Another fatal dog attack

[CanteringCarrot]

Edit: Never mind. It was an incomplete thought that was poorly written.

 

[DabDab]

I do have a bit of a hope that the ban and the publicity surrounding the aggression that can (far too often) be displayed by these breeds will at least serve to make the well meaning but naiive category of owner have a bit more of a think about choosing the breed. Unfortunately these breeds have been heavily marketed as family dogs and I'm glad that there is now a much more public counter narrative to that marketing.

 

[CanteringCarrot]

So I've got a question and thoughts...

What makes a dog dangerous or even ban worthy as a whole?

XL Bully aside, because it's obvious that they are.

Is it size? Is it biteforce? Is it breed history? Is it purely statistics based off of previous attacks?

I know what has made breeds banworthy historically, but what are your views on the criteria? Or what do you think the criteria should be?

 

[CanteringCarrot]

I do have a bit of a hope that the ban and the publicity surrounding the aggression that can (far too often) be displayed by these breeds will at least serve to make the well meaning but naiive category of owner have a bit more of a think about choosing the breed. Unfortunately these breeds have been heavily marketed as family dogs and I'm glad that there is now a much more public counter narrative to that marketing.

Honestly, marketing the XL Bully (not sure what you mean by "these breeds" or which breeds are included in that) as a family dog or a dog for anyone, was/is stupid. I feel sorry for those that fell for that misleading marketing.

 

[DabDab]

I actually don't really agree with a ban, but I do think that there should be licences for dog ownership with different categories of licence requiring tests for each. And in that sort of system I would say that the dog breeds/types in the category requiring the most stringent licence and owner qualification test would be those that have a combination of high strength, weight, and are temprementally predisposed towards guarding or fighting.

 

[DabDab]

(not sure what you mean by "these breeds" or which breeds are included in that)

Pitbulls and derivatives of (of which the xl bully is one)

 

[ycbm]

That eliminates many dogs then. How far do you want to go with this? Genuine question.

Until I can walk without reasonable fear of death from a dog in my own streets.

This situation existed until very recently. It no longer does.
.

 

[CanteringCarrot]

Until I can walk without reasonable fear of death from a dog in my own streets.

This situation existed until very recently. It no longer does.
.

Ok. Would you blame that solely on the XL Bully?

Or what changed the situation from before vs now?

 

[CanteringCarrot]

Again, because I feel as though I need to present this disclaimer; I am not arguing that certain dogs aren't a problem or that a ban wouldn't be helpful.

Between this thread, Irresponsible Owners, the one about people being unreliable, and countless others to include the people that hit and overturned a horsebox and fled, along with countless others that cause various damages and/or death and flee, I do see a trend of people not taking responsibility for their actions and think that society in the UK is sort of going down this spiral of sorts. You're always going to have these people, but I do feel like it's increased and in some ways being enabled.

 

[stangs]

We are not the only country to have banned breeds.

Are banned breeds and restrictions managed successfully in other countries, does anyone know?

Or is it just here that people try to circumvent the law?

Most banned dog breeds by countries updated 2024 XL Bully UK

List of most banned dog breeds by countries: some of the breeds are now considered to be dangerous, and in most countries these dogs are banned or have imposed certain restrictions for keeping them

petolog.com

It's not about people trying to circumvent the law; it's the nature of BSL being fundamentally flawed. These are studies that I have linked to before, but to remind everyone:

"The implementation of breed-specific legislation in Spain (1999 and 2002) does not seem to have produced a reduction in dog bite–related fatalities over the last decade." [x]

"There is no evidence from Australia or elsewhere that it does so [that BSL works]. Indeed, the rate of dog attacks has not declined since the introduction of BSL." [x]. This whole paper is worth a read because he discusses the context behind BSL implementation in the UK, and consequently Australia.

Súilleabháin, 2015

• There was a total of 3164 human hospitalisations due to dog bite from 1998 to 2013 [Ireland following implementation of legislation], with a 45% increase in numbers hospitalised; the incidence increased by 21% over the same period.
• Ott et al. (2008) indicated that the breeds currently regulated in Ireland do not possess higher levels of aggression in comparison with other domestic breeds. Breed legislation can mislead the general public into believing that unregulated breeds are less capable of inflicting serious and fatal injuries (Clarke et al., 2013).
• Regulating dogs based on breed to reduce injuries resulting in hospitalisations and fatalities is contrary to scientific evidence (AVMA (American Veterinary Medical Association), 2001, Cornelissen, Hopster, 2010) and compounded by research highlighting the inaccuracy of breed identification, making current regulations unenforceable (Voith et al., 2013).

BSL was also removed in the Netherlands and Lower Saxony because studies found that it had no scientific basis (Ott et al, 2008; Cornelisson & Hopster, 2009).

I did find a study once of a Canadian province (will have a look for it) that found that restricting ownership of the pitbull resulted in a decrease of attacks on adolescences. Some (some, not all) studies of areas in America have found similar things. However, the key thing to note when you do stumble across such a study is that:

• These areas often have stricter legislation surrounding dog ownership in general (licensing, leashing in public areas, etc).
• These so-called pitbulls can be absolutely anything. In America, the label of pitbull is pretty much put on any dog with a bull breed-type muzzle when it arrives at a shelter. Aka the name "pitbull" doesn't denote a breed, but a type containing a greater proportion of dogs with unknown history and breeding, who are more likely to have come from bad homes where their needs weren't met, and therefore are more likely to harm someone than a dog who has come from a good breeder and good home where it received appropriate socialisation.

Also worth keeping in mind that the nature of "banning breeds" differs tremendously. If you ban the importation of a breed who was never in the country to begin with, it looks like you've stopped attacks, but there's no dogs to start those attacks in the first place. It's also difficult to compare "bans" when they vary in severity and context; few go to the extent that the DDA does in a country that's otherwise pretty lax regarding dogs.

In Bermuda, for example, Schedule 2 dogs (e.g., the Cane Corso, wolf dogs) cannot be imported or licensed; Schedule 3 dogs (e.g., the pitbull, English mastiff, Akita) can be imported and kept, but may be prevented from being trained for protection work. However, in Bermuda, all dogs must be on a leash if in a public space (excluding certain areas which have allowed otherwise), so that further makes it difficult to compare the two countries.

I'll finish off with some quotes from a discussion on the DDA in the House of Commons, 2022 [x]

• It is important that we look at the correct risk factors, but the more that the Government focus on breed-specific regulation, which has been shown to be unscientific in outcomes, the less likely we are to look at the real risk factors, such as puppy farming, trauma, abuse and lack of training, which need to be addressed to protect the public.
• A 2021 independent report by Middlesex University, commissioned by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, found that dog bite data is lacking and is inconsistent. However, it was used by the UK Government to underpin a breed-specific approach to public safety, which casts doubt on the evidence that certain breeds of dogs are inherently more dangerous.
• The coalition believes that identifying certain types of dogs as dangerous can create a false sense of security by over-simplifying the situation. Aggression in dogs is a complicated behaviour, involving a range of factors such as breeding and rearing, experiences throughout a dog’s lifetime and, for some dogs, being continually kept on a lead and muzzled in public, which can inhibit natural behaviours and, in some cases, increase aggression.
• In the past 20 years, dog bites have increased by 154%, but only 8% of dangerously out-of-control dog cases involved banned breeds. What is happening with the other 92% of out-of-control dog cases? Why have all the legislative eggs been put in one basket, which accounts for only 8% of the problem?
• According to the latest data from the Battersea Dogs and Cats Home, about 200 leading behaviour experts found that socialisation is the most critical factor: 86% said that the way a dog is brought up by its owner is the most important reason why some are more aggressive towards people than others, and 73% said that the dog’s upbringing by the breeder before they are sold determines behaviour. It is clear that that is where the focus ought to be.

 

[stangs]

That eliminates many dogs then. How far do you want to go with this? Genuine question.

Having asked this question before, here's a quick answer guide for you:

If person doesn't like dogs - all dogs should be muzzled and/or leashed
If person has only small dogs - all big dogs should be restricted
If person has a medium-sized breed with fatalities/high bite incidences - mastiffs/molossers/bull types should be restricted/banned
If person has a mastiff - molossers/bull types should be restricted/banned

And so on.

I think some of you are getting me wrong here. It's like the minute that you question a ban it's like blood in the water and the sharks are comin'

It's a very clever style of arguing called "if we all jump at the person who dares to say BSL maybe isn't the solution to all life's problems, they will inevitably get sick of their character being assassinated and will chose to leave the thread which means we've won the debate."

 

[skinnydipper]

It's not about people trying to circumvent the law

Importing pitbull semen.

and

"One US dog breeder told The Telegraph that the industry would continue to produce dogs under a different name, such as “American bulldog”, after the ban comes into force.

“They’ll just come in as something else,” the breeder said. “That’s what happened with pit bulls once pit bulls were banned – they made a hybrid and they’re bullies.

“What’s next? You ban a bully? Okay, now it’s an American Bulldog.”

Pit bull semen from America used to breed XL Bullies in UK

US kennels charging up to £16,000 to ship frozen material abroad to create the large dogs

www.telegraph.co.uk

 

[skinnydipper]

Meanwhile many xl bully 'furbabies', the much loved and cherished family dogs, are rapidly being off loaded via Facebook.

If I had a dog that found itself on a banned breed list it wouldn't be a problem to me to register the dog, spay/neuter, undergo a temperament test, leash in public and wear a muzzle.

 

[ycbm]

Ok. Would you blame that solely on the XL Bully?

Or what changed the situation from before vs now?

Not solely on the XL Bully, but largely. Largely because, well just look at the statistics of people killed or seriously injured by dogs.

What changed is you did not used to get the number of dogs that can easily cause death out in public and when they were out in public they were largely on leads with people who could hold them.
.

 

[twiggy2]

Having asked this question before, here's a quick answer guide for you:

If person doesn't like dogs - all dogs should be muzzled and/or leashed
If person has only small dogs - all big dogs should be restricted
If person has a medium-sized breed with fatalities/high bite incidences - mastiffs/molossers/bull types should be restricted/banned
If person has a mastiff - molossers/bull types should be restricted/banned

And so on.


It's a very clever style of arguing called "if we all jump at the person who dares to say BSL maybe isn't the solution to all life's problems, they will inevitably get sick of their character being assassinated and will chose to leave the thread which means we've won the debate."

Rubbish, I have worked with dogs for over 22yrs, I have done that through choice, I however believe that muzzling all dogs if done correctly is far less of an issue for the dogs than the owners, keeping dogs on lead in public is the same, having all dogs muzzled and on lead in public would make those that don't follow the law easily identifiable and then action could instantly be taken.
Banning breeds doesn't work, that's been proven already.
More use of dog excersise areas would be made and people would adapt to the new restrictions.
It would make it much easier for the law to be upheld, that said some effort does need to be out in to upholding the law by the authorities.
The biggest thing needed though is education ideally before people obtain a dog, that's not going to be easy as we live in a society where people just get what they want without a second thought for any other beings either human or animal.

 

[Ellibelli]

Having asked this question before, here's a quick answer guide for you:

If person doesn't like dogs - all dogs should be muzzled and/or leashed
If person has only small dogs - all big dogs should be restricted
If person has a medium-sized breed with fatalities/high bite incidences - mastiffs/molossers/bull types should be restricted/banned
If person has a mastiff - molossers/bull types should be restricted/banned

And so on.


It's a very clever style of arguing called "if we all jump at the person who dares to say BSL maybe isn't the solution to all life's problems, they will inevitably get sick of their character being assassinated and will chose to leave the thread which means we've won the debate."

I like dogs and I have German Shepherds and terriers. I have no problem with all dogs being muzzled and / or leashed in public. I want to be able to walk with and without my dogs and hack my horse in public areas without fear of being attacked - is that really too much to ask? I know a show jumper who keeps lions. They would never attack anyone in theory - they are his pets - but he doesn't expect to be able to take them out in public and expose others to the risk.

 

[Tiddlypom]

Having asked this question before, here's a quick answer guide for you:

If person doesn't like dogs - all dogs should be muzzled and/or leashed
If person has only small dogs - all big dogs should be restricted
If person has a medium-sized breed with fatalities/high bite incidences - mastiffs/molossers/bull types should be restricted/banned
If person has a mastiff - molossers/bull types should be restricted/banned

And so on.


It's a very clever style of arguing called "if we all jump at the person who dares to say BSL maybe isn't the solution to all life's problems, they will inevitably get sick of their character being assassinated and will chose to leave the thread which means we've won the debate."

A gross over simplification to suit your agenda

I have a 7kg JRT, and am in favour of all dogs being on leads in public places.

 

[stangs]

Importing pitbull semen.

and

"One US dog breeder told The Telegraph that the industry would continue to produce dogs under a different name, such as “American bulldog”, after the ban comes into force.

“They’ll just come in as something else,” the breeder said. “That’s what happened with pit bulls once pit bulls were banned – they made a hybrid and they’re bullies.

“What’s next? You ban a bully? Okay, now it’s an American Bulldog.”

Pit bull semen from America used to breed XL Bullies in UK

US kennels charging up to £16,000 to ship frozen material abroad to create the large dogs

www.telegraph.co.uk

a) To prove that the recent increase in fatalities by bullies is due to people deliberately trying to circumvent the law, you’d have to prove that the majority of dangerous XL bullies owners bought those dogs specifically because they wanted a pitbull, and not because they were made popular by rap/drill, or because people had friends who owned them, etc.


b) I know it’s not just you, but style of ‘debate’ that’s become increasingly common on this forum, where people ignore the entire post and just criticise a single clause out of context, is so incredibly tiring.

You asked a question about how well bans work. I took time out of my day to provide what I’d like to think is reasonably balanced evidence, though primarily to the contrary. I didn’t expect a thank you, but at least acknowleding the information provided would have been nice. Maybe even interacting with it, arguing why you think it is or isn't applicable.

I’m not going to try saying that this attitude is disrespectful, because previous comments of yours have suggested you have little to no respect for me, let alone people who own XL bullies or are actively involved with the community, but I do find it depressing that this is what debate - an artform that has existed for millenia - has been reduced to.

That’s not to say that I’m some expert debater. I know I’ve frequently made petty, pointless, and leading posts on this thread, and I do apologise for that. However, in equal measure, it has deeply saddened me to see this thread become increasingly polarised and full of arguments devoid of rationality or sound evidence - on both sides. After all, surely we are all in agreement that there has been an increase in dogs being out of control, and that current legislation is not adequate. Surely we all want to live in a country where dog welfare is of a good standard, and where we can walk and ride without worries?

If that is the case, then even someone who agrees with BSL should take note of contexts where such legislation has failed, so that things can be improved here. I genuinely don’t understand how anyone who calls themselves a dog lover would be happy with the current legislation, which means that a dog, solely because of its morphology, might be sentenced to months in police kennels, where welfare is notoriously poor. I’d be much keener for there to be an XL bully ban into this country if I thought such shortcomings of the original DDA would be improved upon with the change in legislation.

Oh well. The information’s there if anyone wants to read it. I’ll pass the torch onto CanteringCarrot now.

 

[skinnydipper]

where people ignore the entire post and just criticise a single clause out of context, is so incredibly tiring.

because previous comments of yours have suggested you have little to no respect for me

Here I am again responding to part of a post.

You completely altered the text one of my posts when you 'quoted' it. I asked you to delete it. You didn't. I had to ask Admin to do that for me.

That did not earn my respect.

 

[SilverLinings]

To have any noticeable effect on the number of attacks the description of the breed in the ban legislation is going to have to be very careful, because otherwise within a year or two people will be breeding in-essence 'XL Bullys', just making sure that the individuals are an inch shorter etc than the breed dimensions on the ban.

There are XL Bully's being offloaded at prices much reduced from those of earlier in the year, but there are still a lot of 'standard', 'american' and 'pocket' bully's for sale online at huge prices, and they are pretty much the same thing as an XL bully except in size. And presumably any current XLBs that 'measure out' post ban will be prized by certain types of breeder.

The link below shows a pocket bully male for sale for £5,000, it is a solid lump of muscle (although that one looks pretty deformed) so surely owners of pocket/standard/american bully's will just fill the gap by breeding bigger? Or cross breeds, as there are quite a few crosses for sale at high prices already (£1,000+), including XLB x Cane Corso, XLB x Malamute and XLB x Boxer.

Dogs & Puppies for Sale in Dunstable, Bedfordshire - Gumtree

Give a pet a good home in Dunstable, Bedfordshire on Gumtree. Find your best friend within the thousand breeds available on Gumtree: Labradors, Cockers, Golden Retrievers, Boxers and many more.

www.gumtree.com

 

[skinnydipper]

It looks more like a hippo than a dog.

 

[Clodagh]

I think there should be a licensing system for anyone who wants a dog bred historically to fight and kill things.
It would never happen but like guns, if you want an air gun you can just go and get one, a shotgun you need a license and a firearm you need enhanced suitability and requirement checks.
Not going to happen I know.

 

[SilverLinings]

I've had a bit more of a look on Gumtree and I am surprised to see so many XL Bully puppies and young dos for sale for £1k-£2.5k. There are quite a few for around £300-£500 but I really didn't expect to see so many still being sold at higher prices. I appreciate that they might not sell at those prices, but it appears to be relatively common, rather than just the odd deluded seller.

There seems to be quite a few 'bullys' for sale with no mention of whether they are XL/standard/etc.

There are also a lot of questionable crosses, both for temperament and conformation reasons, e.g. bully (doesn't say which sub-type) cross shihtzu, XLB x Malinois (bargain at £650, 11wks old and apparently excellent with children ), XLB x collie.

The older ones being re-homed seem to either being described as being practically able to rear your children single handed ('loves children', 'trust him with my life', 'he's a soppy baby' etc), or come with a list of requirements that ring alarm bells ('needs an owner at home all day', 'needs to be dominated', 'needs a strong owner for walking', 'must be the sole pet in the household', 'scared of children', 'will protect owner from other dogs' etc).

And what exactly is an 'XX Bully' or an 'exotic bully'?!

 

[TheresaW]

I got bitten by own dog a few weeks ago. Completely out of character for him. He just suddenly lurched around and grabbed my leg. He did puncture the skin, but released immediately. I’m not sure if I inadvertently kicked him, or what. He’s a rescue, and since having him, have learnt that if we play football in the garden with him, he will cower if we kick the ball too close to him. We were on way out the door for a walk.

Talking to a friend, an XL could quote possibly have crushed my knee. May also have ragged my leg for good measure.

I haven’t seen any XL’s around here, and I choose to walk very early to avoid people. I, like others have said above, am starting to feel a bit paranoid about walking my own dogs. They’re not small breeds, but are definitely not fighters either.

 

[photo_jo]

Dogs & Puppies for Sale in Dunstable, Bedfordshire - Gumtree

Give a pet a good home in Dunstable, Bedfordshire on Gumtree. Find your best friend within the thousand breeds available on Gumtree: Labradors, Cockers, Golden Retrievers, Boxers and many more.

www.gumtree.com

That ad appears to have vanished but found another pocket bully for sale-yuck!

 

[AmyMay]

That ad appears to have vanished but found another pocket bully for sale-yuck!
View attachment 124772

Depending on the site, reporting them for being clearly deformed gets them removed very quickly

 

[SadKen]

Can see more ‘all on leads, all muzzled’ posts appearing.

I hate to harp on but again, these two ideas are pointless, if your goal is to prevent dog attacks.

They won’t apply in the home where many attacks occur.

The people who actually need to muzzle and put on lead will not do so. Those who are eager to obey laws and muzzle and put on lead ‘if it saves one life’ will be muzzling and putting on leads dogs who were never going to attack or kill anyone anyway, making zero difference to anything.

Many will disobey because it’s a stupid idea and their dogs aren’t a danger, plus they are walking in the middle of nowhere with nobody around.

Current legislation isn’t enforced at all. This will not be either. The police don’t have time to properly enforce today’s legislation never mind new blanket laws that affect everyone.

Again - what is needed is proper enforcement of existing legislation. Stronger sentencing would be welcome. Not blanket laws that do nothing to reduce attacks except punish the whole population for committing no crime.

 

[ycbm]

....pointless....

They won’t apply in the home where many attacks occur.

It isn’t pointless to allow people to feel safer walking the streets.

It is a choice to be inside a property with one of these dogs. It's avoidable.

The choice not to have to be near them at all is called agoraphobia.
.

 

[skinnydipper]

I don't know the actual number or if they are recorded officially somewhere but on Facebook alone there are more than a few reported dog on dog maulings and fatalities caused by XL bullies when people are out for a pleasant stroll with their cockapoo, dachshund or whatever.

If keeping dogs leashed and muzzled in public prevented those attacks and the subsequent distress they cause, both to a dog that has been attacked and to their families then I don't see a problem. I can tell you that my dog who was mauled went from a happy dog, relaxed and comfortable around other dogs to being understandably quite nervous when approached by unfamiliar dogs.

I never used to give BSL a thought, It didn't bother me that certain breeds were banned because I would never have wanted to own one. I don't think BSL should be scrapped. I think it should be reinforced with restrictions on who should be allowed to breed what and who should be allowed to own them.

 

[Errin Paddywack]

Again - what is needed is proper enforcement of existing legislation. Stronger sentencing would be welcome. Not blanket laws that do nothing to reduce attacks except punish the whole population for committing no crime.

This is what is lacking in so many situations. Laws just not being rigorously enforced.