And I don't think I am preaching to the concerted on here because it has become a small dog big dog debate with the 'at least I can pick my dog up if she reacts' defence being used. Which, if it was my dog would not be good enough for me I would want to find out why it was happening and how I cold prevent the reaction. Relying on picking them up is not good enough!

I've owned more BIG dogs than small dogs.

I don't remember every being very frightened that strange little dogs might kill my GSDs while I was out with them.

I have more than once feared that strange big dogs might kill my tiny dogs while out with them!

As I said David vs Goliath. Leaving aside well trained and not so well trained dogs. It's not much different from a 6 stone weakling bloke trying to defend himself against a strong and powerful 15 stone bloke is it?

And - I would like a pound or a euro for every time I've heard this old chestnut said by owners of large dogs (usually when they've lurched towards us or I've asked if they are friendly) 'yes - but he doesn't like little dogs'.

Even in the case being discussed here the animal behaviour expert said some big dogs see little dogs as 'prey'. Not sure what they see people or children they attack as.

But I've read just about every excuse for a dog attacking that you could imagine here on Dogsey since I joined. Not long ago a member's brother was being blamed for his own injuries because he 'stared' at her dog.

Supposing that was a 1 year old or 2 year old child that was 'staring' at the dog? Maybe even staring at it in fright because of the sheer size of it and its big teeth? Would they 'deserve' to be mauled?

Not sure why you felt the need to say about your child jumping on your dog and your dog not reacting badly?

Is that supposed to be a plus point? I would assume you wouldn't have them in the same room if there was any chance whatsoever that the dog WOULD react badly?

As for 'how many little dogs would be so good about it' - my answer is twofold. Quite a lot of little dogs I know that love children. (Where my Cavvy was concerned they could have ripped her to bits without her reacting) But the other point is (same as with the damage inflicted BY big dogs) how many little dogs would be more hurt or injured by a child leaping on them than a huge great big dog would be?

There IS a difference between toy, miniature and very small dogs and huge great big ones (and their potential to inflict serious damage) and there is a difference between them when it comes to small children being able to 'injure' the dogs - which is why some small breeds are not recommended for families with very young or boisterious children. Even if you refuse to acknowledge that difference.

Someone who sees no difference between a miniature Yorkie and an Akita is never going to understand.

Picking the dog up (or even rugby tackling it as in this case) is no good after the event is it?

I've picked my small dog up to rescue her from other dogs. Do you suggest I let them bite her and lecture their owners on responsible dog ownership instead? When I can save her from being injured (or injured worse) by just picking her up?

The last time I was involved in a small dog big dog scenario I did pick mine up (not before she was roughed up but only scratches to her belly) the owner of the big dog (a GSD) dealt with his by half beating it to death with its heavy metal chain lead. I found that as distressing as seeing my own dog injured.

When we all live in this perfect world where big dogs are seen as no more dangerous as tiny ones and ALL dog owners are responsible and have perfect control over their dogs at all times - well we won't be having ANY discussions about it all will we?

And we won't be seeing headlines with pictures of children with half their faces ripped off, eyes and ears missing or reading sad obituaries from family members who lost a loved one to a dog attack.

When do you think this time will come? I am realistic enough to think it will not come during my lifetime. And that in the meantime, in the climate and because dog attacks are on the increase, all we are going to see is more calls for dog laws to be tightened up to appease the sections of the public that are calling for that.

I said about picking my dogs up surely better than letting them bite children and other dogs ! And they were BTW both rescues and the main reason sadly I have decided no more rescues for us as dogs I actually get as puppies I make sure are soft dafties who never hurt anyone. Also sadly that has made them a target for the local thug dog who hurt my poor old softy badly.

Some times dogs are so damaged no amount of training will stop them being dangerous. So PTS a lot of dogs or pick up the ones we can to keep people safe ?

So many points there but I see I too am talking to someone who will not change their view too.

Not staring at a dog should not be reason for it to attack. ....and many many dogs get stared and children daily and because dogs are so wonderful they can learn from an early age that when people look at them it makes a big difference to when dogs look directly at them.

Once again changing my words...can you point out where I said my child jumped on my dog?! I think you'll find she fell! The reason I mentioned it was to highlight that just because is perceived to have the potential to do terrible damage it does not mean that they ever will.

As for the comment about hearing people say their big dogs don't like small dogs...yep, I've heard that too for a variety of reasons though. Some don't like them because they see them as prey, some don't like them because they have experienced unprovoked aggression from them. Every situation has a tail to tell.

Dogs seem to be becoming more diverse in their stature and you have feared for your tiny dogs life. Lets tightening up the rules then and have a standard size for dogs no smaller than a cocker and no larger than a springer! But not fast like a whippet....or lumbering like a bulldog.

BSL does not work and has not worked and will not work in the future if laws are tightened! Pit bull types are on the increase as are bites. .....So too are the numbers of exempted dogs! The theory is flawed! Banning dogs just raising their kudos as status dogs! we can keep banning dogs until we are blue in the face but its not going to help! It may be an ideal world where all owners are responsible and knowledgable but I would rather fight for that than positively than add more to the banned breeds list.

OK 'fell' but how would a dog know the difference?

I was just commenting that you seemed to think it was somehow brilliant that your dog did not react aggressively?

My boys were raised with big dogs - I wouldn't have found that noteworthy. Totally trustworthy with my kids.

But so are many small dogs.

I don't know where you get the idea I am 'down on big dogs' I am not.

All I am saying is I can UNDERSTAND why some people are and why they see them as potentially more dangerous than small dogs. Human nature.

And it is just fact of course that a big, powerful dog can inflict far worse damage than a small puny one can. However many examples of small dogs you dredge up where they've attacked. They will not top the list of dogs that have killed and maimed.

And small pincy poncy dogs don't tend to attract the sort of idiotic owners that have no control over their dogs and who got the dogs for reasons other than 'their love of animals'.

Or did the fashion for certain 'types' of owners wanting Staffies and Pit Bulls pass you by?

Mmmmm I do think its amazing when dogs don't react aggressively because it shows how amazing dogs in general are and how they are able to live with us without, in general reacting.

You seem to be more biased to small dogs now...you also seem unable to comprehend when I have written. Did the fashion for certain types of owners wanting Staffies and pitbulls pass me by? Er no....which is why my closing comments were about how banning certain breeds does not help because it draws even more negative attention to powerful breeds and people who want to have a dog for its intimidatory factors will want the banned breeds!

I am not anti big or small dogs I am pro dogs and pro responsible ownership and education and anti irresponsible ownership....but my original comment still stands I am anti lazy sensational journalism and breed specific legislation.

The further down the road of BSL the more ridiculous it gets. Remus has big potential to do damage to a tiny dog because it was what he was bred to do....so do we ban or insist on muzzling Sighthounds in public? Or do we judge each dog on its own merits? Sensational journalism does nothing for the dog world in general. It scares people and results in this sort of infighting in the dog world. There's already calls for all dogs regardless of breed or size or potential to be muzzled and on lead in public places.....is that really what we want for these wonderful animals that humans have bent and shape into various sizes and builds? Because that's where we are going with BSL.

I'm VERY biased towards owning a small dog now! But not maybe for the reasons you imagine.

I am 64 and no longer have the physical strength and stamina required to train and keep a large and powerful dog under control.

Aging brings the dubious benefits of arthritis in the joints with it!

And here in Cyprus I would not be allowed to keep a large dog in an apartment under the new laws. And wouldn't anyway for the sake of the dog.

Cyprus is one place where they've stopped discussing it and taken action about complaints about dogs. New law states

Apartment (anywhere) 1 small dog allowed.
House in town (regardless of size) 2 dogs allowed.
House in countryside - maximum 4 dogs allowed.

Woman in the next block to me has been ordered to get rid of one of her 2 dogs or it will be removed from her.

Mind you her dogs are the subject of many complaints from neighbours as she has never had them on a lead, one of them has nipped other dogs on a couple of occasions and she keeps them out on her verandah where they bark a lot for quite long periods.

If she were a different sort of owner I doubt anyone would have reported her. We don't report strays or abandoned hunting dogs here because we know what will happen to them - they will be rounded up and PTS after 6 days if not claimed.

You seem to want to make this personal Catrina. You are missing my point entirely it seems. My point is I can understand why a lot of people are prejudiced against big powerful dogs with the bad press they get. I don't have to agree with them to understand why they feel as they do.

What are you doing to get your views across to people who might be able to make a difference?

I've just been reading on the dog rescue .org sites about the terrible and widespread prejudice against Staffies and about how many come in saying things like 'any breed as long as it isn't a Staffy'. And about WHY they've got this bad reputation. But surely you know why and just keep insisting that all big dogs and yours in particular are no more danger than tiny dogs is not going to change the PUBLIC PERCEPTION of them or how they are reported on after attacking.

The article states that the mauled dog had "so many wounds" and was "torn limb from limb" along with internal injuries that it had to be put to sleep. In that photo "after" the attack... the dog looks completely clean.

I've unfortunately seen and been witness to MANY savage dog attacks, resulting in serious injury and one death and NONE (not even ONE) of which had perfectly clean looking, blood free dogs walking away from the scene, especially ones with lots of white or light color on them.

Photo taken after the guy was leaving the scene of the attack. Dog is completely dry, so nobody washed the blood off. Front paw, completely white and 100% clean in an attack like the one described? NO WAY, not a soul in the world could make me believe that the attack happened as described.

*sniffs* I smell fish... and I also smell *sniffs again* B.S.

I'd like proof of the injured dog, vet records etc. as well as a more credible photo and story. I'm with Catrin (as usual)... I see a biased article trying to target a breed by using NASTY unethical means to make people feel sorry for the tiny dog etc. I could be wrong, of course.. but that is what I see.

Also.. what kind of REAL expert would make a statement like this:

"Animal behaviour expert Roger Mugford said: ‘Unfortunately, these types of attacks are on the increase as the trend nowadays is to have very small dogs. The larger dogs see these small dogs as if they are squirrels and therefore attack them as they would do any prey.

‘Owners should keep their dogs on leads if they pose a threat to other animals.’ "

What a GARBAGE article, I'm sorry but it is to me. If the dog was truly mauled to death... then I'm terribly sorry but this article and EVERYTHING surrounding it bothers the living CRAP out of me.