Does something need to be done about dogs?

[Felon]

If you're found with a banned breed, it's an unlimited fine and something like 6 months in prison

That's completely wrong,

If you're found with a banned breed, there's a whole load of stuff that goes on, it has to be inspected and checked - the court might even allow you to keep it and it be added to the list of exempt breeds, where you can continue to own it so long as it's muzzled at all times.

The people who get an unlimited fine or jail time, are at the absolute worst end of the problem, and are probably repeat offenders with a serious criminal history.

What Should You Do If You Suspect You Have a Prohibited Type of Dog

In the UK, owning a prohibited type of dog has legal ramifications. This post explains what you need to do if you suspect you own a banned dog.

wheldonlaw.co.uk

Provided your dog is of good temperament and does not pose a danger to the public and provided you are someone the court would consider to be a fit and proper person to have a dog of that kind, you should be able to go through the legal process of obtaining a Certificate of Exemption which means your dog will be legal provided the conditions of exemption are complied with.For your dog to be exempted, it has to be:

• Neutered
• Microchipped
• Covered by third-party insurance
• Registered on the Index of Exempted Dogs

 

[413x]

No, let's just make it even more illegaller. That'll show 'em, the rotters!!
Oh, I know - Let's put out an ad campaign actually telling people it's illegal. I'm sure none of them even realised... because asking nicely has worked so well against determined criminals.

Or we could ban cars. Not all cars, of course, as that would be lunacy... Just the brands and models in which people routinely speed, drink-drive and drive while using their mobile phones. I believe the Toyota Prius is the one most commonly involved in a crash though, followed by the Zafira, Corsa and Astra, so let's ban those.
Or if that's too much, just ban the maintenance of them and prohibit their spare parts. That way they'll all stop working in 10-15 years and while plenty of people will die in the meantime, we'll ultimately remove these devils from our roadways.
That way we'll prevent thousands of deaths, rather than just the mere ten or so that dogs cause.

If the car was found to be at fault I'm sure it would be recalled. Bull dog bars were banned for example.
The car analogy is a bad one. As the car doesn't have free will. It's completely the person driving it. It could be any any other car.

Dog is different as it has free thought.
You pee off a small dog and it might bite you, a big dog and it can kill you.
You pee off a dog with that's more aggressive and it may snap sooner than a calm breed.

You're always going to get outliers. But the facts speak. These XLs (in this case) have a disproportionate number of cases against them. It's a combination of owner and breed. Ideally tackle both. But sorting out the scummy type owners is hard

No matter how much you kick a car it's. Not going to turn round and run you over.

 

[ttaskmaster]

That's completely wrong,

If you're found with a banned breed, there's a whole load of stuff that goes on, it has to be inspected and checked - the court might even allow you to keep it and it be added to the list of exempt breeds, where you can continue to own it so long as it's muzzled at all times.

Not quite. You're missing the middle bit:
If you have a banned dog, the Police or local council dog warden can take it away and keep it, even if it is not acting dangerously or there has not been a complaint
If it's in public, the Police do not need a warrant, nor do they need one if they find the dog on private property while serving a different warrant.

If they decide it's a banned breed, you then go to court, whereupon you must prove it's not a banned breed. If you cannot prove it, you will be convicted of a crime.
AFTER this, you can then argue the toss in a separate civil court case about whether the banned dog is a danger to the public, whether you're a responsible owner who will comply with the Exemption Index regulations, etc etc... It doesn't specify, but presumably any convictions will still stand even if you subsequently get the dog exempted.

Controlling your dog in public

You can be fined if your dog is out of control in public - find out about Dog Control Orders, banned dogs, dog fouling and reporting a dangerous dog

www.gov.uk

If the car was found to be at fault I'm sure it would be recalled. Bull dog bars were banned for example.
The car analogy is a bad one. As the car doesn't have free will. It's completely the person driving it. It could be any any other car.

Dog is different as it has free thought.
You pee off a small dog and it might bite you, a big dog and it can kill you.
You pee off a dog with that's more aggressive and it may snap sooner than a calm breed.

You're always going to get outliers. But the facts speak. These XLs (in this case) have a disproportionate number of cases against them. It's a combination of owner and breed. Ideally tackle both. But sorting out the scummy type owners is hard

No matter how much you kick a car it's. Not going to turn round and run you over.

Again, not my analogy, but with some comparable factors - For example, an owner may find difficulty controlling the car because they do not fully understand how it works, or find that it doesn't work properly because they've neglected it. Not perfect, but I can run with it.
Similarly, you could argue that a Koenigsegg CCX or a Noble M600 in the hands of an irresponsible or inexperienced driver yields the same result as BXLs in scum hands.

The headline issue is that the scum want BXLs in the first place, and that if we utterly eliminate all BXLs they'll just get some other breed to **** up.

 

[413x]

Not quite. You're missing the middle bit:
If you have a banned dog, the Police or local council dog warden can take it away and keep it, even if it is not acting dangerously or there has not been a complaint
If it's in public, the Police do not need a warrant, nor do they need one if they find the dog on private property while serving a different warrant.

If they decide it's a banned breed, you then go to court, whereupon you must prove it's not a banned breed. If you cannot prove it, you will be convicted of a crime.
AFTER this, you can then argue the toss in a separate civil court case about whether the banned dog is a danger to the public, whether you're a responsible owner who will comply with the Exemption Index regulations, etc etc... It doesn't specify, but presumably any convictions will still stand even if you subsequently get the dog exempted.

Controlling your dog in public

You can be fined if your dog is out of control in public - find out about Dog Control Orders, banned dogs, dog fouling and reporting a dangerous dog

www.gov.uk

Again, not my analogy, but with some comparable factors - For example, an owner may find difficulty controlling the car because they do not fully understand how it works, or find that it doesn't work properly because they've neglected it. Not perfect, but I can run with it.
Similarly, you could argue that a Koenigsegg CCX or a Noble M600 in the hands of an irresponsible or inexperienced driver yields the same result as BXLs in scum hands.

The headline issue is that the scum want BXLs in the first place, and that if we utterly eliminate all BXLs they'll just get some other breed to **** up.

The last bit I can agree with. There will always be scum. And they will always want powerful dangerous looking dogs. And it's really hard to police. Don't think there's a perfect solution that's realistic. It's sad for the dogs. It's not thier fault.

 

[dowie]

Firstly, it's your analogy, I'm just running with it.

Nope, you proposed this banning cars analogy not me:

Or we could ban cars. Not all cars, of course, as that would be lunacy... Just the brands and models in which people routinely speed, drink-drive and drive while using their mobile phones.

Ironically we do have standards for cars and cars that are dangerous can be recalled + cars need to meet certain regulations to be allowed on the road.

Drivers also need to be licensed and can be banned from driving.

 

[ttaskmaster]

The last bit I can agree with. There will always be scum. And they will always want powerful dangerous looking dogs. And it's really hard to police. Don't think there's a perfect solution that's realistic. It's sad for the dogs. It's not thier fault.

I agree it's hard to police, which is why I'm looking at alternative approaches.

No, it's banning based on how dangerous it is, thus your apparent confusion.

There's no confusion - In my response to your analogy, the Prius is one of the least dangerous cars around, leaving the driver as the factor that puts it at the top of the accident stats table.
This is why your campaigns address drivers' thinking, attitudes and behaviour, not the type of car they drive.

 

[413x]

I agree it's hard to police, which is why I'm looking at alternative approaches.


There's no confusion - In my response to your analogy, the Prius is one of the least dangerous cars around, leaving the driver as the factor that puts it at the top of the accident stats table.
This is why your campaigns address drivers' thinking, attitudes and behaviour, not the type of car they drive.

Can't really think of an alternative. Castration (of the chav) is frowned upon!

 

[Chris Wilson]

I had my vet round last night dropping a car off, so i asked him what the story was about these hugely muscled, bizarre looking bull dog types that have appeared. Whilst I was partially correct that anabolic steroids are being used he told me their appearance is because dogs with a mutated gene are being bred (and mainly interbred) from. The gene is similar to that found in Belgian Blue cattle.

This double muscling phenotype ,which is a form of hyperplasia, results in not the normal enlargement of muscle fibres through exercise and usual genetics, but their increase in actual number. In some breeds of cattle it's regarded as desirable as the beast produces a lot more lean meat and breeding is closely controlled. In dogs, probably heavily interbred to maintain this genetic mutation, it may well impact mental stability such as increased aggressive tendencies and / or reduced lifespan, jpoint problems et cetera.

He reckons some are fine temperament wise, others much less so, but often that's mirrored in the temperaments of their owners....

"It's not a dog I go out of my way to be alone with in my consulting room, given a choice" he said tactfully.

If you look at photos of Belgian Blue cattle the muscle abnormality is very obviously similar to that in these canines.

 

[dowie]

This is why your campaigns address drivers' thinking, attitudes and behaviour, not the type of car they drive.

No, the type cars that they drive are regulated as already pointed out.

The analogy I put forwards was speeding and drink driving in response to that line of argument, we don't just run campaigns against speeding or drink driving or the wearing of seatbelts we also pass laws to regulate those things.

It's no good just running an anti speeding campaign or anti drink driving campaign if you're not going to take enforcement action w.r.t those who don't comply, this argument is flawed:

The simple solution has already been tried.

That people still speed or drink drive doesn't lead to the conclusion that we shouldn't, therefore, dismiss regulating these things.

 

[ttaskmaster]

Can't really think of an alternative. Castration (of the chav) is frowned upon!

The ideal would be to have the dog destroy such an owner, of course.

Marketing and social media both influence a lot of people these days. Far more than namby-pamby "Please don't drink and drive" advert campaigns.
People don't like being told what they can and can't do but, just like dogs and small children, they do respond to persuasive reinforcement and idols they can emulate.

That people still speed or drink drive doesn't lead to the conclusion that we shouldn't, therefore, dismiss regulating these things.

I have not ever argued that we should dismiss regulation.
My argument was that no matter how much more of the same regulation and campaigning you come out with, it will have no effect on those people who have already ignored the existing ones, and who are the cause of the current problems.

So once again, the simple solution has already been tried... and tried and tried and tried and tried and tried and tried.

"There is some indication that campaigns are beneficial for road safety on various levels. Meta-analyses show an association with accident reduction, increased safe behaviours and risk awareness.
However, for other outcome variables such as drink-driving or safety relevant attitudes, no such effect was found".

https://www.roadsafety-dss.eu/assets/data/pdf/synopses/Effectiveness_of_Road_Safety_Campaigns_26072017.pdf

This is in spite of all these campaigns:

https://www.rospa.com/rospaweb/docs/advice-services/road-safety/history-road-safety-campaigns.pdf

 

[potatolord]

I had my vet round last night dropping a car off, so i asked him what the story was about these hugely muscled, bizarre looking bull dog types that have appeared. Whilst I was partially correct that anabolic steroids are being used he told me their appearance is because dogs with a mutated gene are being bred (and mainly interbred) from. The gene is similar to that found in Belgian Blue cattle.

This double muscling phenotype ,which is a form of hyperplasia, results in not the normal enlargement of muscle fibres through exercise and usual genetics, but their increase in actual number. In some breeds of cattle it's regarded as desirable as the beast produces a lot more lean meat and breeding is closely controlled. In dogs, probably heavily interbred to maintain this genetic mutation, it may well impact mental stability such as increased aggressive tendencies and / or reduced lifespan, jpoint problems et cetera.

He reckons some are fine temperament wise, others much less so, but often that's mirrored in the temperaments of their owners....

"It's not a dog I go out of my way to be alone with in my consulting room, given a choice" he said tactfully.

If you look at photos of Belgian Blue cattle the muscle abnormality is very obviously similar to that in these canines.

I reckon I could batter that bull, no problem. Big left to the jaw and he'd be stone cold.

 

[dowie]

I have not ever argued that we should dismiss regulation.
My argument was that no matter how much more of the same regulation and campaigning you come out with, it will have no effect on those people who have already ignored the existing ones, and who are the cause of the current problems.

So once again, the simple solution has already been tried... and tried and tried and tried and tried and tried and tried.

Again that's flawed and we've not tried banning XL Bullies nor do we have good control over breeders... so you don't in fact oppose doing that?

 

[ttaskmaster]

Again that's flawed and we've not tried banning XL Bullies nor do we have good control over breeders... so you don't in fact oppose doing that?

I oppose the idea of banning XLBs purely because; a)when we've banned other breeds it's neither curtailed the illegal breeding of banned dogs, nor prevented the loophole crossbreeding of (which might as well be the same as) banned dogs, and b) because it is based primarily on appearance alone, which has led to the seemingly outrageous cases of mistaken identity already discussed.

In addition, c) The "ever fiercer punishment" is the typical Tory drivel that they trot out when 'cracking down' on drugs, speeding, antisocial behaviour and just about everything... and it hasn't worked for them.

I'd be all for controlling breeders further, if you could assure me that you'd be targeting the obviously illegal backstreet breeders, but as is I am not convinced that any such measures would actually be enforced or be enforceable to any degree, or that they would affect anyone but those who already follow the law anyway.

If you can present a convincing argument that such measures would work, I might be interested.

 

[Wizzkidy]

Just get rid of all dogs, disgusting creatures and dangerous no matter what breed. I don't believe anyone should be allowed dogs no matter how responsible

 

[Chris Wilson]

Just get rid of all dogs, disgusting creatures and dangerous no matter what breed. I don't believe anyone should be allowed dogs no matter how responsible

That's sounds like a vote winner in the animal loving UK, get yourself elected to the parish council, you'll go far from there <LOL>

 

[Thekwango]

Just get rid of all dogs, disgusting creatures and dangerous no matter what breed. I don't believe anyone should be allowed dogs no matter how responsible

That’s a bit of a mental take on it!!

 

[Wizzkidy]

That’s a bit of a mental take on it!!

Not really the longer dogs are allowed the more children and others will die from them

It's a pretty simple solution

 

[200sols]

Not really the longer dogs are allowed the more children and others will die from them

It's a pretty simple solution

It's not a solution, it's stupidity.

 

[Wizzkidy]

It's not a solution, it's stupidity.

It absolutely is a solution, an extreme one I give you that but a solution non the less

 

[Thekwango]

Not really the longer dogs are allowed the more children and others will die from them

It's a pretty simple solution

It’s really not a pretty simple solution dude, it’s a proper bonkers solution. Dogs provide so much love and joy to many millions of people. Outright banning all of them because a few are dodgy/have dodgy owners is kinda mental. For sure something needs doing, especially where these ‘monster’ breeds are concerned, but banning every type of dog, not really a solution even worth discussing.