Dangerous Dogs

A kind of twitter really from a guy who lost count of the number of bans which govern our daily lives decades ago.

What do you all think of our paranoia about Dangerous Dogs ?

The UK Government in it`s superior wisdom in all things important brought in a new law in 1991 called "The Dangerous Dogs Act". Hounds of the Baskervilles being out and Lassie plus all dogs on Blue Peter being in.

They were going to classify all dogs bigger than a Chihuahua as a threat to our entire population, but compromised for fear that a civil war may break out and settled for the following ;-

Section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 prohibits four types of dog:
* the Pit Bull Terrier
* the Japanese tosa
* the Dogo Argentino
* the Fila Brasileiro

I do not know the last 3 breeds, but I do know the Pit Bull - a lovely dog, but not to the stalwarts in charge of our health and welfare.

The Pit Bull was considered by the UK Government as a bigger threat to our nation than that made by Adolf Hitler in 1940, when he intended to challenge the might of the Royal Navy by invading our Great Island in an armada of wooden paddle boats from occupied Holland.

So, here in this proud nation, the epitome of world leadership and all things good, the lovely Pit Bull is now banned. Recruitment for the Postal Service went up by 50% in 1992.

In the USA, Pit Bulls are as common as mongrels. Cesar Millan - The Dog Whisperer loves them, his favourite side kick Daddy is soon to retire from active service on the film set due to old age.

Not going to break any records with this one, but have any of you got a comment to make on the subject and especially Pit Bull`s ?
John Bull

i think it is all deed not breed, they always target the wong end of the lead and dont punish the sick people, who lead to these dogs having a bad name, properly.

and just have to say, i love daddy!!

I think by labelling a breed as "dangerous" encourages idiots to want them. In Australia we have the same category with those specific breeds. I can only go on what pit bulls I have met and that is only one (pure bred), it is not good but if you look on the other end of the lead (as Lozzibear said), it was worse as it was like a status symbol for him and wanted his dog to be aggressive.
They have some traits that do make them more unpredictable (yes I am generalising the breeds) but with responsible owners they are no more dangerous than any other breed.

Again, I think its down to owners, HOWEVER, with the amount of abandoned and unwanted staffords in rescue all over the UK, then as much as I love Pits I wouldnt want to see them brought back currently. They will suffer the same fate as the staffie and end up PTS more often than not, or used as a hard mans penis extension.

I dont need or want to see that.

I would support bringing back Pits ONLY when its done at the same time as a Dog ownership test and harsher animal cruelty laws with rescue associations having the right to seize and prosecute people harshly for their failings with their animals.

Our staffies are currently in an awful situation and its not getting any better, I wouldnt want to introduce another breed into the same boat.

Do think the problem with Staffies and overpopulation is because of the DDA though? I certainly do. They appeal more to the 'wrong' type of dog owner as they are the nearest thing, looks wise to Pit bulls. The DDA caused a hundred more problems than it solved, including the Staffie 'hard image'. When I was a kid, Staffies were seen as family pets, not weapons. These days joe public can't see the difference between Staffies and the Pit bull that they saw in the paper (that generally shows an image of a Staffie!). I would also like to see ownership tests. For ALL dogs.

As much as I hate breed bans, the "deed not breed" thing is a little off IMO, because if you are only punishing a dog/owner after the "deed" then the person that has had to suffer the "deed" is really the loser in this situation, and may never get over the incident?

In my Ideal world.I would like some form of responsible ownership testing done, and a licence issued if they pass, similar to driving, I would like it that the police/wardens etc can request to see said licence, and bans given to irresponsible owners.

Mo

Yes.

Double yes

Yes! Yes! Triple yes!

I think alot of the problem is the over reporting of attacks by TYpe dogs, and no reporting by any other. I think its alot to do with why people want these dogs as you say- yes, But it seems like its been such a long time since staffies were considered family pets by the general public, my recent thread regarding the mums forum reaction to people who had staffies and other bull breeds as family pets proved that.

YOu know you spend a lot of time trying to get the message across about how great these dogs really are and it all gets blown apart by one idiotic owner and his very unfortunate dog who ended up with them.

Dog ownership test
Tougher laws
Responsible ownership
Responsible Breeding ( reduction in breeding)
Less media Hype or more positive hype.

All of these things would need to be the factors before I would actually want the DDA to be lifted.

There is no way that by just lifting the DDA that things would get better, all that would happen is that the idiots who want the hard dogs would just order themselves one of the 4 banned breeds and the same problem would start all over again.

If sec 1 DDA were repealed today then it would only have a positive effect.

The DDA has not prevented idiots form getting dogs. It hasn't eradicated 'type' dogs. The DDA adds to the image, the hype and popularity of tough looking dogs with irresponsible owners.

The DDA kills dogs every day and adds to the staffie problem by making them unpopular with responsible homes at the same time as making them attractive to irresponsible homes who then mismanage the dogs perpetuating the negative stereotype in a self-reinforcing cycle.

I agree with a ownership test. I agree with breeding restrictions. But repeal of BSL would only be positive and would allow the law to refocus on dog fighting and poor owners whilst removing some of the glamour it gave the pit bull.

I don't think repeal would lead to a great influx of Tosas or Filas. There weren't many here before the ban and, if there is a small surge in popularity it would be directly attributeable to the 'image bestowed upon them by the DDA. Hardly an appropriate reason to retain it. Besides the one thing an idiot owner needs even more than a dog that looks tough is a dog he can control. Being towed down the pavement by your own dog is not a very 'hard' image.

I dont support BSL, quite the contrary I just dont think you can just repeal it and do nothing else. Of course I want to see the DDA scrapped and an end to BSL, however all the other things would need to also be in place to solve the long term issue of the hard men and their dogs.

The publics opinion of staffies is low, alot of the time due to influx of these dogs in areas where they are mostly all owned by idiots.

What I am getting at is the DDA to be repealed to be replaced by a Dog ownership test at the very least.