Police dog PTS for being pit type

Spring Feather said:
....... I'm not sure I get the point of dog licenses tbh and I guess the UK don't either as years ago when I lived in the UK we did have to buy dog licenses; they cost 37p from what I remember.
Click to expand...

Correct, that was 7/6d., or thereabouts! I remember it too. My first Lurcher puppy cost me 10/s, and I was dammed if I was going to spend almost her purchase price, again and on a licence. Lace never had a licence, but my word she did have some fun! I would that I had her now.

Alec.
 
The Staffordshire Bull Terrier has arisen from centuries of careful breeding to develop a strong dog that is placid towards people. It should not be confused with the pit bull, a breed of uncertain origins and unpredictable temperament.

The above taken from a breed description and history .. Such a shame that these lovely dogs have been tainted by the pitbull label.
 
Crabby said:
The Staffordshire Bull Terrier has arisen from centuries of careful breeding to develop a strong dog that is placid towards people. It should not be confused with the pit bull, a breed of uncertain origins and unpredictable temperament.

The above taken from a breed description and history .. Such a shame that these lovely dogs have been tainted by the pitbull label.
Click to expand...

I totally agree. I have a staffy although he does have a little of something else in there too. Of my 4 dogs he is the most loyal and loving. He adores people.

I cannot fault his temperament. I love all my dogs but he is just that little bit extra special. He reads me exceptionally well. He's also extremely trainable as all he wants to do is please us. He loves to be told he is a good boy when he does something well.

He came from a pretty dire dog pound that was closed down due to some of the practices that were taking place. Despite this humans are the love of his life.
 
Yes I read the stats. I also recently read stats that in the uk you are more likely to get bitten by a lab, not that they are more aggressive than any other breed. And whole countries have overturned bsl, italy and the netherlands? being two I believe because it simply does not work, aswell as states in the usa
Ok so lets ay the apbt is of unsound temerament and has no place in society - just the pit, not a staff, lab, rottie x or a mongrel made up of god knows what- so how do you didifferentiate in this country? You cant, so they dont, which is hugely unfair to any responsible owner, with a dog who has done nothing wrong.
I have no issue with dda, for any breed out of control, dogs shouldnt be a nuisance to the public, but basing a law on a "type" of dog helps no one, and as was illustrated by the dog in the op, not all bull breeds are running around biting folk.
 
Lexie you keep hearking back to dogs that bite, but the issue here is dogs that kill.

Surely it's better that a thousand innocent dogs painlessly lose their lives than that one innocent child is mauled to death?
 
Ok not long ago there was a high profile attack involing a mal and a collie x I think, and a dead baby. Apparently the truth was never told surrounding that (someone on here said the news had it totally wrong) but still - not bullbreeds. There qre also a fair few by bull mastiffs - but they are not subject to bsl. Where would you like to draw the line - ban all dogs? A bite can kill.
 
Last edited:
cptrayes said:
I'll summarise. The crux of the issue is this:

SIX per cent of US dogs were pit bills in 2013

SEVENTY EIGHT per cent of people who were killed by a dog in the US in 2013 were killed by a pit bull.

If they are bred by type and not recognisable by DNA, what is the alternative to the current law?
Click to expand...

This is the crux of it .
There's no point in spending my and everyone else's taxes in a complicated and useless system because licences and owner checks that would burden the usual law abiding Members of the population and by ignored by the people causing the issue .
The law at the moment not fair but it's the best of a bad job .
 
2 babies have been killed by jrt's in recent years. Those cases seem subject to less media hysteria and not accompanied by the all too familiar picture of a snarling dog and headlines such as devil dogs etc.

The main issue surrounding those attacks is don't leave a baby / child unattended with a dog, no matter what it's breed.

If this law has it's way all staffys will end up banned to. Then what dogs will it come for next?

It's all very well to quote statistics from the US but the crux of the matter here is the way dogs who clearly aren't pitbull types are labelled as such.

So what we will do is continue to let the people that are causing the issue get away with it and penalise responsible dog owners.
 
ester said:
I don't think the issue is having pit bulls banned, it is the determination of what constitutes a pit.
Click to expand...

Agree.. That and lack of knowledge and hysteria by the general public which results in perfectly good dogs being reported as being pit bulls. One of my neighbours has a beautifully behaved GSD who is about a year old. A few days ago a small off lead dog ran up to him and they were actually playing together but little dogs owner insisted that GSD was dangerous and was fighting his dog. Threatened all sorts and went around telling everyone about how his dog was attacked. With the new laws in place this could so easily result in a lovely well behaved dog being pts ...again public misconception about a powerful breed and ignorance about how dogs play and inter react coupled with stupidity of owner who thinks that it's ok to let small dogs to run free without any sanction.
 
lexiedhb said:
Ok not long ago there was a high profile attack involing a mal and a collie x I think, and a dead baby. Apparently the truth was never told surrounding that (someone on here said the news had it totally wrong) but still - not bullbreeds. There qre also a fair few by bull mastiffs - but they are not subject to bsl. Where would you like to draw the line - ban all dogs? A bite can kill.
Click to expand...

I would draw the line at any breed where the number of serious injuries and deaths caused by that breed of dog far outweigh what would be expected from the number that exist. That is my understanding with pit bulls.

There will ALWAYS be bad owners, and until we can guarantee that there are none, we need to try to make sure that they cannot own a risky breed. If you cannot DNA test for a pit bull, what other sensible option is there but to try to eradicate the type?
 
I really don't know the answer to this. As said previously I'm certainly not a fan of BSL but I'm also wondering if it is actually doing some good, over here anyway, maybe not in the UK yet? The amount of attacks/fatalities that have been high profile in the news in years gone by, don't seem to be coming to light any more. I don't know whether that is because these attacks aren't happening so much or there is some other reason for it.

I'm not convinced that dog licenses would make any difference though. Over here I know people who have never tagged their dogs and I know just as many who have more than 3 dogs in my municipality and they only tag a couple of them so they don't have to fork out for a kennel license. These are all normally law abiding citizens as well, so if they are doing it then I'd think that anyone who is 'dodgy', shall we say, wouldn't even bother to get any of their dogs tagged.

I honestly don't know the answer.
 
Crabby said:
Agree.. That and lack of knowledge and hysteria by the general public which results in perfectly good dogs being reported as being pit bulls. One of my neighbours has a beautifully behaved GSD who is about a year old. A few days ago a small off lead dog ran up to him and they were actually playing together but little dogs owner insisted that GSD was dangerous and was fighting his dog. Threatened all sorts and went around telling everyone about how his dog was attacked. With the new laws in place this could so easily result in a lovely well behaved dog being pts ...again public misconception about a powerful breed and ignorance about how dogs play and inter react coupled with stupidity of owner who thinks that it's ok to let small dogs to run free without any sanction.
Click to expand...

No ones going to put a dog to sleep for playing - if it had attacked then there would be injuries proving this.
Sadly there's no legislation against the stupid and ill informed.
 
Actually the new law states differently. You don't have to be bitten, just be in fear of the dog. It can be the other side of a fence. I'm sure this wouldn't equal pts but it can cause problems for people I'm sure.
 
If the Authorities were called, every time that a dog barked at a stranger, and all of those dogs were considered to be dangerous, then we'd barely have a dog left alive, in the country!!

The paranoia is pathetic, it really is, but and it's a huge BUT, there are those dogs, dogs which are capable of causing the most dreadful damage, or worse, and who are owned by idiots (the irony of this must appeal to others!), and I still fail to understand how or why it is that those who know what they're doing, don't want these animals, but the idiot, DOES!! Is it to do with image? Is it to do with a lack of self esteem, and a belief that the difficult and the mostly intractable, will somehow give them a degree of kudos?

Why is it that those who haven't the faintest idea what they're doing, want the most difficult dogs? Why do those who would struggle with a Ford Fiesta, want to drive Ferraris? Does anyone know?

Alec.
 
lexiedhb said:
But any dog can bite, doesnt mean they do so why should normal, friendly family dogs be pts because they have a wide head and are x cm's tall? Could be any mix of dog breeds.... could as the dog in the op be useful to society! Yes dangerous dogs need to be dealt with but not on the basis of a set of measurements.
Click to expand...

lexiedhb said:
Yes I read the stats. I also recently read stats that in the uk you are more likely to get bitten by a lab, not that they are more aggressive than any other breed. And whole countries have overturned bsl, italy and the netherlands? being two I believe because it simply does not work, aswell as states in the usa
Ok so lets ay the apbt is of unsound temerament and has no place in society - just the pit, not a staff, lab, rottie x or a mongrel made up of god knows what- so how do you didifferentiate in this country? You cant, so they dont, which is hugely unfair to any responsible owner, with a dog who has done nothing wrong.
I have no issue with dda, for any breed out of control, dogs shouldnt be a nuisance to the public, but basing a law on a "type" of dog helps no one, and as was illustrated by the dog in the op, not all bull breeds are running around biting folk.
Click to expand...

Are you seriously unable to understand the difference between a typical attack from a dog that originally was bred to fight and other types of dog?

Yes all types of dog can bite, but fatalities from these attacks are notable in that they are unusual, mostly the result of more than one dog attacking at the same time.
Fatal and serious attacks on people & fatal and serious attacks on other dogs/other pets are overwhelmingly caused by bull breeds.
 
Are you seriously unable to understand that I agree with the dda. I agree there are dogs out there of dubious temperament, managed by idiots. If you accept the genetics that make them "fighting dog s" you have to also accept they were bred to be non human aggressive.
I also dont have a problem per se with the pit being banned I struggle with the fact it could be a number of different, non banned breeds, losing their lives having done naff all wrong. All this bull has been seen in different breeds over the years, and its always been nonsense.
yes target the idiots using dogs as weapons, or for intimidation purposes but joe bloggs with his mutt (which pit types Invariabbly are ), minding their own, or dogs like in the op, who are useful, friendly etc why should they suffer?

ban the pit the idiots will move on to the mastiff, or the husky, or the rottie. Doesnt stop idiot owners wanting, and getting a 'hard' dog.
 
Last edited:
lexiedhb said:
Are you seriously unable to understand that I agree with the dda. I agree there are dogs out there of dubious temperament, managed by idiots. If you accept the genetics that make them "fighting dog s" you have to also accept they were bred to be non human aggressive.
I also dont have a problem per se with the pit being banned I struggle with the fact it could be a number of different, non banned breeds, losing their lives having done naff all wrong. All this bull has been seen in different breeds over the years, and its always been nonsense.
yes target the idiots using dogs as weapons, or for intimidation purposes but joe bloggs with his mutt (which pit types Invariabbly are ), minding their own, or dogs like in the op, who are useful, friendly etc why should they suffer?

ban the pit the idiots will move on to the mastiff, or the husky, or the rottie. Doesnt stop idiot owners wanting, and getting a 'hard' dog.
Click to expand...

They don't need to 'move on' to the mastiff, husky or rottie - they are already just as much a status dog as pits.
 
cptrayes said:
There's one dead dog in the ring by then, is the other not half dead too, and fairly easily removed? Ditto in training, the dog will already have killed whatever 'free to a good home' dog it's been trained with, and be fairly easy to remove from its victim, I would have thought?

:(
Click to expand...

Would you go in the field to remove a stallion that had just killed, or half killed, its field mate (say it had got in with another aggressive stallion? I don't think so. You must have split up a dog fight in your time? More often than not the winner goes for you when you try to detach him from his victim.
 
Clodagh said:
Would you go in the field to remove a stallion that had just killed, or half killed, its field mate (say it had got in with another aggressive stallion? I don't think so. You must have split up a dog fight in your time? More often than not the winner goes for you when you try to detach him from his victim.
Click to expand...


The stallion comparison is irrelevant.

The dogs are not fighting any more at the end of the kind of dog fight that these dogs are bred for, one is dead, or mostly dead, that's the point of the fight. The fight is OVER when the winner is removed.

I do not see why there is an assumption that fighting dogs must be easy to handle by their trainers. The people I have come across with dangerous dogs have been proud that they are hard to handle.
 
Last edited:
Its not an assumption. They were bred to be human friendly, those that werent simply did not make the grade. Although, then and now is obviously vastly different.
 
lexiedhb said:
Its not an assumption. They were bred to be human friendly, those that werent simply did not make the grade. Although, then and now is obviously vastly different.
Click to expand...

Staffordshire bulls were bred to be human friendly. I don't believe that the same necessarily applies to pit bulls, otherwise they would not kill in the disproportionate numbers that they do.
 
I haven't read all of the replies but I just wanted to share two websites that may be of interest: http://www.dogsbite.org and http://www.daxtonsfriends.com

These are both American websites and having read the vast majority of victim case studies it would appear that in many cases the pit bulls were raised in loving homes from puppies. Mine may be an unpopular view, but I do believe that this breed has a higher propensity for causing serious injury or death over any other breed and the statistics appear to back up that claim. I'm glad they are banned in this country.
 
Taken from the american badrap pit bull website - 'bite inhibition towards humans was encouraged through selective breeding so gamblers could handle their dogs during staged fights - partially because of these early breeding efforts which frowned on man biters pit bulls gained a reputation for their trustworthy nature with humans'
 
America can not be compared to UK. There are far more people for a start, much larger cities, more crime etc. UK does not have the same pit problem, there are very few real pits here. They are all porrly bred crossbreeds and god knows what the cross is.
 
Crackedhalo said:
Taken from the american badrap pit bull website - 'bite inhibition towards humans was encouraged through selective breeding so gamblers could handle their dogs during staged fights - partially because of these early breeding efforts which frowned on man biters pit bulls gained a reputation for their trustworthy nature with humans'
Click to expand...

Errr, a pro pit bull website is ..... pro pit bull. ??
 
So are you suggesting they are supplying incorrect information?

Its common sense really isn't it, you wouldn't breed human aggresive traits into a dog that required handling by humans during a fight - the same as dogs bred to retrieve aren't bred with hard mouths.

As Lexi mentioned, those days are not these days and the pit bulls in this country are not pit bulls as they were originally bred.

However I think the point is being missed, anti pit bull or pro pit bull, the point is the way the dog is deemed to be of type is inadequate. I don't think anybody has said pit bulls should be legal in this country.

Responsible owners will always be responsible and idiots will always be idiots.
 
What specific improvement do you want to see in the way that a dog is deemed to be a pit bull type? My understanding having read the thread is that there is no solution, and that so far no-one has suggested any solution other than repealing the law.



PS I'm suggesting that it is completely impossible to know if the information is true or not because of its source. If it came from a site that was about all sorts of dogs it would be a lot more credible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top