Banned dogs - thoughts
- Thread starter Scottieoutdoors
- Start date
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!
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.
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.
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.
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:
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.
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.
That would be a right old laugh!!!!I really really want to walk down the high street with a slavering Hyena on a leashwatch those bullies run.
Nature’s Laughter Riot: The Spotted Hyena
World Laughter Day is here, and with it we humans are extolling all the virtues associated with good ‘ole laughter. The onslaught of laughter inducing events- laughing classes, workshops, groups and so on and so forth, is proof enough! But [...]Share this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new...
www.saevus.in
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.
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.
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.
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.
