Woman attacked by dogs and killed in Liverpool

FestiveG

Over the hill and far awa
Joined
14 September 2006
Messages
16,216
Location
West Yorkshire
Visit site
Nature versus nurture, the never ending debate! The rotters were intensively socialised from the off and were confident, friendly animals throughout their lives. The labs were bought late summer, so we missed all the aggri shows, then we had lockdown and all the things we had done with the rotters were denied them. Getting them civilised was much harder work, as they were so much older before they could get properly out and about. We did still have B rotter when they could get out and about, so they did have a good solid role model. It really is about their training imo and working with the dog you have, whatever its breed.
 

bonny

Well-Known Member
Joined
17 September 2007
Messages
6,700
Visit site
No well-trained, well-socialised dog will kill someone. So, in creating new legislation, does the question have to be which breeds are the most likely to kill someone if untrained or poorly socialised?
There isn’t any other way to stop these attacks other than by looking at breeds ?
 

Nasicus

Well-Known Member
Joined
15 December 2015
Messages
2,263
Visit site
To what extent is the high proportion of bully attacks to do with the types of people that tend to own them, rather than to do with their nature and build alone? I'm sure that if every dodgy bloke with a XL bully had an Airedale terrier instead, there'd be people on here posting that Airedale terriers need to be banned with the number of people they've killed.
Then again, I'd still prefer people to have an XL bully than a bully kutta or a LGD breed being kept in the city.

A bull breed is going to do a LOT more damage and has far more capability to seriously maim, mutilate and kill a human than an airedale terrier. And when you look at the lists, they do just that. Sure an Airedale owned by the same kind of people that tend to own these bull breeds could be an absolute wackjob, but the difference in killing capability is the rub here.
And that's taking the piss-poor breeding and disregard for mentally, stable healthy dogs that these bull breeds seem subject to out of the equation.
 

Clodagh

Well-Known Member
Joined
17 August 2005
Messages
26,651
Location
Devon
Visit site
I’ve said it before on here but I have no idea why we can’t follow Australia’s example. Dog licenses that are expensive for entires and cheap for neuters. Tags that are colour coded so at a glance you can see if they are up to date. A robust dog warden presence with fines that are doled out quite briskly for misdemeanours. I’m not saying (before anyone Google’s!) that no one ever gets bitten in Oz but let’s at least make a bit of an effort.
 

CorvusCorax

'It's only a laugh, no harm done'
Joined
15 January 2008
Messages
59,301
Location
End of the pier
Visit site
I’ve said it before on here but I have no idea why we can’t follow Australia’s example. Dog licenses that are expensive for entires and cheap for neuters. Tags that are colour coded so at a glance you can see if they are up to date. A robust dog warden presence with fines that are doled out quite briskly for misdemeanours. I’m not saying (before anyone Google’s!) that no one ever gets bitten in Oz but let’s at least make a bit of an effort.

Boulder Colorado (a state which doesn't appear to have a blanket ban on Cane Corsos) has a great system of colour coded tags for leash requirements, assessments to determine these etc.

Northern Ireland does not issue tags any more but still licences and there is a discount for neutered animals. There used to be the colour coded ones but I guess that was too expensive.
 

splashgirl45

Lurcher lover
Joined
6 March 2010
Messages
16,099
Location
suffolk
Visit site
I’ve said it before on here but I have no idea why we can’t follow Australia’s example. Dog licenses that are expensive for entires and cheap for neuters. Tags that are colour coded so at a glance you can see if they are up to date. A robust dog warden presence with fines that are doled out quite briskly for misdemeanours. I’m not saying (before anyone Google’s!) that no one ever gets bitten in Oz but let’s at least make a bit of an effort.

The trouble is this country is too meek and mild to carry out stern enough measures regarding other crimes so we have no chance of a rigorous system to sort out dangerous dogs…. If licenses are bought back I would think nearly all of us on here would stump up the money and obey the rules but the criminal element in society would just ignore it rather like the horse passport fiasco. I don’t see an answer to be honest.
 

Clodagh

Well-Known Member
Joined
17 August 2005
Messages
26,651
Location
Devon
Visit site
The trouble is this country is too meek and mild to carry out stern enough measures regarding other crimes so we have no chance of a rigorous system to sort out dangerous dogs…. If licenses are bought back I would think nearly all of us on here would stump up the money and obey the rules but the criminal element in society would just ignore it rather like the horse passport fiasco. I don’t see an answer to be honest.
I absolutely see that but in Oz they are robust and do seize dogs and they are pts in 7 days ( or did in my day). Agree we are too pathetic.
 

stangs

Well-Known Member
Joined
18 September 2021
Messages
2,868
Visit site
There isn’t any other way to stop these attacks other than by looking at breeds ?
Realistically, the only way to stop these attacks would be to create a society where people like their owners - whether that be people who don't understand dog behaviour, or people who want their dogs to behave like this, or people who don't care enough to give their dogs a good upbringing - didn't exist, or didn't get the chance to own a dog. But, unfortunately, people seem to think it's a human right to have a dog, even when they can't provide a good home, and no one can control what the dodgy types get up to, so the breeds end up taking the fall instead.
.
 

Cortez

Tough but Fair
Joined
17 January 2009
Messages
15,576
Location
Ireland
Visit site
I didn't realise you lot don't have dog licencing, do you also not have dog wardens? IMO some breeds should be banned, never mind the "bad dogs have bad owners" stuff; no one who is not a member of the police or the armed forces needs a dog that is designed to bite and hold, nor one that is bred to be aggressive. If you love the bully breeds or the guardian breeds, or the fighting breeds, tough. Go find another type of dog to love.
 

SilverLinings

Well-Known Member
Joined
12 August 2017
Messages
3,170
Visit site
The trouble is this country is too meek and mild to carry out stern enough measures regarding other crimes so we have no chance of a rigorous system to sort out dangerous dogs…. If licenses are bought back I would think nearly all of us on here would stump up the money and obey the rules but the criminal element in society would just ignore it rather like the horse passport fiasco. I don’t see an answer to be honest.

The money raised from dog licenses should be used to employ more dog wardens, and dog wardens or police who spoted a dog without a license tag should seize it and fine the owner. Dog wardens could also scan microchips to check that the dog is licensed if they suspect the tag is fraudulent. There would still be some people who didn't bother, but hopefully over time that number would shrink.

Making entire dogs more expensive to license and making the breeder responsible for the puppies' initial licensing would cut down on indiscriminate breeding too- particularly the type who breed without even the financial reserves to pay when the bitch/puppies have a veterinary emergency.
 

splashgirl45

Lurcher lover
Joined
6 March 2010
Messages
16,099
Location
suffolk
Visit site
All good ideas on here but sadly we are not in charge and animal welfare is low on the list of things to do. I agree, there should be more dog wardens and they should have the power to seize dogs who are not chipped Or licensed (if we had licensing) and there should be a crackdown on back street breeders who are breeding the wrong temperament and have no regard for the well being of the dogs by breeding these X-LARGE bully breeds, who are deformed and have trouble breathing…. We also need to stop the business of so called foreign rescues who are trapping street dogs and sending them here to an uncertain future, but that it still going on
 

CorvusCorax

'It's only a laugh, no harm done'
Joined
15 January 2008
Messages
59,301
Location
End of the pier
Visit site
no one who is not a member of the police or the armed forces needs a dog that is designed to bite and hold.

Almost every utilisation of dogs on the planet comes from adapting a dog's natural desire to possess and hold.
Their mouths are their hands.
Prey/food and the need to survive is the primary drive and we've just adapted it to our own ends.
Gundogs too, although they have been selectively bred to have softer mouths, still need to be able to hold.
Terriers and lurchers/sighthounds, as far as I am aware, do not negotiate their quarry to death.
Any dog engaged in a sport requiring a retrieve.
Search and rescue dogs.
Detection dogs.
Assistance dogs.
And all the police and armed forces dogs who are bred/raised by civilians.

Everyone is for banning entire breeds until it comes to their breed, or type, or all dogs in general.
 

Morwenna

Well-Known Member
Joined
1 May 2022
Messages
464
Visit site
Of course some dogs naturally have soft mouths or are trained to but that doesn’t mean that can’t cause significant damage if they want to. Yes, certain dogs have stronger jaws and a breed history of being trained to bite and not let go, but any dog is capable of inflicting serious harm. Banning breeds doesn’t seem to work. I’d far rather owners had to be licensed, and any unlicensed dogs could be seized regardless of breed.
 

twiggy2

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 July 2013
Messages
11,708
Location
Highlands from Essex
Visit site
Almost every utilisation of dogs on the planet comes from adapting a dog's natural desire to possess and hold.
Their mouths are their hands.
Prey/food and the need to survive is the primary drive and we've just adapted it to our own ends.
Gundogs too, although they have been selectively bred to have softer mouths, still need to be able to hold.
Terriers and lurchers/sighthounds, as far as I am aware, do not negotiate their quarry to death.
Any dog engaged in a sport requiring a retrieve.
Search and rescue dogs.
Detection dogs.
Assistance dogs.
And all the police and armed forces dogs who are bred/raised by civilians.

Everyone is for banning entire breeds until it comes to their breed, or type, or all dogs in general.
Lurchers catching rabbits and hare should retrieve live to hand
 

twiggy2

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 July 2013
Messages
11,708
Location
Highlands from Essex
Visit site
Teeth, I don't dispute what your saying about dogs and teeth just wanted to point out in an ideal world a rabbiting lurcher should have enough control over its mouth to hang on to a kicking rabbit or even hare but not bruise or kill it, it always amazes me what we expect dogs to do. It would take a fair amount of strength to hold onto a hare for sure so you grip and hold all the way.
It seems many people dont realise that ideally lurcher should be as soft mouthed as gundog.
 

AShetlandBitMeOnce

Well-Known Member
Joined
25 January 2015
Messages
6,358
Visit site
Stop banning dog breeds, license breeders. Ensure they have appropraite evaluation forms for the puppies they sell and track puppies/owners rigorously. Impose more restrictions/hoops to jump through for those who take on dogs with a higher risk - bullys, Shepherds, Malis, Huskys, Chow Chows and Rotties etc etc. Ensure those who buy stupid breeds that shouldn't exist (brachy dogs) take their pets for check ups every 3 months to make sure they are doing right by the animal. Anyone who doesn't has the dogs destroyed at 14 days if they cannot show that they aren't willing to comply with training/vet/socialisation requirements. Charge breeders a fee, lesser fee for rare breeds, higher fee for bully breeds/those we could do with less of. Use that money to fund dog wardens and the kennels I mention above.
 

CorvusCorax

'It's only a laugh, no harm done'
Joined
15 January 2008
Messages
59,301
Location
End of the pier
Visit site
Teeth, I don't dispute what your saying about dogs and teeth just wanted to point out in an ideal world a rabbiting lurcher should have enough control over its mouth to hang on to a kicking rabbit or even hare but not bruise or kill it, it always amazes me what we expect dogs to do. It would take a fair amount of strength to hold onto a hare for sure so you grip and hold all the way.
It seems many people dont realise that ideally lurcher should be as soft mouthed as gundog.

I know lurchers run a wide gamut, but some types are equally capable of a strong crushing bite, as I'm sure you know!
 

stangs

Well-Known Member
Joined
18 September 2021
Messages
2,868
Visit site
I'm struggling to understand the logic here. If, for arguments sake, American Bulldogs were banned, then 100% of the people killed by American Bulldogs would not be dead, no?
Then they would have been killed by a GSD, Cane Corso, husky, etc, instead. In a world where XL bullies didn’t exist, their owners would buy a similar sort of breed. They wouldn’t have chosen a newfie.
 

Cortez

Tough but Fair
Joined
17 January 2009
Messages
15,576
Location
Ireland
Visit site
Sorry to get the nit comb out again, but American Bulldogs and American bullies are not the same thing. It did confuse the crap out of me as well for a while.
Sorry, not an afficionado. For narrative run, let's just assume that I'm talking about whichever dog breeds are most responsible for inflicting death and injury, eh? And let's also assume that those would be the breeds most sensible to not have around. I don't find this idea all that hard to understand.
 
Top