Beagle killed in dog attack

criso said:
I think that's what it looked like the owner was trying to do in the video - don't want to watch it again to check.
Click to expand...

Its one of those things you have to commit to, much like strangling them. Theyre very large heavy breeds, not many people can hold that amount of muscle thats fighting back. Some experts recommend putting leads around the legs/wasit as you then have leverage strength and can pull them away as soon as they have any "give" in the jaw. The most important part is not letting the other dog/whatever be held as it will then only rip..they have to let go first and have no opposing force.
 
Spiritedly said:
A few years ago I had three dogs attack mine whilst I was seeing to my horse, it was on an army base and the dogs belonged to a security guard....privately owned not security trained dogs....some squaddies heard me shouting and came out of the barrack block opposite and about 4 of them then booted the attacking dogs in the sides which made them release mine and she shot into the barracks for cover. On my own I would never have been able to get all three to release her but the booting method did work.
Click to expand...

I have booted more dogs attacking my 3 dogs than I can remember, works every time, big or small they get the boot, no excuses, no waiting for owners, simplu had enough of out of control aggressive dogs and their pathetic excuses for owners. Was surrounded in a dark barn on my own by 3 Mastiffs once, all growling and got bitten in the back of my leg, unfortunatley for them I retailed, they sure as hell didnt do it again. I have been attacked by quite a few large and small dogs, seen them all off and always will defend myself and my dogs with what ever is to hand.
 
maisie06 said:
For those already in the country, compulsory neutering, muzzled and on lead in public, and compulsory public liability insurance for a start. I would like to see dog licencing back too - plus a face to face interview for anyone wanting to own bull breeds to see that they were wanting them for purposes other than a status symbol.
No bull breeds allowed in social housing either.
.
Click to expand...
What compete and utter rubbish. "No bull breeds allowed in social housing either AND the ridiculous assumption that anyone wanting a bull breed needs an interview. Thank you for putting back the cause of bull breeds, which organisations such as Battersea have been fighting to advance. Thank you for waving your poorly researched opinions and thank you for advancing the prejudice we face.

And I would like to actually give an ACCURATE outline of what the DDA is and why it fails. Unlike a large number of posters, I investigated this so I could understand it. The Pit bull is on the banned list. Except that doesn't work because "Pit bull" is a type not a breed. This is purely based on measurements and dogs with absolutely no history of any agression, ever, can be seized and if the owners are coerced into signing over their dogs, destroyed by the police. Please tell me now a law like that makes sense. Police have destroyed some puppies in a litter "because they were or type" yet allowed others to live. If you have a dog you suspect could fall foul (so a lab or boxer X stafford could easily fall into these measurements), you take a gamble and go to court and "hope" you can get your dog exempted - which means muzzling in public, insurance. If you fail, your dog will be destroyed. You can't be pre emptive.

I am not going to watch this video, I have no desire to see a dog dying and I agree that the owner has everything coming to him. The owner, not the dogs. The dogs will no doubt be destroyed and all 3 deaths could have been avoided. But please don't make a horrendous situation even worse.
 
Luci07. Amazing how many more lab X boxers and other bull type yet not cross breeds are out there. The police have to try to do something. If you own a banned breed type and it does not misbehave you would be deeply unfortunate to be targeted.
 
maisie06 said:
Our powers that be need to grow a pair and ban these dogs.

For those already in the country, compulsory neutering, muzzled and on lead in public, and compulsory public liability insurance for a start. I would like to see dog licencing back too - plus a face to face interview for anyone wanting to own bull breeds to see that they were wanting them for purposes other than a status symbol.
No bull breeds allowed in social housing either
Click to expand...

Oh FGS, get real.
 
Luci07 said:
…….. . "No bull breeds allowed in social housing either AND the ridiculous assumption that anyone wanting a bull breed needs an interview. Thank you for putting back the cause of bull breeds, which organisations such as Battersea have been fighting to advance. Thank you for waving your poorly researched opinions and thank you for advancing the prejudice we face.

And I would like to actually give an ACCURATE outline of what the DDA is and why it fails. Unlike a large number of posters, I investigated this so I could understand it. The Pit bull is on the banned list. Except that doesn't work because "Pit bull" is a type not a breed. This is purely based on measurements and dogs with absolutely no history of any agression, ever, can be seized and if the owners are coerced into signing over their dogs, destroyed by the police. Please tell me now a law like that makes sense. Police have destroyed some puppies in a litter "because they were or type" yet allowed others to live. If you have a dog you suspect could fall foul (so a lab or boxer X stafford could easily fall into these measurements), you take a gamble and go to court and "hope" you can get your dog exempted - which means muzzling in public, insurance. If you fail, your dog will be destroyed. You can't be pre emptive.

I am not going to watch this video, I have no desire to see a dog dying and I agree that the owner has everything coming to him. The owner, not the dogs. The dogs will no doubt be destroyed and all 3 deaths could have been avoided. But please don't make a horrendous situation even worse.
Click to expand...

As you appear to see the inadequacies of the DDA, and that it clearly doesn't address the problem with, what you would see as justice, were you to be placed in charge of the legislation which would cover dangerous dogs and were you able to disband the existing Law and establish a fresh set of regulations, how would you organise it?

Alec.
 
^^^^ As everyone's being fairly quiet perhaps we should throw the question to all and anyone and I'd be genuinely interested in the collective thoughts of HHO. Do we continue as we are, witnessing hideous attacks, and sometimes on humans, and only reacting to the individual cases and thereby neutering the DDA?

If doing nothing isn't an option, just how do we separate the breeds, the cross-breeds and their owners, from those who keep well balanced and sane Staffs?

Alec.
 
The problem is Alec that you only see the staffs and crosses in the news. Many other dog breeds attack and kill other dogs and animals but you just don’t hear about it.
 
From what I've read, the catalyst here was a ball. The beagle should never have been allowed to get into a position where he could challenge two large dogs for a possession, that was never going to end well. Having said that, taking a ball to a park teeming with dogs was risky and the interaction was obviously lazy. When the ball was thrown it should have been retrieved, presented to the owner and remained mostly in his possession. Leaving it on the ground was irresponsible and inviting a free for all.
All those dogs were let down by people who should have been able to assess the situation and protect their dogs.
 
What has this got to do with Staffs. They are not banned

GSDs, Rotts, Dobes, Rhodesian Ridgebacks and several other breeds, the names of which escape me, are banned from social housing and must he kept muzzled and on a 1m line in public, in the Republic of Ireland.

Some way towards helping would be a licensing and streaming system for dog ownership and huge controls on breeding. Including real registries where DNA is taken and stored.
It happens in almost all countries in Europe and many US states. Breed clubs are strong advocates for responsible breeding and if you don't comply, the puppies are pretty much impossible to sell. There's no incentive for breeding dogs with poor health and character.
 
Last edited:
Having worked for a couple of social housing providers, generally they don’t allow any dogs at all?

I was interested to read that this attack was possibly due to the dogs arguing over a ball. My immediate thoughts when I first read the article were that the dog walker could not possibly have proper control over 5 dogs in such a popular area unless they were all in a lead (unless she was a very good trainer as well), and that this was an excellent/appalling example of why I don’t ever walk my dogs in popular areas :(

How we stop this sort of thing happening is difficult to say the least, it is not the ‘fault’ of the dog but of the owner and you seemingly cannot legislate for stupidity
 
Interesting question Alec. How would I improve the DDA without rendering it weak? Firstly...it IS weak. It is an abhorrent ill thought and lazily created law. It offers absolutely no protection either. I would go after back street breeders in the first instance. Tax those who breed cheaply for a quick profit. There is a world of difference between a breeder who researchs and tries to breed healthy animals and the grasping lowlifes who don't give a toss. Bring back dog licensing, but keep the cost low and the fines high. Compulsory dog training as part of the ownership process. Ban selling animals on places like gum tree and Facebook. All dogs to be chipped and high fines on irresponsible owners whose animals attack others. These would help dissuade people. Fully appreciate that some of this is wishful thinking but we need to make a start where people see having a dog as their right and not a priveledge with responsibilities. I also agree that a lot of people say Staffie X to avoid having their dog labelled as a pit bull. Incredibly unhelpful for those trying to restore the good name of a proper Staffordshire Bull Terrier.

Other point I would like someone on here to confirm or deny. I have read that the beagle was off lead and the owner had been warned to retrieve it. Is this the case? And were those dogs on a lead? Not excusing the outcome but wondered if this was the case.
 
I read somewhere on FB that the 2 that attacked were on leads, and the beagle wasn’t. In the video, the 2 attacking were clearly not on leads. How likely is it that they both slipped them?
 
Luci07 said:
Interesting question Alec. How would I improve the DDA without rendering it weak? …….. . Bring back dog licensing, but keep the cost low and the fines high. Compulsory dog training as part of the ownership process. Ban selling animals on places like gum tree and Facebook. All dogs to be chipped and high fines on irresponsible owners whose animals attack others. These would help dissuade people. Fully appreciate that some of this is wishful thinking but we need to make a start where people see having a dog as their right and not a priveledge with responsibilities. I also agree that a lot of people say Staffie X to avoid having their dog labelled as a pit bull. Incredibly unhelpful for those trying to restore the good name of a proper Staffordshire Bull Terrier.

…….. .
Click to expand...

With the greatest respect, none of your suggestions above, however seemingly sensible, could be enforced. We also have to remember that there has to be a certain degree of 'will' in Government — and there isn't.

There are certain breeds of dogs which pose huge risks and they're all so often owned by those who are the least qualified, perhaps it's a case of closing the stable door behind the bolting horse, but perhaps those breeds which are known to be at high risk should have any further import permits (is a permit of any sort needed?) should be banned.

Then we have those breeds which have sadly been swept up in all this, and I'm considering Staffordshire Bull Terriers. I've had little if anything to do with Staffs, but every one that I've met has been quite charming and percentage wise, they'd be in the lead where many other breeds are concerned. The problem is that that's where the positives end …….. Staffs are often used as part of the breeding programme (programme? :D ) of those who produce the type of dogs which contribute nothing of worth to our canine world, apart from bigging-up the self esteem of those who would otherwise have none.

If we consider the chemicals of Hydrogen Peroxide and Liquid Paraffin, are we all aware that their purchase, except under controlled conditions, is now illegal because both can be used to make bombs? Will the day ever arrive when those dogs with a considered propensity and importantly, a mind set and an ability to cause major harm will only be bred under licence with all the progeny being neutered?

I wonder how much a neutered Pit-bull or an Akita or any other of these breeds would be worth……..

Alec.
 
TheresaW said:
How likely is it that they both slipped them?
Click to expand...
I've once had a velcro-on type harness with grab handle come off in my hand whilst trying to pull a dog off my dog (I live in a very dog-dense area, but when I think about it he has been attacked rather too many times over the last year or so!)

I've also had my own dog wriggle out of his (clip-on and no grab handle) when another dog picked him up and started shaking him. I have mixed feelings about how 'good' I want his harness now... his road sense is non-existent (and he is old, so taking a while to re-train on that) so I need it to work most of the time. But equally, it not being perfect possibly saved his life...

So, I'd say possible if they were both already hyped up when held... but they are not the kind of animal that ought to be on anything but the sturdiest of leads.
 
Alec Swan said:
With the greatest respect, none of your suggestions above, however seemingly sensible, could be enforced.
Click to expand...

But dog licenses used to be enforced, no? I'm too young to remember but I think they existed in the past? Of course there will have been those breaking the rules... but it would certainly be something that those not actively seeking to break the law would comply with?

I'd forget breed-specific rules and go with something simpler like weight... or just say all dogs (over a certain weight) to be muzzled in public?

Obvious issues would be with playing fetch and working dogs. So, registered handlers exempt and fenced dog-areas in parks exempt? I know some seemingly happy greyhounds which are always muzzled out...
 
Dog licenses in the past weren't enforced. Responsible owners had them but those who let their dogs stray didn't bother, and I don't recall many people being punished in anyway for not having a license.

The thing is, had the DDA worked and been enforced properly we wouldnt be seeing any pitbull types today as they were all supposed to be neutered. That certainly hasn't happened has it.
 
In Australia, as I have said ad nauseum, the dog license was rigorously enforced. I assume it paid for itself. Your license was cheap if neatered, expensive if not. (I think, back in the day, about $5 for a neutered dog, $45 for an entire animal). Your dog had a coloured tag, relevant to the year, that it had to wear on it's collar. If you were out walking it and no tag it could be seized, you then had 7 days to sort it out or it was destroyed. How hard can it be? Of course nowadays we would all be against healthy dogs being PTS.
 
MurphysMinder said:
Dog licenses in the past weren't enforced. Responsible owners had them but those who let their dogs stray didn't bother, and I don't recall many people being punished in anyway for not having a license.

The thing is, had the DDA worked and been enforced properly we wouldnt be seeing any pitbull types today as they were all supposed to be neutered. That certainly hasn't happened has it.
Click to expand...

Misinformation and an incorrect interpretation of this act. Pitbulls are a banned "breed". They cannot be imported, they are an illegal "type". Therefore this law is based purely on measurements. We had the ridiculous incident whereby a rescued Stafford X was taken by the police, retrained as a sniffer dog, was then destroyed when someone suddenly decided it was of "type". I did also say that some of my suggestions would be wishful thinking as the government will never give this the focus it deserves, but they were thoughts to be put out there. People vote with their pockets so at least whack up the fines to make idiots think twice. But hey, that irresponsible driver mowed into 2 horses in Normandy last Sunday, despite the horses wearing hi viz and in single file. Said woman has been widely reported to have been asked to slow down. As we know, the horses were out down and this woman will get a maximum of £250 and 6 points. Like that will make people think again.
 
MurphysMinder said:
Dog licenses in the past weren't enforced. Responsible owners had them but those who let their dogs stray didn't bother, and I don't recall many people being punished in anyway for not having a license.
Click to expand...

Oh, interesting thought: why is that that people don't let their dogs out by themselves any more? I remember it being quite common when I was a child and yet I can't actually recall seeing it done deliberately for the last 15 or so years? Is that just a cultural shift? Strays now will of course more frequently have microchips which would make enforcing rules on that easier I guess... But I think the straying reduced before that anyway?

Microchips would make licensing enforcement easier... And, as dogs legally have to have a contact tag anyway, it would be quite simple to include owner details along with the license tag which would be handy for a variety of scenarios...
 
Possibly because there is so much traffic. People pay loads of of money for their dogs nowadays. In the past dogs were mongrols which cost just a few pounds
 
There is no place in society for these types of dogs. The humble staff has been totally overtaken in the numpty owner stakes (I hope). As Alec says every staff I have ever met has been a delight, except a bit dog reactive, but they don't have the power of these imports.
 
Luci07 said:
Misinformation and an incorrect interpretation of this act. Pitbulls are a banned "breed". They cannot be imported, they are an illegal "type". Therefore this law is based purely on measurements. We had the ridiculous incident whereby a rescued Stafford X was taken by the police, retrained as a sniffer dog, was then destroyed when someone suddenly decided it was of "type". I did also say that some of my suggestions would be wishful thinking as the government will never give this the focus it deserves, but they were thoughts to be put out there. People vote with their pockets so at least whack up the fines to make idiots think twice. But hey, that irresponsible driver mowed into 2 horses in Normandy last Sunday, despite the horses wearing hi viz and in single file. Said woman has been widely reported to have been asked to slow down. As we know, the horses were out down and this woman will get a maximum of £250 and 6 points. Like that will make people think again.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you are saying that I am misinterpreting the act , but it clearly said that no dog "of the type known as pit bull terrier" could be bred from, nor sold or given away .
It was an ill conceived act and has certainly not worked, if would be far better using the microchipping law to make sure owners of all breeds/types were responsible but there is little chance of that happening.
 
There are plenty of people keeping lions as glorified pets (in the US). Only a few kill their owners each year. But I would argue that lions are not suitable pets for most people to keep. Surely you can't just say only the lions which have already killed an owner are unsuitable?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top