Another fatal dog attack

Nicnac said:
Banned breed my backside. It's illegal to rehome banned breeds. Why is he allowed to rehome XL Bullies?
I am a dog lover but they need to be culled. It's always the same types that are attracted to owning them. People who shouldn't be allowed to keep animals.
Click to expand...
is it 're'homing if going back to the owners?
 
Nicnac said:
Banned breed my backside. It's illegal to rehome banned breeds. Why is he allowed to rehome XL Bullies?
Click to expand...

He isn't:

By law, abandoned dogs must be kept for seven days to allow owners an opportunity to claim them, but are put down on the eighth day if they are a banned breed, as they are not allowed to be rehomed.

"I certainly didn't come into this business to put dogs to sleep. But would you rehome that dog, not knowing anything? Would you put your name to it? Because I wouldn't," Mark says.

"I'm worried about when I have to sit in front of a coroner and say I'm sorry I rehomed that dog because I felt sorry for it. I'm sorry your daughter's lost an arm or been killed. And that's the reality of this situation."
Click to expand...
 
"I'm worried about when I have to sit in front of a coroner and say I'm sorry I rehomed that dog because I felt sorry for it. I'm sorry your daughter's lost an arm or been killed. And that's the reality of this situation."

BBC is a bit confusing as states can't be rehomed but then next paragraph states the above. Maybe he does mean returning to owners rather than a new home. He's in an unenviable position.
 
Nicnac said:
"I'm worried about when I have to sit in front of a coroner and say I'm sorry I rehomed that dog because I felt sorry for it. I'm sorry your daughter's lost an arm or been killed. And that's the reality of this situation."

BBC is a bit confusing as states can't be rehomed but then next paragraph states the above. Maybe he does mean returning to owners rather than a new home. He's in an unenviable position.
Click to expand...
I think he's continuing the hypothetical of "would you rehome those [abandoned, unclaimed, banned breed] dogs". The context of the article shows it as part of the same exchange, but the wording itself is unclear.

eta - he could easily have said something like "I'm worried about when I'd have to sit in front of a coroner..." and the interviewer misheard him.
 
Smitty said:
I'm looking forward to seeing kennels full of dangerous chihuahuas, as we all know they are way more vicious than any muscle dog.
Click to expand...
Actually all joking aside we used to say if one of our JRTs had been Labrador sized he would have been dispatched PDQ! A small feisty little ratter snuggled up at your feet in bed growling and snarling whenever you wiggle a toe, or snatching at your hand when you attempt to see whatever it is he's after under cupboards is one thing or curling his lip if you were too noisy when he was trying to sleep, a larger version doing the same thing would not have been so amusing. I never, ever allowed him free rein around children for instance, I just could not trust him enough.

It seems a bit unfair what we will tolerate (rightly or wrongly of course) from a cute little dog, could be judged a death sentence in a larger one. 🤷‍♀️
 
Mrs Jingle said:
Actually all joking aside we used to say if one of our JRTs had been Labrador sized he would have been dispatched PDQ! A small feisty little ratter snuggled up at your feet in bed growling and snarling whenever you wiggle a toe, or snatching at your hand when you attempt to see whatever it is he's after under cupboards is one thing or curling his lip if you were too noisy when he was trying to sleep, a larger version doing the same thing would not have been so amusing. I never, ever allowed him free rein around children for instance, I just could not trust him enough.

It seems a bit unfair what we will tolerate (rightly or wrongly of course) from a cute little dog, could be judged a death sentence in a larger one. 🤷‍♀️
Click to expand...

It's about the potential of damage though, yes, much smaller dogs such as JRTs have killed very young children, but the capacity to do physical harm to everyone and intensity of these types of dogs being discussed is off the scale.
 
CorvusCorax said:
It's about the potential of damage though, yes, much smaller dogs such as JRTs have killed very young children, but the capacity to do physical harm to everyone and intensity of these types of dogs being discussed is off the scale.
Click to expand...
Of course, I am aware and I was being quite flippant and perhaps shouldn't have been on this thread. Apologies.
 
We have a hairy little monster (Bichon x Yorkie) who growls blood curdlingly if you tell her to move from your comfy fleece covered bed. Would never follow through (and I have tested her on many occasions) but yes, in a larger dog could be worrying. She scared the hell out of our poor Tesco delivery driver unless shut in a bedroom when he called, but after meeting her calm has been restored (and our grocery supply happily secured) 🤣 🙈. A very long way from XL bullies, who should ALL be culled:eek:IMO
 
CorvusCorax said:
Oh goodie 'the problem is the other end of the lead' says a dog trainer I've never heard of, completely negating the genetic elements which sees perfectly nice dog owners, passers-by and children receive grievously injury and worse.
Click to expand...
Yup, just providing fodder for the "it's how you raise them" brigade.
 
I watched the Panorama programme last night and I honestly believe all dogs that are involved in an attack on humans should be seized and put down with no option of being returned to the owner. Evidence proves that XL Bullies are more predisposed to violence (whether that is because they're selectively bred for and chosen by the undesirables of society is almost by the by) but I agree with the RSPCA lady - they are no less dangerous if their face is half an inch too narrow for the classification. It does seem utterly ridiculous that ~£20m per annum is being spent kennelling these dogs, putting the staff at significant risk, only for the court to order that those not classified as XL Bullies can be returned to their owners, even if they have attacked a person.
 
kaiserchief said:
I watched the Panorama programme last night and I honestly believe all dogs that are involved in an attack on humans should be seized and put down with no option of being returned to the owner. Evidence proves that XL Bullies are more predisposed to violence (whether that is because they're selectively bred for and chosen by the undesirables of society is almost by the by) but I agree with the RSPCA lady - they are no less dangerous if their face is half an inch too narrow for the classification. It does seem utterly ridiculous that ~£20m per annum is being spent kennelling these dogs, putting the staff at significant risk, only for the court to order that those not classified as XL Bullies can be returned to their owners, even if they have attacked a person.
Click to expand...
I totally agree that any dog that has attacked a human should be PTS.
There is a huge difference between a single provoked bite and an attack.

Also yes all dogs could attack a person, but an angry yorkie is not going to do much damage.

I've been bitten by a golden retriever, it was one bite, it only punctured the skin in one place, it was absolutly provoked (though nessecary provoking, he had been hit by a car and I had to move him off the road! I got the head end, my brother took the hind end, something clearly hurt a lot when we lifted him) and the dog was clearly absolutly mortified by what he had done.
He could have done a lot of damage, he was a 50kg young and fit dog (overheight) but one small, not very deep puncture wound shows that even in extreme circumstances a nice dog wont attack people.
 
If the police are called to a dog attack the dog should just be pts. There’s no need for a lengthy debate about it, it can be measured afterwards to see what level of crime it was (banned breed or not).
Also the XLB’s that were picked up as strays, why were they even in a kennel? Just PTS. If there is unsureness about type give them 7 days then pts.
Anyone that applies to keep a banned breed, this was suggested by that poor girl’s mother, should definitely undergo vetting as for a gun licence and should have to pay for it.
Those dogs that killed the sheep were euthanised immediately, why do children not have the same protection?
 
kaiserchief said:
I watched the Panorama programme last night and I honestly believe all dogs that are involved in an attack on humans should be seized and put down with no option of being returned to the owner. Evidence proves that XL Bullies are more predisposed to violence (whether that is because they're selectively bred for and chosen by the undesirables of society is almost by the by) but I agree with the RSPCA lady - they are no less dangerous if their face is half an inch too narrow for the classification. It does seem utterly ridiculous that ~£20m per annum is being spent kennelling these dogs, putting the staff at significant risk, only for the court to order that those not classified as XL Bullies can be returned to their owners, even if they have attacked a person.
Click to expand...
Thank you @kaiserchief for expressing my feelings so eloquently!!
 
Clodagh said:
Waiting for some of the pro bully bunch on here to say ‘not all bullies’ and ‘other dogs bite too’ 🙄

Even from the dogs pov, as they didn’t ask to be born, why would anyone want them sitting in a bare kennel for all that time.
Click to expand...
Exactly what is the point of keeping them. If they have owners they're clearly not responsible ones.
 
CorvusCorax said:
Oh goodie 'the problem is the other end of the lead' says a dog trainer I've never heard of, completely negating the genetic elements which sees perfectly nice dog owners, passers-by and children receive grievously injury and worse.
Click to expand...
Seem to recall that same female presenter was earlier investigating ‘underground’ dog breeding / fighting? In which was clearly shown the crazed inbreeding, deliberate importation of dog semen to intensify traits in xl bulldogs? Quite why that issue wasn’t addressed in that particular interview, is unclear - it is generally acknowledged that sustained incestuous breeding produces mental instabilities and aberrations in all kinds of mammals, not just dogs.
All dogs can bite and attack, and even small ones occasionally kill, we all know that is a possibility because that is what all dogs could do.
Certain types are larger, heavier and more powerful, the potential capacity for damage increasing proportionately. Add that to bizarre genetics - obviously the breed of the animal is a valid issue, whether it’s an undersized runt of an XL which doesn’t quite measure in, or not.
 
Clodagh said:
why would anyone want them sitting in a bare kennel for all that time.
Click to expand...
This is an XL bully "sanctuary" near Forfar (Scotland), it's an absolute $hit tip!! The woman who runs it has MH issues and has been refused a local authority license multiple times.

Facebook

www.facebook.com www.facebook.com
 
HBB said:
This is an XL bully "sanctuary" near Forfar (Scotland), it's an absolute $hit tip!! The woman who runs it has MH issues and has been refused a local authority license multiple times.

Facebook

www.facebook.com www.facebook.com
Click to expand...
So how come the local authority haven’t taken action to close down this unlicensed kennels in the intervening years?
 
kaiserchief said:
I watched the Panorama programme last night and I honestly believe all dogs that are involved in an attack on humans should be seized and put down with no option of being returned to the owner. Evidence proves that XL Bullies are more predisposed to violence (whether that is because they're selectively bred for and chosen by the undesirables of society is almost by the by) but I agree with the RSPCA lady - they are no less dangerous if their face is half an inch too narrow for the classification. It does seem utterly ridiculous that ~£20m per annum is being spent kennelling these dogs, putting the staff at significant risk, only for the court to order that those not classified as XL Bullies can be returned to their owners, even if they have attacked a person.
Click to expand...
Presumably, some impounded dogs still won’t be either xl bulldogs or aggressive, altho proportions clearly escalated.
Owners of straying Xls commit crime whether the dog does anything unpleasant or not, and that dog needs eliminating because the owner is not keeping either it or the general public safe from serious bodily threat. Cost to the public - both the danger and financial burden - is outrageous.
Be interesting to know whether those which are destroyed incur further vets’ fees (and handling risk), or are shot by way of euthanasia?
 
HBB said:
Because she keeps appealing it and the dreadful saga continues on and on and on.
Click to expand...
Appeal, or fresh application? Usually got L.A. time and process limits on these……you can’t just keep an unlicensed enterprise or rescue charity going indefinitely, particularly if there are welfare concerns, or potential hazard to the community.
What are the locally elected representatives (councillors? MSPs?) doing to conclude things?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top