Does something need to be done about dogs?

Given how little crime is being dealt with by the police these days it’s hard to see anything actually being done about dogs.
The amount of potholes on roads and bankrupt councils that we have also makes it doubtful councils will do anything either.
 
Given how little crime is being dealt with by the police these days it’s hard to see anything actually being done about dogs.
The amount of potholes on roads and bankrupt councils that we have also makes it doubtful councils will do anything either.

And the idiots in scooters. So many round here that just pull out in front fo cars. Been a couple of accidents really nearby
 
This is hilarious, the woke but innumerate charity workers at the RSPCA (who totally don't have a vested interest here re: pitbull types in their shelters) are fine with advocating in favour of ownership of Bully XLs... unless it's for insurance purpose, sadly then the grown-ups who have studied statistics and appreciate risk have decided that it's not worth insuring them.

Funny contradiction but it does show up their stance to be totally full of *** #SkinInTheGame


273 attacks by these dogs in the UK this year yet the innumerate types will come out with the same "but but it's the owners", "but but what about other big dogs", "ackchually did you know little Chihuahuas are more aggressive", "they call them the nanny dog".

 
Last edited:
273 attacks by these dogs in the UK this year yet the innumerate types will come out with the same "but but it's the owners", "but but what about other big dogs", "ackchually did you know little Chihuahuas are more aggressive", "they call them the nanny dog".
So nothing actually needs to be done about dogs, then? It's enough to merely bleat about it on some computer forum in a dark corner of the internet?

"Another case of poor ownership".... "A dog is losing it's life because of a total irresponsible owner"
Dog Mum of Benson, in your link above.

Think you need to go tell her how wrong she is - That bitch clearly needs schoolin', Dowie style!!
 
Are there any metrics on whether all these bully xl attacks are from "bad" owners?
Probably not, as can't quantify it easily.

But I'd love to dissociate that.

What proportion of attacks by "dangerous breeds" are associated with "poor" care?


But I guess that's part of the point. A badly behaved bully xl can kill. A badly behaved corgi might scratch you.
 
You know it must be bad when The Economist has a feature on bully xls.


"These dogs are my therapy,” says Darren Egan, a 12-year-old dog handler, as he straddles Indie, his 44-kilo American Bully pup. “I trust them.” Darren and his dad, Michael, have driven 17 hours from Ireland to compete in Champs Camp, a dog show run this month by the uk Bully Kennel Club. The event, in a Derbyshire field by the m1, brings together lovers of the Bully, a controversial breed known for its strength and propensity to attack. Darren admits his mother worries and calls the dogs “very vicious.”

Ms Egan is right to fret. Bullies are close descendants of pit-bull terriers, one of four breeds banned under the Dangerous Dogs Act of 1991. They were first imported from America roughly a decade ago. Bully xls, the largest type, have killed eight people since 2021, including two this year. BullyWatch, a campaign that monitors the breed, claims the different variants of Bullies carried out 45% of all dog attacks this year. In one week in July Bullies killed seven other dogs. The Daily Mirror is campaigning for a ban.

Champs Camp’s attendees say the pups are misunderstood. At the show, even toddlers compete in handling events. Owners gush about their dogs’ gentle nature. “I’d put my baby’s hand in his mouth,” says one man. Another tells how his xl is used as a therapy dog in an old people’s home. The real problem, say the attendees, is owners who cannot control their animals. Breeding is another issue. BullyWatch suggests that 97% of breeders are unlicensed. Much inbreeding takes place, with many dogs’ lineages going back to a few imported animals. Most attendees support the idea of a register for owners and breeders.

Bully owners and others, including the Dog Control Coalition, a lobby group of animal-welfare charities, want legislation banning specific breeds to be overturned. Instead, they say, officials should target individual dogs that act dangerously. The trouble with that argument is that some breeds, including Bullies, are by nature more aggressive, no matter the owner. Both people who were killed this year were experienced in handling dogs.

A ban on Bullies is possible. In July Chris Philp, a policing minister, said it was an option. Pressure for one mounts with news of every horrible attack. This month a Pocket Bully, a smaller variety, mauled a five-year-old girl in Stockton. At Champs Camp, there was little concern that change would come soon. Your correspondent left before a promised camp fire began, encouraged by a number of delegates who had earlier shouted at him to “beat it.” Sometimes, owners are more menacing than their dogs."
 
Last edited:
At least there does seem to be a bit more pressure re: this issue... at some point some of the "but but it's the owners" might finally realise it's not a monocausal issue and actually the breed is a big factor here, I mean how much of a maths fail do you have to have to deny it with stats like these:


Britons are 270 times more likely to be killed by American Bully dogs than any other breed.

The pets have carried out 73% of dog attack deaths since 2022, despite forming a tiny part of our canine population.

I mean let's try an argument that doesn't require much numeracy but just some basic common sense - here is a Russian who keeps a Puma as a house cat (there is another Russian who keeps a Leopard too, this is also something that happens in the UAE):


Fortunately, it is super rare but suppose that was legal in the UK and a few more bought them, a small portion of British cat owners decide to buy a Puma and take it for walks... then people start getting killed in Puma attacks in both local parks and family/friends of owners in their homes, say 10 deaths last year and maybe 5 deaths this year from pet Pumas. And in many more cases people are seriously injured by Pumas in their local parks and pet dogs are killed in attacks too.

You'd be insane to argue it's just the owners and try to dismiss it as just a few deaths, don't ban people from owning Pumas, there are plenty of Puma owners whose cats don't kill people, clearly in all cases where they do it was just a bad owner. You personally know a Puma owner and their pet is lovely and never hurt anyone, great with the kids too.

"Ackchually the Puma is the nanny cat, a regular domestic cat can get nervous and scratch an excited toddler but a Puma is more gentle around them and doesn't react like that"
 
Last edited:
At least there does seem to be a bit more pressure re: this issue... at some point some of the "but but it's the owners" might finally realise it's not a monocausal issue and actually the breed is a big factor here, I mean how much of a maths fail do you have to have to deny it with stats like these:

My main problem with the whole "The breed isn't the problem, it's the owner" argument, is that we can't make everyone a good owner, it's impossible - you're always going to have a percentage of complete muppets who end up owning dogs, who are going to cause a problem, because that's just life - and we have a reasonably free society.

In the UK there are around 220 dog breeds, and each breed will be owned by it's fair share of complete muppets, yet overall - we don't really see that much of a problem with 99.5% of the breeds. Even some of the large powerful breeds which can easily kill, (Rottweilers, Mastiffs, GSDs, etc) don't really seem to nudge the needle much - they do occur, but not in any great numbers, maybe a few a year and that number has largely been flat for a long time.

But when this Bully XL appears on the scene, the numbers all literally double in a very short space of time - no other dog even comes close, and it's not even difficult to see.

Then for me there's a second argument to this - why do we need a BXL? If you want a large powerful dog fine - loads to choose from which aren't as statistically dangerous, why does it have to be an Americal Bully XL? - what's wrong with a GSD rescue, or a Rottweiler or something? Been around for years, largely known and understood breeds, they're great pets - they can work, protect and do whatever.

Why do we need these monsterous things..?
 
At least there does seem to be a bit more pressure re: this issue... at some point some of the "but but it's the owners" might finally realise it's not a monocausal issue and actually the breed is a big factor here, I mean how much of a maths fail do you have to have to deny it with stats like these:

The problem with stats is that they lack any context, especially when posted to support bleating internet opinions.
"The stats" say you're far more likely to be involved in an accident with a Prius than any other car, yet there's no Somethng Must Be Done About threads for those...

My main problem with the whole "The breed isn't the problem, it's the owner" argument, is that we can't make everyone a good owner, it's impossible - you're always going to have a percentage of complete muppets who end up owning dogs, who are going to cause a problem, because that's just life - and we have a reasonably free society.
So?
You can't make everyone a good driver, even with laws, licencing, training and monitoring, which is why we see a couple thousand road deaths every year... but it's still down to the driver.

"BullyWatch suggests that 97% of breeders are unlicensed"
Whether true or not, it's again down to the owners, who create the demand and facilitate such incidents.
 
Back
Top Bottom