Does something need to be done about dogs?

Yeah this is very true,

Also - quite often it's really hard to identify exactly what the breed actually is, in some cases it might have "some" pitbull DNA in it, but also the DNA of many other dogs, because these idiots are basically just breeding hellhounds.



Yeah I really don't see the problem with common sense checks and balances, I'm on the list for a Bullmastiff and I'd be totally fine with paying a license, getting him chipped, insured, and having the correct paperwork. I'd also be fine - with it being like what we have with cars, if you can't produce the correct papers, the dog gets taken away until you fix it.

It's not that harsh really, my mum had dogs when she was growing up - and people just paid the licensing until they abolished it in the 80s (**** knows why) and it was all just fine...

I suppose people will always cry "don't want a nanny state" but at the end of the day, there are a lot of idiots out there and they can do a lot of damage to innocent people.

What's the point of having a license when all dogs are required to be chipped by the time they're 8 weeks old.

Yes people can avoid having their dog chipped, just the same way people can avoid having a license. It wont stop people from owning/breeding banned breeds.
 
It wont stop people from owning/breeding banned breeds.

Yeah but nothing will ever stop people from owning or breeding banned breeds, so long as dogs exists - people will be irresponsible. Just the same as with cars - so long as they exist, a small minority will drive without insurance and not wear seatbelts.

The point is, if it reduces the likelihood or probability of a terrible incident happening then surely it's worth trying, and I think it probably would*

In the grand scheme of things, the total number of deaths per year due to dogs is very very small and I don't think we should persecute law abiding responsible owners for the actions of a very small minority, but it does feel to me like we should try to do something.

*To be honest, taking into account the current state of law enforcement (sister got burgled last year and the police never even turned up to their house). I don't know how any of these measures would ever be enforced, but that's not an argument against having the measures themselves.
 
Yeah but nothing will ever stop people from owning or breeding banned breeds, so long as dogs exists - people will be irresponsible. Just the same as with cars - so long as they exist, a small minority will drive without insurance and not wear seatbelts.

The point is, if it reduces the likelihood or probability of a terrible incident happening then surely it's worth trying, and I think it probably would*

In the grand scheme of things, the total number of deaths per year due to dogs is very very small and I don't think we should persecute law abiding responsible owners for the actions of a very small minority, but it does feel to me like we should try to do something.

*To be honest, taking into account the current state of law enforcement (sister got burgled last year and the police never even turned up to their house). I don't know how any of these measures would ever be enforced, but that's not an argument against having the measures themselves.

All a dog license will achieve is a mirror image database of the chip database, pointless when that information is already available.
Completely agree with your final paragraph, not much point implementing duplicate systems when nothing will be enforced.
 
I am not exaggerating when I say that every single other house in our village has at least one dog. Every, single house. Morning and evening is like a parade of dogs all going for a walk. I like dogs as much as the next man but it is ridiculous. One dog starts barking and then the entire village is dogs barking. Our neighbour has a beautifully trained little dog who is always happy to see you and never barks and he is really complaining about the way people allow their dogs to keep barking at cars, people, birds, clouds, loud noises, quiet noises, imaginary things...

Since when have dogs become an essential item for life?
 
I am not exaggerating when I say that every single other house in our village has at least one dog. Every, single house. Morning and evening is like a parade of dogs all going for a walk. I like dogs as much as the next man but it is ridiculous. One dog starts barking and then the entire village is dogs barking. Our neighbour has a beautifully trained little dog who is always happy to see you and never barks and he is really complaining about the way people allow their dogs to keep barking at cars, people, birds, clouds, loud noises, quiet noises, imaginary things...

Since when have dogs become an essential item for life?

Untrained and dogs that generally bark at everything are annoying AF. My dod barks when playing and if he needs to go out but apart from that I've discouraged barking since we got him and he is a dream now.

Currently helping my friend with her dog at the moment that barks at any other dog. It's taking a while but slowly getting there.
People are just lazy and don't want to put the time in to train dogs properly.
 
I still would like a general license for dog ownership. So there is a papertrail. Every dog should be chipped with all of their owners details.

Well, we did already have dog licences at one stage (black & white ones were cheaper :D), but they were abandoned because people took no notice of them and they did nothing to stop the problems.
Microchipping was compulsory from 2016, yet still people don't do that either... and really a few boxes of 9mm ammo is far cheaper than a microchip scanner.

Yup, I mentioned chihuahuas earlier too, they're supposed to be a bit bitey/aggressive too (more so than average in their case), but they're not going to kill either. And in their case, I guess a postman can just boot them across the front garden! :)

The issue with bull terrier types is that even if they're no more aggressive than the average dog when they are aggressive the consequences can be far worse.

I mentioned Labradors specifically because their attacks are less likely to be fatal, but even so are still greatly under-reported and statistically skewed due to very high ownership rates... which is further compounded by some of them being so trainable that we're happy for them to be tied to blind people, who'd not have a hope in hell of controlling them if things went wrong.

Labs certainly can and do kill, though, and I believe they rank something like #15 on the top 20 most powerful dog bites. It just doesn't make for the same catchy headlines as a BULL TERRORier.

Also - quite often it's really hard to identify exactly what the breed actually is, in some cases it might have "some" pitbull DNA in it, but also the DNA of many other dogs, because these idiots are basically just breeding hellhounds.
Aye, and that's the problem, as some reports are now acknowledging, in that it's a Bull-Terrier type dog, or a Staffie type dog... if you're lucky, they actually call it a cross... So you're therefore looking at an already susceptible breed, being bred by some clueless careless **** wit, and crossed with **** knows what, to produce a four-legged status badge.
 
Labradors specifically because their attacks are less likely to be fatal, but even so are still greatly under-reported and statistically skewed due to very high ownership rates... which is further compounded by some of them being so trainable that we're happy for them to be tied to blind people, who'd not have a hope in hell of controlling them if things went wrong.

Labs certainly can and do kill, though, and I believe they rank something like #15 on the top 20 most powerful dog bites. It just doesn't make for the same catchy headlines as a BULL TERRORier.

It's not just catchy headlines there is just such a huge difference in risk it's not really comparable.
 
It's not just catchy headlines there is just such a huge difference in risk it's not really comparable.
They each have roughly the same PSI to their bite and Labs bite far more frequently... they just feature in fewer actual kills, although that's no consolation to those that survive to live the remainder of their life with disfigurements, missing body parts and all the associated trauma.
 
They each have roughly the same PSI to their bite and Labs bite far more frequently... they just feature in fewer actual kills, although that's no consolation to those that survive to live the remainder of their life with disfigurements, missing body parts and all the associated trauma.

I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make here, I think we both agree that labs don't tend to kill people anywhere near as much as bull terrier type dogs do + all dogs can bite, sure a medium or large dog can give you a nasty bite...
 
5 American bulldogs...shock.
Breeding house, dogs known by people around area to be aggressive, especially one of them, which probably was one of the ones that attacked her as it seems not all of them did.

Shock that isn't it, owners unable to control their dogs.

Seems there are loads of these dogs in this area, guess we will see more attacks up there then?
 
Last edited:
What's the point of having a license when all dogs are required to be chipped by the time they're 8 weeks old.

Yes people can avoid having their dog chipped, just the same way people can avoid having a license. It wont stop people from owning/breeding banned breeds.

All cars are required to have a number plate. The driver still needs a licence.
 
I assume it’s been posted and I’m not reading 33 pages to find it.

cs85Cdh.jpg


On a side note, I used to love dogs. Not a fan anymore, people have just become lazy and don’t train them anymore. I have no issues with them, but I don’t want your dog jumping up when I’m walking through the park because you haven’t got it on a lead but don’t worry “it’s friendly”. Foxtrot Oscar. Thank you.
 
I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make here, I think we both agree that labs don't tend to kill people anywhere near as much as bull terrier type dogs do + all dogs can bite, sure a medium or large dog can give you a nasty bite...
The point is that there's no difference in the risk. Labradors still come 8th in America's 10 most dangerous breeds (based on kill stats from Dogbite.org). Even in general, while the outcomes may differ, it could be argued that neither outcome is worse than the other.
It also gives rise to the exploration of other factors, such as the types of people more likely to own each breed and the sort of handling each can therefore expect, which seems to be a factor often argued.
 
On a side note, I used to love dogs. Not a fan anymore, people have just become lazy and don’t train them anymore. I have no issues with them, but I don’t want your dog jumping up when I’m walking through the park because you haven’t got it on a lead but don’t worry “it’s friendly”. Foxtrot Oscar. Thank you.
My dog doesn't lead. This is him walking our grandson.

sP405pl.jpg
 
The point is that there's no difference in the risk.

That's quite clearly false:
oXKJVzX.jpg

The following infographic shows that the Pit Bull is still responsible for the most fatal attacks in the U.S. by far, killing 284 people over that 13-year period - 66 percent of total fatalities. That's despite the breed accounting for just 6.5% of the total U.S. dog population.

Labradors are the most popular breed in the US.
 
Back
Top Bottom