Does something need to be done about dogs?
- Thread starter Dis86
- Start date
Will you two just get a room already?
Keeping Dowie busy in this thread is doing the entire forum a great service, preventing his nonsense spamming dozens of other threads on the board.
We should all be incredibly grateful to @ttaskmaster.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,491
Since their introduction to the world (primarily America) there were very few incidents, and this count has remained quite low.
Since their introduction to the UK supposedly around 2014, although other sources argue about court cases involving these dogs dating from before, the incident count remained non-existent until 2021, whereupon it soared to present levels.
This measured against the performance of other similar breeds, such as the aforementioned American Bulldog and Pit Bull from 2005, suggests some change occurred outside of genetics, to prompt this rise in incidents.
Is that clearer for you?
Which were crossed with five other primary breeds, making them the mongrel result of breeding with those too. The Pit Bull appearance is the dominant heritable gene, just as the Staffy appearance is with Staffy/Pit Bull crosses. At best, it's a Pit-Bull type without being an actual Pit-Bull, in the same way a Welsh Collie is a Collie type in appearance but almost nothing like a Border Collie in most other ways.
But by your reasoning, it's also a bulldog type, terrier type, and a Staffy type.
In trying to argue that breed defines behaviour, you're citing studies that show the very opposite. You're also conflating 'breed' with 'breeding', while further misunderstanding what each term actually entails, hence your difficulty and misinterpretation of your own sources.
I really do follow your argument and I see where you have gone wrong. It's a shame you don't... though I suspect 'won't' is more likely.
We have one... but it's his turn to pay the bill and he's still not seen to it.Will you two just get a room already?
I got you covered, bro!!Keeping Dowie busy in this thread is doing the entire forum a great service, preventing his nonsense spamming dozens of other threads on the board.
We should all be incredibly grateful to @ttaskmaster.
Just make sure my sacrifice is not in vain!
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 2,830
- Location
- Cheshire
Songs will be sung about your great deeds and your name will be passed down through the generations, written into myth and folklore.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,491
A man might be thought wealthy if someone were to draw the story of his deeds, that they may be remembered...
Keeping Dowie busy in this thread is doing the entire forum a great service, preventing his nonsense spamming dozens of other threads on the board.
We should all be incredibly grateful to @ttaskmaster.
Dowie's nonsense in this case being the argument that XL Bully's should be banned, a view that the vast majority of people support and only lunatics like you and ttaskmaster seem to oppose.
What do you think a pitbull is?
Oh, wait... it's a combo of an old English terriers and bulldogs
False, I argued that breeds share behavioural traits which is what the study shows. Your argument against that is that the study only concerned pedigree breeds... but you accept that genetics inform behavour. Well the problem you have now, and that you can't address, is that XL Bullys share a bunch of common ancestors, they're descended from fighting dogs.
All you can do now is try to deflect from that with your various multi quotes that don't even attempt to address the flaw here.
Some of your previous arguments/cope were to point out that other dogs are big and strong too... join the dots, there's a difference here and that's w.r.t behaviour/aggression as well as being a powerful dog, that's why XL Bullies are dangerous they're powerful and they'll be aggressive, spark that aggression in that type of dog and you get serious injuries and deaths. (In b4 "but but muh bad owners")
Last edited:
American bully XL owner willing to lose pub job over dog
American bully XL owner willing to lose pub job over dog
A pub manager says he has been told his pet will have to go when such dogs are banned.
www.bbc.co.uk
Bye Felicia!
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 Jan 2022
- Posts
- 3,347
- Location
- UK
American bully XL owner willing to lose pub job over dog
A pub manager says he has been told his pet will have to go when such dogs are banned.www.bbc.co.uk
Oh grief, here we go. The upset owners. They would rather commit suicide than muzzle their dog in public places.
Fine. Report to the local vets. I am sure the government can manage a quantity discount.
Did chuckle at one of the comments, "man threatens to leave minimum wage job over his dog"...
Funnily enough I'm not allowed my dog at work but I still crack on with my day.
Who's wearing the lead?Will you two just get a room already?
UK campaigners seek to overturn ban on American XL bully dogs
Group of owners and dog experts launch legal fight against rules due to be enforced in England and Wales
www.theguardian.com
This is one of those subjects I won't put my name against in a public forum.
Its very much a vocal minority wanting it overturned. And going on Facebook could even cause a ruckus in my close family.
I see it like the USA and guns. Many don't want it banned until something happens to them.
Luckiky over here there are not enough people invested to cause a big fuss.
I'd understand if it was a flat out "your dog is being put down".
But people using the "cost of living, muzzle costs too much" is down right pathetic. If you can't afford a muzzle on a hugely expensive dog. Or insurance that costs much more.. You shouldn't have a dog.
Good money for the lawyers though
Last edited:
Quite - if they can't afford a £30 muzzle and/or a few hundred/year for insurance, then how are they going to pay if their dog injures someone and they get sued for thousands?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 11 Mar 2005
- Posts
- 32,222
- Location
- Leafy Cheshire
Yea gotta get rid of those guide dogs, absolute scourge on society........
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 2,830
- Location
- Cheshire
It won't be a few hundred a year for insurance. My staffie is now £130 a month as he's 12 years old. I'd imagine with the ban coming in the number of insurance companies wanting to deal with xl's is going to be very small and very expensive.
Yeah, fair point was just basing it on our greyhound who is £20/month
Can we put idiot trolls down at the same time please?
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 Jan 2022
- Posts
- 3,347
- Location
- UK
UK campaigners seek to overturn ban on American XL bully dogs
Group of owners and dog experts launch legal fight against rules due to be enforced in England and Wales
This is one of those subjects I won't put my name against in a public forum.
Its very much a vocal minority wanting it overturned. And going on Facebook could even cause a ruckus in my close family.
I see it like the USA and guns. Many don't want it banned until something happens to them.
Luckiky over here there are not enough people invested to cause a big fuss.
I'd understand if it was a flat out "your dog is being put down".
But people using the "cost of living, muzzle costs too much" is down right pathetic. If you can't afford a muzzle on a hugely expensive dog. Or insurance that costs much more.. You shouldn't have a dog.
Good money for the lawyers though
I don't even know what to say. I am so, so tired of these minority groups standing against common sense.
The problem is with these people, is that they campaign against something, but they don't offer solutions to the problems. It's all very well keeping the dogs, but how do you solve the problem with them causing mayhem?
These minorities fighting everything in the courts are a darn nuisance. I do strongly believe that an elected government should be allowed to do what it wants, since it can make the laws if it so wishes. A few protestors should not be able to challenge and slow down a government that has been put in place by millions of voters.
Our energy policy is largely a shambles because of noisy minorities.
Also people can keep their dogs in a sort of "licensing" system which is how the exemption is going to work.UK campaigners seek to overturn ban on American XL bully dogs
Group of owners and dog experts launch legal fight against rules due to be enforced in England and Wales
This is one of those subjects I won't put my name against in a public forum.
Its very much a vocal minority wanting it overturned. And going on Facebook could even cause a ruckus in my close family.
I see it like the USA and guns. Many don't want it banned until something happens to them.
Luckiky over here there are not enough people invested to cause a big fuss.
I'd understand if it was a flat out "your dog is being put down".
But people using the "cost of living, muzzle costs too much" is down right pathetic. If you can't afford a muzzle on a hugely expensive dog. Or insurance that costs much more.. You shouldn't have a dog.
Good money for the lawyers though
If they are resisting that, then how can they say they would be responsible and support a licensing system.
As you said if the reason is they cant or wont put a muzzle on their dog, then they are the sort of people who shouldnt have a license.