Literally nobody. He just can't read and makes things up.
Does something need to be done about dogs?
- Thread starter Dis86
- Start date
Literally nobody. He just can't read and makes things up.
and there was me looking some merriment this evening. kinda guessed summat was up though after the first page and half of reading.
I am just dumbfounded by the lack of willingness to compromise.
None of us have proposed killing all of the dangerous breed dogs, we have just proposed common sense solutions to making it safer, but in return is a barrage of but the dogs are such softies and its all on the individual owners, my response to that is of course well we can legalise guns if that makes it ok, as responsible owners wont kill people with them.
Dangerous attacks are on the rise, bull type dogs are the most common culprit, and the stories will keep on coming, it wont just go under the carpet.
None of us have proposed killing all of the dangerous breed dogs, we have just proposed common sense solutions to making it safer, but in return is a barrage of but the dogs are such softies and its all on the individual owners, my response to that is of course well we can legalise guns if that makes it ok, as responsible owners wont kill people with them.
Dangerous attacks are on the rise, bull type dogs are the most common culprit, and the stories will keep on coming, it wont just go under the carpet.
Not everything, just bitbulls and other "Nanny" dogs that you lot can't seem to live without because of some sort of insecurities about yourself. Why can't you have a nice labrador or border collie?
No, he said muzzle everything. Also very poor selective quoting because I suggesting banning certain breeds if you cared to read the entire post. I dont own one of these dogs either.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,486
The common issue with things that incur bans, whether it's dogs, guns, knives, fast cars, or whatever, is the scumbags that abuse and misuse them.
The answer is to focus on preventing people from being scumbags, or at least discouraging such behaviour - They get status dogs because they think it makes them cool... Change that general perception, so their mates all think they're pathetic *******, instead.
Two dogs that generally rank high on the bite frequency statistics, yet don't get as widely reported because they're not evil status dogs...
oh 100% agree - sadly the human scumbag element isn't getting fixed any time soon.
It's kinda hand-wavy... change that perception and magically the issue is gone. Let's do the same and allow handgun ownership too? The carrying of knives for any reason?
It's also flawed as it clearly isn't just "scumbags" who want status dogs, bull terrier-type dogs are a popular breed in general and commonly owned as family pets, sure typically by chavs but not exclusively. The likes of shelters such as Battersea can be full of them - often reported as the number 1 dog they have even.
It's also flawed as it clearly isn't just "scumbags" who want status dogs, bull terrier-type dogs are a popular breed in general and commonly owned as family pets, sure typically by chavs but not exclusively. The likes of shelters such as Battersea can be full of them - often reported as the number 1 dog they have even.
We had advice to not do this too much, as it's better for them to socialise and the best teachers of boundaries and behaviour are other well behaved dogs, so we always asked when we were out and about and found a lot of people very happy to let your dog socialise and will help you not worry when one has a snappy bark, they'll all tell you that's normal and being told off is exactly what is needed.
What is not acceptable is not asking, letting your dog overwhelm a smaller dog and do nothing to address the situation.
I will say anecdotally, those that tend to keep their dogs on leads as puppies and don't allow that level of interaction tend to have to keep them on the leads when they are adults, that is certainly true around us.. In fact you can see owners that not only keep them on a lead but keep them really close when other dogs are around seem to make the dog feel insecure and they tend to be far more protective or worried later on..
I'm not lecturing, I know every dog is different, but just in case it wasn't obvious.. Training a normal dog is actually a lot of effort at times and as a good owner you will worry about such things, it's only really because we have such nice dog owners around us, when we are all in the park they are very very understanding and supportive, and as ours has grown, we are very supportive too..
I mean when i am just walking with him. I do let him off when it is safe to play ball with. I do also let him socialise if he is being well behaved. I have had advice to NOT let him see the other dog if he lunges towards them on the lead, as that teaches them that lunging works and rewards them with seeing the dog..
I mean this person i was talking about walks around with their dog off the lead all the time (all the paths, near roads etc).
I can't have him off the lead all the time. He's a 9 month retriever who loves everyone and everything- he'd cause havoc
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,486
How is it "hand-wavy"? Aside from anything else, there's a massive marketing industry out there that specialises in changing peoples' perception of all manner of things. Mostly they do it in order to sell products and the like, but the psychological mechanics behind it all clearly work. Politicians too have a wealth of tricks to garner votes, often despite being blatant and shameless scumbags themselves, and yet they're still in power.
Between commercials and fashion, social media influencers, and the government, I think it's clear that people are quite easy to influence. No Jedi hand-waving needed.
It's not the simple, done and dusted, one-shot as just blanket-banning things would be, but neither does it require the resources and enforcement that either banning or tighter regulations and licencing would. Even half-assed campaigns have managed to reduce drink-driving and increase seatbelt use, primarily through fostering strong social pressure. A concerted effort would be considerably more successful.
Incidentally, you can still own handguns, and you can carry certain knives without needing any reason at all.
Yes, we know all about your family pets argument - They're not generally the problem as such owners are far more likely to keep proper control over their dog, especially if they are a family.
The main issue is people who don't treat their dog appropriately, don't keep them on a lead when going somewhere that might present issues, and wouldn't step in to stop their dog if it became a problem.
'Scumbags' encompasses anyone who doesn't train and treat their dog appropriately. They could be a merchant banker or a church minister, but they're still a scumbag if they don't look after their dog... and that looking after includes keeping it from becoming the 'bad guy' in situations involving other people.
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 160
I've been having to deal with the aftermath of pointing out on "next door" about some meathead who walks around with 2 big American Bully XLs - off-lead down past the local NHS walkin centre, past a nursery, past a school and along a main road.
I called him out on it as I don't think it's acceptable. But they just got their wife, friends and family to post comments which made me out to look like an interfering busybody (also accused as being racist, despite not making any comment about colour of skin or anything... didn't even know he was tbh... nor did I care).
And it transpires that these people are "breeders" of this breed (although I see no reference to them on any kennel/local gov site)
I called him out on it as I don't think it's acceptable. But they just got their wife, friends and family to post comments which made me out to look like an interfering busybody (also accused as being racist, despite not making any comment about colour of skin or anything... didn't even know he was tbh... nor did I care).
And it transpires that these people are "breeders" of this breed (although I see no reference to them on any kennel/local gov site)
They're scum man. A girl I used to go to school with ended up marrying some absolute crackhead and she posted the other day about giving away their prized family dog at the tender age of 2... No surprise it was a big ole violent thing.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,486
So have they themselves publicly admitted online to being breeders?
Might be worth sending screenshots and a link to the local council department responsible for (and any other authority with an interest in) breeder licencing, then... I'm pretty sure all breeders have to be licenced.
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 160
No but I did a small amount of internet sleuthing and their username (which they quickly changed) was that of the same name as a local dog breeder of the same name who have a website and a FB page about them as breeders.
I did contact the council to check, and they wasn't registered. So who knows what is going on.
Either way, as breeders , registered or no, they should be more responsible than to let their dogs walk around without leads on.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,486
Given their attitudes, I suspect they don't care enough to be registered.
Worth forwarding all this to the authorities, and possibly even the local rag - What they need is for their name to be mud, until they sort their **** out.
handwavy - Wiktionary, the free dictionary
But those things are also illegal... drink driving is illegal, not wearing a seatbelt is illegal.
So would you support phasing out bull terriers in addition to a campaign to foster strong social pressure against owning them?
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,486
Legality is not the issue in this.
"The answer is to focus on preventing people from being scumbags, or at least discouraging such behaviour".