What I am saying Trouble. If legislation is brought in why should it extend as far as a yorkie owner or yes a Jack Russell owner? There aren't nearly as many of those causing bother on the streets.

I don't think Mr What Breed Shall I Get to Impress My Mates would bother with a Papillon would he??

and yet i've never met a bad staffie out and about, met plenty of little terriers that want to have a go at my dogs, and two attacked my MIL's springer (who was minding her own business i hasten to add) and did enough damage to have her in the vets for GA and stitches.

I have 5 dogs and would encourage legislation that is enforceable and can be policed even though mine are daft as brush springers

You can't just aim it at one breed though. Look what happened with the Pitbulls. Legislaton of Staffies won't stop "hard" people wanting "hard" dogs. If it's not the Staffie, it will be the Mastiff, the DDB, the Akita, the GSD - there will always be a replacement "status breed" if the issue itself isn't dealt with. Not sure how it can be dealt with but we've tried the breed-specific legislation route and it hasn't sorted things.

I said Lab x

The difficulty comes because it is difficult to know what is in the dog when it it a cross. I have people swearing blind to me that my girl is a Lurcher.....or a hound....I know what she is and she is neither - but it is hard to see that.

Jack Russels are on this top 15 dangerous dogs list, where there is no Staffordshire bull terrier place, and the APBT is number 15, so lets ban them , and I've had more issues with Labradors then any bull breed, and they are over bred, a lot of them poorly bred, and a good breed for many a BYB, lets licence them too , anyone ok with that?

http://factoidz.com/the-15-most-dangerous-dog-breeds/

Oh and Paps are on there too, two above the Jack Russell, its not just 'hard' dogs that are problems, little dogs are allowed to get away with a lot by some people, but it seems that they are too small for their bad temperment to be of a concern, but a bully breed, oh God look at them, they are monsters, everyone who owns them are doing so to look 'ard education is key, I bet many dog owners, and many bull breed owners are fed up with the stereotypes and ignorance that comes their way, many of these dogs are lovely, and I would trust being in a room with a strange Staffy a lot more then I would some other breeds, and when I was working at the kennels a bull mastiff mananaged to get hold of a rabbit and I managed to get my hand in his mouth and pull it out no problems, I hadn't really known him before then, but some people cross the street to get away from dogs like him, its ridicolous. (Oh and the rabbit was kind of accident, but I should of been more aware, we had been walking the dogs all morning, and a rabbit must of died of the walk we use over lunch, the dog was the first one I got out, and the first one to use that trail that afternoon, he was sniffing around on the extenable lead - which is the only time I would use them - up ahead, next thing I know he turns round, from one side the front legs were sticking out, from the other the back legs were, all I thought he was doing was sniffing around as one of the females was due to come into season apparently, so when I saw him making a fuss over a area I thought that she had pee'd there or something).

But there are irresponsible breeders of Papillions out there as well.
If something is going to be done it should be with regards to ALL breeding that is done for the wrong reason.

If you read my post I said "neutered at the appropriate age" exactly for the reason that different breeds grow at different rates & the age of neutering can affect their growth. I also said "possible exceptions could be dogs with health issues that would make the operation dangerous" so I trust I've answered your queries.

Ok so we make staffs and staff x's undesirable and difficult to obtain so what breed do these morons move on to next, the Rottie, the doberman, the boxer? What happens then do we release the restrictions on the staff and implement new ones on the next breed of choice or do we just keep adding different breeds to the licence-able (sp) breeds.

Yes there is an abundance of staff and staff xs in rescues but as mentioned also a number of other breeds this is imo down to irresponsible breeding. Breeding needs to be licenced in my opinion. Free adverts should be banned, pups should be identifiable to a bredeer and an owner and a vets practice or for example the PDSA(if a breeder can be seen to have taken all reasonable steps to ensure a good responsible owner has been found for their pup then they may not necessarily be held accountable if circumstances do not permit - though I know most good breeders would take responsibility.

Every dog should be registered and if a dog isn't then sadly, it should be taken from the owner. This would mean average numpty on the street or person who keeps dog in yard still has to have their dog registered so the owner can be identified and i necessary held accountable.

Yes breeders would be probably penalised but not extensively and if they were decent breeders and lets face it most who breed breed at a loss anyway (good breeders I mean) they would be prepared to accept this for the good of all breeds.

Of course these are only my opinions but something has to change before even more dogs are bred for financial gain and not for the right reasons and more are sold on with no real thought gone into the new owners and then they end up in rescue and then on death row

Just seen this, KC reg doesn't mean anything really, it is currently open to abuse, there is no way, apart from the breeders say so to determine who is the parents, if I were to cross a labrador with another dog, but if I were to say to the KC that the parents were two Labradors whose to say that they aren't, until something like DNA profiling is in place the trust is on the breeder, and there are many dogs who have 'pedigrees' that are a bit suss, whether by accident or design, and if the parents were something like a labrador and a black lab cross, all the pups were black, the father was the cross and the buyers didn't see him, but the pups looked Lab enough how many potential owners would question that? There is too much room for people to lie.

I get far more trouble from aggresive yorkies in the park than staffs. Except for one lady who owns the three sweetest yorkies ever, there are a numer owned by little old ladies who all run at anything bigger than them, snapping and snarling. Then the little old ladies scoop them up and run off as if my dog has done something wrong! Ok, maybe the yorkies can't do my dog much harm, that doesn't mean their aggression us acceptable.

And why are they like that? Are yorkies naturally aggressive?no! It's because many are owned by older ladies who spoil them, don't train them and let them rule the roost. Maybe they don't encourage the aggression but many do not see a problem, do bit discourage it and nearly always blame the other dog that was just walking by for frightening "thier baby"

I don't see the situation being that dissimilar from the staff culture. Again it comes down to the way the dogs ate being raised. Breed specific legislation doesn't work. It doesn't matter what size or breed the dog is, the only solution is to force the owner to take responsibility for their animal.