposition - not really. I love large breeds, especially mastiffs, but these Bully XLs have only one purpose - to be dangerous and intimidating.
Because they’re not a breed with standards, you have no real idea what you’re getting in terms of temperament etc.
And in the end all I need to do to make the point is to point you to the recent dog fatality data - nothing else needs to be said.
I already have, you're just engaging in fallacies here. That we have speeding laws and people still speed doesn't mean that having speeding laws has no effect.
So we're back to the vague handwaving.
Do you think we should abandon speeding laws and just have a government campaign using "social engineering" to stop people from speeding?
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,490
Depends why you chose that particular dog and whether you're a **** or not...
A typical problem owner will be from an inner-city estate, unemployed, without any educational achievements, and there are many parallels with those who carry knives as weapons. The appeal of dogs like these is that kids won't be sent away for several years just for having one on the street.
People don't like being told what to do, especially by any authorities that they perceive as having put them in their situations. But they are very open to influence and persuasion from those they idolize and seek to emulate.
Those with status dogs are typically influenced by their portrayal in media, particularly Gangsta Rap and Hip-Hop, as both agents and symbols of masculinity and power. Much of these cultures and portrayals are about pushing back against The Law and the societal issues that put them in the positions they're in. They seek empowerment and the dogs are proxies for that.
The obvious approach would be to use those same media platforms to spread the opposite message - Essentially that those needing status dogs are weak and cruel little pussy-bullies, who have to force dogs to protect them because they're not man enough to do it for themselves.
The inclusion of celebrities and artists that people actually listen to is an essential component. If the likes of Andrew Tate, Kanye West, Drake, Jay-Z and similar were to be broadcasting this same message, that's what people will listen to. I don't know many current rappers, but if you bring on-side whoever rivals the likes of Rick Ross, DMX and Big Boi (three well-known pit-bull advocates), those are the sorts of representatives you want... and a big part of this is letting them design and implement the methods of dissemination, as they'll know their audiences better than anyone.
The less obvious element would be adopting the same psychological manipulations used by big corporations like Amazon and various online influencers, to essentiall 'sell' them on the 'product', being the rejection of the whole status dog idea.
Basically, someone sold them on the idea that they want and need a status dog. You instead sell them harder on the idea that they really don't.
As already pointed out, here and earlier, the "other" breeds absolutely were a problem. They're precisely the reason that dog licences were replaced by the DDA1991 and over 20 other dog-specific legislations.
Pit Bulls and similar types became popular as status dogs when those used for fighting started also being used by gangs as weapons in the 1980s, and when hip-hop culture started glorifying them. I think the first death from one only came in the mid-90s.
Since the transition, most of those breeds have now lost much of their bad reputations, but there'd be nothing stopping status dog seekers and illegal breeders returning to those earlier breeds and creating more XL variants - Can you imagine what a Rottweiler Bull XL would be like?
The BXL may appear as a new problem, but the very same was said when Pit Bulls started emerging as the 'outliers'. This is the same problem, just with even more irresponsible breeding.
'According to Sergeant Ian McParland, chief officer at the SDU [the dedicated Status Dogs Unit of the Met Police], simply banning more dogs under the DDA is not the answer. The problem is not genetics, but upbringing, he says. Most dogs can become aggressive or peaceful, depending on how they're raised, he says.
"You could go on banning breeds until the cows come home and it won't make a difference," McParland says. "We're almost fortunate that the status dog of choice, the pit bull terrier, is illegal. I don't know what we'd do if Akitas, German shepherds and rottweilers started becoming fashionable [as status dogs]".'
That was back in 2010.
Are dogs the new weapon of choice for young people?
The number of dangerous dogs being seized by the police has soared as young people increasingly use them as 'weapons', rather than carrying knives.
www.theguardian.com
Yet again - I never said we should abandon existing laws. That is you misrepresenting my argument, since you want to talk about fallacies.
I said adding new ones... that's NEW ones... will have no effect on those people causing the problems we're trying to prevent.
And again, you have not proven your proposal will actually work.
Andrew Tate owns a pitbull and he bragged about it mauling a cat to death.
As for Drake;
It just feels like, in order for your solution to work - you basically need all the role models of society to suddenly stop being big and tough (because that's what people think is cool) and suddenly turn into Jeremy Hunt..
It's just not going to happen, it's impractical and totally outside of the realms of reality.
Last edited:
No, I asked you a question... that's also a flawed positon, some sort of status quo bias - supporting laws simply because they're existing laws and opposing new changes by default without some unclear "proof"?
Meanwhile, you still have no suggestions yourself beyond handwaving.
Also, we do change rules re: roads, we update speed limits for example or we close some roads or we make some roads near schools into school roads and ban traffic from them during certain times.
Why oppose updating legislation/rules re: dogs and blindly support the status quo?
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,490
I did see Tate's blustery proclamation on his dog. I also don't believe most of what he says, as it sounds just like sensational ******** he makes up as he goes along.
But you can always strike him and Drake (who I was sure had an Akita) off the list and find better replacements, or pay/convince them to change their tune. In the case of the latter, it'd speak volumes if someone like Drake were to announce that, in light of recent incidents involving such dogs, he could not in good conscience continue to own them.
I'm not especially au-fait with who exactly are and who aren't the most influential role models within scum society, which is why I said someone like them, ie prominent and respected influencers... but either way, these are the ones who define what people think is cool so we do need the likes of them to redefine it.
Since you mention Jeremy Hunt, a parallel approach brought up earlier is to make what is cool into uncool, so if Hunt and his ilk were to suddenly start copying the trend, it loses the cool status factor.
Since prison culture is also a feature in some of these lifestyles, it might be worth focussing on the reputation these dogs have as child killers, and by implication their owners. Child killers really aren't popular in prison culture...
It's far more practical because it persuades and encourages instead of dictating and threatening.
If the celebs are on board through belief in the cause, it's also potentially far cheaper than half-assed government plead-bully campaigns and more laws.
As for reality/never going to happen - The social science behind it is sound enough for people to make billions from applying it. This kind of influence already happens every day on a massive scale. Just here on this forum, graphics card and CPU threads are peppered with YouTube links and quoted opinions of various influencers (Linus, Jay, Steve at GamersNexus). Elsewhere it's all "Get celebs, get real life, ger Closer", and a dozen other magazines, that are purely about what celebs are doing, wearing and buying . News websites too, peppered with articles on what bikini some woman from Corrie is wearing, or where Ronaldo went shopping over the weekend... always accompanied by a breakdown of what they bought, where it's sold and how much, and where to find budget versions. People ******* lap this **** up... why not make good use of it?
Yes, we change/update laws and people who followed the law before follow the changes too. They're not the problem.
The problem, on both sides of that change, is the people who don't follow the laws, which is what needs to be addressed.
Also, what makes you think it's blind opposition?
Of course you won't have read it, but there is a quote up there from a guy who actually ran the Status Dog Unit of the Met, asserting the same as I did, and dozens of studies that draw the same conclusions.