Lennox

Dobiegirl said:
http://networkedblogs.com/zNR4K


This is really interesting and gives a real insight into aggressive dogs.
Click to expand...

The video of him evaluating the sibe has actually shaken me a little bit. Put either of my dogs (and R especially) in a pen with a stranger and they would act in a very similar manner. Yet that dog had been seized because he was considered aggressive enough to pose a danger to society?

I know that appropriating that 'first they came for the...' quotation is out of order but. Y'know.
 
And on that "assessment" they branded him inpredictable and dangerous! Just a dog being politely submissive hoping if he is a good dog he will get the profered treat. Blooming unbelievable.:mad:
 
The assessment video I have seen of Lennox shows no aggression whatsoever. It is not just about Lennox it is about any dog be it a cross breed who looks a certain way. I have a staffy x as do many others and the worry is someone could decide they are a pitbull type, seize them, assess them and pts, whether they show aggression or not. My dogs are not aggressive in anyway but by the looks of things that doesn't matter.
 
I read that too Amymay. It said they needed people to email. I just can't understand why they can't even have his collar back. Be interesting if Channel 4 did investigate.
 
blackcob said:
The video of him evaluating the sibe has actually shaken me a little bit. Put either of my dogs (and R especially) in a pen with a stranger and they would act in a very similar manner. Yet that dog had been seized because he was considered aggressive enough to pose a danger to society?

I know that appropriating that 'first they came for the...' quotation is out of order but. Y'know.
Click to expand...

That is a bit worrying - it just looked like a typical, excited sibe. Nice dog.

What I'm concerned about is the general direction of the BSL. How many breeds are going to end up on the list, especially with BYB not looking at the temprament of breeding stock, or home/character checking of the buyers.

Sibes and mals, for example, are a favourite of BYB's, and I'm hearing everyday now, of people buying them without doing their homework on the breeds, and not being able to cope with the hyper energy or hyper sensitivity of these dogs. The dog is misunderstood, and confused; it bites someone in excitement or fear, and then it's 'dangerous', and rehomed or given away!

Thus you get a very confused, high energy, highly sensitive, and possibly scared dog - not a good combination in anyone's books.

Obviously, this happens with all breeds, not just my own, but how soon before we/you have wardens knocking on our/your door, quoting the BSL, wanting to take your friend!
 
Exactly MisterJay! And this is why BSL is every dog owners issue not just bull breeds. I hear the hoodies who have ruined the reputation of the staffy are turning to huskies etc now. I hope not or else another lovely dog will have its good reputation ruined :(
 
Copperpot said:
Exactly MisterJay! And this is why BSL is every dog owners issue not just bull breeds. I hear the hoodies who have ruined the reputation of the staffy are turning to huskies etc now. I hope not or else another lovely dog will have its good reputation ruined :(
Click to expand...

Absolutely, CP, even to the extent of stealing them from people's hands; there's been verified reports of walkers being held while their dogs are taken. We've all been 'advised' not to walk them alone ( I can't, I have stark raving mad mals, so have to enrole my OH as co-walker/dragger :D ), but it makes you realise how scarey it's getting.

Apparently, the a*******s use them as bait dogs because they will scream and enrage the fighting dogs even more!
 
bonny said:
It is just mass hysteria....all those people who never met the dog, had nothing to do with him and didn't actually have any idea about his aggression or lack of it.
Facebook sometimes has alot to answer for. It might be boring but think of how much good could have been done if all that so called caring had instead gone on the plight of dogs in general in this country. Why do so few people care about all the dogs who lose their live's every day simply because they are homeless and unwanted instead of jumping onto a crazy bandwagon about one dog who was doomed from the start....
Click to expand...

A number of independent assessments were made that found he dog to not be aggressive-Sarah Fisher, Victoria Stillwell and David Ryan to my knowledge.
They concluded that Lennox was not a danger. One assessment by a BCC dog warden concluded he was.

To me, this is as stupid as deciding a horse is dangerous because a stage 1 groom says so while 3 BHSI's say it is not ;)

It is not surprising then Bonny, that many dog owners are worried about this case.
BCC was able to seize and destroy a family pet with the full consent of the law despite experts in canine behaviour giving evidence to the dogs non aggressive nature.

A future where pets can be stolen and killed by the local council for it's looks is a terrifying one...........
 
bonny said:
It is just mass hysteria....all those people who never met the dog, had nothing to do with him and didn't actually have any idea about his aggression or lack of it..
Click to expand...

I can't agree. I certainly didn't feel hysterical about it. If I'm honest, just mild curiosity. But then growing incredulity that a situation like this could have arisen, whereby a dog was seized through not fault of its own - and for no other reason that it looked like a 'banned' breed.

You also have to understand the miss information put out by BCC, and the treatment of the animal in general whilst in confinement.

For every Lennox and his alleged pit pull type fit, I will show you ten others not far from where I live. I await their seizure.....

And as snide as that sounds - another case surrounding a similar situation is developing. It will certainly be interesting to watch that one.
 
Didn't know that MJ. My Dad has a malamute, will tell him to be careful.

My dog is a staffy x in some poses some people would say he can look "type" usually when he is curious and at other times nothing like. He is friendly. Loves people but I walk him in the middle of nowhere to avoid people seeing him and this situation arising for me. Over my dead body would they take him.
 
I am also not aware of anyone coming forward to say they had been attacked by Lennox.
Surely, given how high profile the case is/as any victims would have been "out there".
The dog was a 7yo when PTS, so IF it was a violent intimidating brute, it would have had a long list of victims racked up in the 5 years prior to his seizure by BCC.
 
Ok then so what is the answer, I think the idea of the dangerous dog act was that it became illegal to import or breed from pitballs with the rather idealistic view that the breed would die out rather than have a mass cull of the dogs already here. So owning a pitbull is now illegal because in theory they don't exist. So the authorities can only act on a dog that looks like a pitbull as no one is going to admit that is what their dog is ....
Lennox looked the part which is surely the issue, not whether he was agressive or not. Either we are going to have pitbulls in our midst or we're not.
 
bonny said:
Ok then so what is the answer, I think the idea of the dangerous dog act was that it became illegal to import or breed from pitballs with the rather idealistic view that the breed would die out rather than have a mass cull of the dogs already here. So owning a pitbull is now illegal because in theory they don't exist. So the authorities can only act on a dog that looks like a pitbull as no one is going to admit that is what their dog is ....
Lennox looked the part which is surely the issue, not whether he was agressive or not. Either we are going to have pitbulls in our midst or we're not.
Click to expand...

The answer is quite simple. If you have:

Pit Bull Terrier
Japanese Tosa
Dogo Argentino
Fila Braziliero

The dog is removed and destroyed.

However, as Lennox was none of these, was not proven to be aggressive, and had no history of aggression - his destruction was entirely unlawful.

And Lennox was clearly not a Pit Bull Terrier, or 'type'.
 
amymay said:
The answer is quite simple. If you have:

Pit Bull Terrier
Japanese Tosa
Dogo Argentino
Fila Braziliero

The dog is removed and destroyed.

However, as Lennox was none of these, was not proven to be aggressive, and had no history of aggression - his destruction was entirely unlawful.

And Lennox was clearly not a Pit Bull Terrier, or 'type'.
Click to expand...

But if no one is going to admit that their dog is a pitbull then what is the answer ? apart from having a breed type
 
bonny said:
But if no one is going to admit that their dog is a pitbull then what is the answer ? apart from having a breed type
Click to expand...

AFAIK, DNA analysis was undergone which concluded he was NOT a pit bull.

It is also important to keep in mind that,as has been mentioned many times on this thread, any dog can be dangerous and targeting a specific breed is pointless- I for one am far more worried about the iffy temperament of a local rough collie( or "lassie dog" as his owners insist on calling him) then I am about the far more powerful but well adjusted mastiff ho is completely obedient to his owners.

In short, bad owners and bad breeders make bad dogs. Being a certain breed does not make a dog a danger and the DDA needs to recognise that.
It should have been about the correct way to deal with a known aggressive dog not a stick to beat certain breeds with and I doubt those who created the Act ever intended non aggressive family pets to be killed because of it.
 
Seapony said:
It is also important to keep in mind that,as has been mentioned many times on this thread, any dog can be dangerous and targeting a specific breed is pointless.
Click to expand...

Any dog can be dangerous. But actually the banned dog list does make sense. The list contains breeds known for their aggression (perhaps apart from Pit Bulls, which can make wonderful pets in the right hands - a friend in the US has three).

In short, bad owners and bad breeders make bad dogs. Being a certain breed does not make a dog a danger.
Click to expand...

I agree with your first sentence, but not your second. Certain breeds are aggressive - regardless of their handling, as referenced in the DDA.
 
Last edited:
bonny said:
Lennox looked the part which is surely the issue, not whether he was agressive or not. Either we are going to have pitbulls in our midst or we're not.
Click to expand...

But he wasn't a pitbull. Weather you disbelieve the owners or not - there is no proof that he was a banned breed.

Surely we should be demanding proof before we destroy dogs on the basis of them possibly being a banned breed?

He also didn't hurt anyone.

So a dog has been destroyed because he 'looked wrong'.

My dog looks like a wolf - should he be seized and thrown in a zoo? Or PTS because he MIGHT become a killer?

It's a slippery slope and I think we dog owners should stand firm and say this hysterical, knee jerk reaction stops now.

We also need to demand well trained and professional dog wardens - if they are supposed to provide witness statements.

I had them round a few months ago courtesy of a nasty neighbour who wrongly complained of excessive barking. It caused me lots of stress and worry and when the dog wardens turned up they were disinterested, clearly terrified of Salem and had no ability to read the body language of a dog.

I would not be confident in their testimony as professional witnesses if it ever came to it :(
 
I'm not arguing about different breeds, numpty owners etc but I'm asking what the answer is as it's now illegal to own a pitbull. I don't think you can use a DNA test so surely the only way to identify them is to use a breed type. The owner shouldn't come into it. Like I said before either we want to have pitbulls in our society or we don't and if the answer is we do then we have to allow indiscriminate breeding.
 
amymay said:
The answer is quite simple. If you have:

Pit Bull Terrier
Japanese Tosa
Dogo Argentino
Fila Braziliero

The dog is removed and destroyed.

However, as Lennox was none of these, was not proven to be aggressive, and had no history of aggression - his destruction was entirely unlawful.

And Lennox was clearly not a Pit Bull Terrier, or 'type'.
Click to expand...

AM, with respect, like it or not (and I don't) three judges in three separate courts decided that he WAS type under current legislation and Caroline Barnes admitted in court under oath that yes he could be considered as being of type, so yes, under law, he WAS type, hence his destruction.
 
But CC, we see 'types' all over the country. It doesn't mean they are. And in Lennox's case - it was not proven.
 
Surely it's impossible to prove either way so the only way to decide is to have experts who have to use a breed type. Failing that we will continue to have pitbulls in this country forever.
 
Amymay, it was proven in a court of law - again, whether we like it or not, the highest court in the country. Otherwise the dog would not be dead.
This is not about my opinion or your opinion, it is the law, not a game where no one can agree on who won.

The biggest problem with the current legislation is that legally there is no such breed as the APBT in the UK as it is not recognised by the Kennel Club - which is why measurements/dimensions and character tests are used. Until that anomaly is sorted, I have no idea what can be done.
That is why a dog of TYPE can be seized - there is no official breed and no breed registry to prove if a dog is or isn't TYPE, it is a type that is banned.
 
Hopefully the best that can come of this is public awareness that a BYB staffie or a crossbreed can be taken as "pit bull type" and discourage people from buying them and hopefully discourage people from breeding if their puppies don't sell.

A client of mine with a red SBT twice had to present the dog's documents at police stations having been stopped whilst out walking. He could prove his dog was a Staffordshire Bull Terrier ( and had 2 reserve CCs to add evidence) but because he was not a common colour and was not the same as the BYB stock around he got noticed.

I could go through local towns on most days and spot dogs of the type and know of Dogos not far from here -they pass them off as Great Dane crosses.

TBH I find the Bullykutta & mixed mastiff fad more scary.
 
I seem to remember seeing somewhere those guidelines that BCC used were taken from an US body without their permission and they were outdated anyway. There was talk of this US body sueing the BCC so it would be interesting to see if anything comes of this.
 
Copperpot said:
Once AGAIN Bonny it is about more than just one dog!
Click to expand...

The whole campaign was about one dog !! And this thread and all the facebook messages, petitions etc etc. It was all about saving Lennox not all the others. There was a tv programme recently where they showed the police removing pitbull type dogs out of council flats where they were often recieving little or no care. They were held for a short time, often showing themselves to be loving friendly dogs despite their neglect and then pts as it's illegal to try and rehome them. I don't remember any uproar at all about that. Joe Public just loves a good sob story, everybody, well almost averybody cared about Lennox !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top