Banned dogs - thoughts

sidpost

Forager
Dec 15, 2016
248
101
Texas, USA
I was smart enough to know a Belgian Malinois was simply too active and high energy for my lifestyle and overall health. Neither the dog nor I would be happy as we would be a bit like Oil and Water. Unfortunately, that doesn't prevent a puppy mill from selling me a Belgian Malinois. Thankfully, I had the good sense to NOT buy one. My German Shepherd was a really a bit more active than I should have gotten but, he was a simply awesome dog and was my constant shadow and always there to brighten my day, I still miss him today!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ystranc

sidpost

Forager
Dec 15, 2016
248
101
Texas, USA
Today, I see too many people on Public Assistance thinking they struck gold by buying a breeding pair of dogs and selling puppies for $3,000 each. With no regard for genetics or personality profile, and generally deplorable living conditions, is it really any wonder why people who buy these dogs have broken hearts when it dies from cancer, suffers from hip dysplasia, or any number of other health or personality disorders?

I suspect a lot of the issues with dog bans in the UK are related to unscrupulous breeders and owners who are clueless about owning a dog, much less a large active breed. Do they even have basic dog-handling skills?

If the owner is not the Alpha "pack leader, any breed can be a problem. Grandma had a Minature Poodle and treated it like a child. Around other people, it was really aggressive, even with young kids as it was asserting its dominance over its 'territory', Grand Ma's house. Finally one day, I had enough as a ~70lb kid, and when it growled and snarled at me, I had enough and smacked it halfway across the empty room. Never any trouble with that dog after that as it figured out, the pecking order between the two of us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CLEM and Ystranc
May 9, 2024
45
46
somerset
Banning dangerous breeds ensures they're only available to people who are prepared to break the law, making them more dangerous. Make the owners accountable for the actions of their dogs. If owners faced a prison sentence because their dog mauled a kid instead of just having their dog put down it would make dangerous dogs less desirable and pre-emptively encourage responsible ownership. As it stands it's only the dogs and the victims that pay the price for bad ownership and banning breeds after they've done harm won't change that.
 

Mesquite

It is what it is.
Mar 5, 2008
28,221
3,199
63
~Hemel Hempstead~
...If owners faced a prison sentence because their dog mauled a kid instead of just having their dog put down it would make dangerous dogs less desirable and pre-emptively encourage responsible ownership. As it stands it's only the dogs and the victims that pay the price for bad ownership and banning breeds after they've done harm won't change that.
Quite a number of owners have been taken to court and received prison sentences

Example being this case. A quick google search shows a lot more similar examples.

The reason we don't hear about it much is because of sensationalism by the press over the original attack. By the time the owner is in court the press have moved on to the next 'headline news' so the owner getting sentenced is just a footnote.
 
Last edited:

Chris

Life Member
Sep 20, 2022
980
1,136
Somerset, Yorkshire, Lincolnshire
Banning dangerous breeds ensures they're only available to people who are prepared to break the law, making them more dangerous. Make the owners accountable for the actions of their dogs. If owners faced a prison sentence because their dog mauled a kid instead of just having their dog put down it would make dangerous dogs less desirable and pre-emptively encourage responsible ownership. As it stands it's only the dogs and the victims that pay the price for bad ownership and banning breeds after they've done harm won't change that.

Not sure I agree here. It doesn't make them anymore dangerous, because the criminals who have them for 'status' already have them, but whilst they're legal the people who just have them being completely ignorant of how to look after such a dog in a safe manner also have them.

It reduces the scale of the problem significantly. I'd also suggest that walking around with an illegal breed is going to get police attention that you might not otherwise get, so it's probably not a very good move for a criminal who wants to keep a low profile with the law.
 

Broch

Life Member
Jan 18, 2009
8,490
8,368
Mid Wales
www.mont-hmg.co.uk
Banning dangerous breeds ensures they're only available to people who are prepared to break the law, making them more dangerous. Make the owners accountable for the actions of their dogs. If owners faced a prison sentence because their dog mauled a kid instead of just having their dog put down it would make dangerous dogs less desirable and pre-emptively encourage responsible ownership. As it stands it's only the dogs and the victims that pay the price for bad ownership and banning breeds after they've done harm won't change that.

Agreed, let's have tigers, panthers, lions, bears ..... as well!
A dangerous animal is a dangerous animal - these dogs have fighting and aggression in their DNA. They must be removed from society IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chris

Pattree

Full Member
Jul 19, 2023
2,167
1,162
77
UK
I know :) I should have included an emoticon :(

The hyena in East Africa are bloody enormous. Few of us here could hold one on a leash. I got up close to a dead one and they are much bigger than they look on the box.
 
Dec 29, 2022
344
368
East Suffolk
Agreed, let's have tigers, panthers, lions, bears ..... as well!
A dangerous animal is a dangerous animal - these dogs have fighting and aggression in their DNA. They must be removed from society IMO.
I think it's more nuanced than just labelling a breed as 'dangerous and that's all there is to it'. They are highly trainable and given the right conditions can be fine in society. It's just that their requirements are often not met.
I'm not necessarily saying a ban on breeding is a bad thing, just that there is more to a dog's behaviour than breed-specific traits.
 
  • Like
Reactions: August Landmesser

Broch

Life Member
Jan 18, 2009
8,490
8,368
Mid Wales
www.mont-hmg.co.uk
I think it's more nuanced than just labelling a breed as 'dangerous and that's all there is to it'. They are highly trainable and given the right conditions can be fine in society. It's just that their requirements are often not met.
I'm not necessarily saying a ban on breeding is a bad thing, just that there is more to a dog's behaviour than breed-specific traits.

Agreed, but these dogs have been bred for one purpose only; you're not going to train that out of them, you may be successful in supressing it - but that in itself is dangerous.
 

Paul_B

Bushcrafter through and through
Jul 14, 2008
6,413
1,702
Cumbria
Every so often a dog becomes something owned by ppl who want that dangerous dog type. Many, many breeds have had that devil dog label over the years. Sometimes this results in real fans of those breeds who breed out aggression. They breed only those who show no aggression, they neuter the ones showing aggression. Several generations later most dogs in that breed are actually not aggressive. Yes still potentially dangerous, still have to look after them responsibly, but mostly they are no longer like when they were the devil dog breed.

In my lifetime that's been German shepherd's, rottweilers ever staffies, although they're still not where the other two got to. However, not every dog breed or type can be bred to be safer, they're just too far into dangerous I reckon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CLEM
Dec 29, 2022
344
368
East Suffolk
Agreed, but these dogs have been bred for one purpose only; you're not going to train that out of them, you may be successful in supressing it - but that in itself is dangerous.
Yeah, I agree supressing it is a bad idea. Though, I do think those traits have the potential to be expressed in a more positive way if the dog is handled responsibly.
No doubt certain breeds have potential aggressive tendencies and higher requirements, but handled correctly can become well rounded animals and function well in society.
As with a lot of these debates, I think there is plenty of middle-ground which is worth exploring.
 

Chris

Life Member
Sep 20, 2022
980
1,136
Somerset, Yorkshire, Lincolnshire
Yeah, I agree supressing it is a bad idea. Though, I do think those traits have the potential to be expressed in a more positive way if the dog is handled responsibly.
No doubt certain breeds have potential aggressive tendencies and higher requirements, but handled correctly can become well rounded animals and function well in society.
As with a lot of these debates, I think there is plenty of middle-ground which is worth exploring.


To me those scenarios make it sound like they should be restricted to people who have the capability and have taken the relevant precautions, which seems to be what the law currently allows for those breeds deemed as dangerous.
 

BCUK Shop

We have a a number of knives, T-Shirts and other items for sale.

SHOP HERE