Banned dogs - thoughts

[CLEM]

In my previous job, delivering and fitting various items of medical equipment in and out of the local borough in the domestic setting mostly for the last twelve years I’ve met hundreds and hundreds of dogs of all breeds, I never met a single nasty Staffie everyone of them super friendly. I met a few snappy little breeds. The only breed I met that concerned me were the Border Collies, very territorial and aggressive.

 

[Paul_B]

Staffies are very friendly, until they're not and then they're dangerous due to breeding.

If you ever read about those Staffin dogs that killed a kid or old lady you often hear that the family involved say it was a friendly, family dog that would never harm above.

 

[sidpost]

I the UK we have what's called gun control. It results in 5% of murders being with firearms. Knife deaths is 3 times as many as gun deaths I read. 84 gun deaths in the year of Dunblane killings. Gun controls brought into law after that incident cut gun deaths we were at 28 gun deaths in 2021/22.

Imagine if the ban of xl Bullies meant 2024 dog deaths is 9 deaths (16 dog deaths -7 xl caused deaths). Is that not a positive? Every death isn't just one lost life, it has repercussions throughout the people who had the attacked and killed person in their life. Family, friends, neighbours. All likely affected by the dog attack and death of that person. It is about improving the situation for all by lowering risks. Crow act was not at all like that. Holocaust was not like that. No comparison at all. Internet warrior argument / Godwin's law.

When guns were banned, didn't knife murders increase? Then various knife laws were enacted to deal with that too?

I dare say, someone who is willing to murder someone else isn't going to be deterred by a law against having a knife. Sure, you may catch a few people before they murder someone but, the problem really is the person NOT THE TOOL!

Are they going to ban automobiles because drunk drivers kill people?

I come full circle back to banning a breed of dogs. If you cannot get your XL Bully what stops you from getting a similar dog not identified as an XL Bully?

The type of person that can't handle or get an XL Bully is just going to get another large aggressive breed. At what point does this become a Whack-a-Mole banning problem?

 

[C_Claycomb]

When guns were banned, didn't knife murders increase? ….

No, they didn’t. See 1996. Now please reflect on why your assumption of correlation isn’t valid.



These same tired arguments are always wheeled out. The real problem in these debates is there isn’t an agreed definition of “works”. The one side wants to point only at the already (hardened) criminal, for whom bans don’t mean much…while conveniently ignoring all the stuff done as first offences by previously fairly law abiding people. Also all the stuff that happens due to chance or snowballing situations and bad judgement.

 

[sidpost]

No, they didn’t. See 1996. Now please reflect on why your assumption of correlation isn’t valid.

View attachment 88520

These same tired arguments are always wheeled out. The real problem in these debates is there isn’t an agreed definition of “works”. The one side wants to point only at the already (hardened) criminal, for whom bans don’t mean much…while conveniently ignoring all the stuff done as first offences by previously fairly law abiding people. Also all the stuff that happens due to chance or snowballing situations and bad judgement.

Wow! That is really surprising.

Laws for public safety that haven't really impacted those meaning to do harm while impacting average people in everyday life.

 

[sidpost]

The real problem in these debates is there isn’t an agreed definition of “works”. The one side wants to point only at the already (hardened) criminal, for whom bans don’t mean much…while conveniently ignoring all the stuff done as first offences by previously fairly law abiding people. Also all the stuff that happens due to chance or snowballing situations and bad judgement.

Happens due to chance? Sorry but, while I agree hardened career criminals aren't that way at birth but, there is a marked difference between a teenager shoplifting and doing similar petty stuff that is easy to intercept to work with so they don't move onto harder crime. Some people can't be saved and they need to be locked away for life.

If you are a hot head then yes, the likelihood to escalate increases but going from petty stuff to murder is still a big leap and in most cases there were multiple misses to either lock them away or educate and rehabilitate them to live a better life.

If restrictive gun and knife laws haven't improved public safety, why are they in place at all? I agree with limits with people who are a definite risk but, outright bans never work as it doesn't really address the problem since it only focuses on a symptom of the problem at hand.

Is the XL Bully the problem or is it a bad or ill-prepared owner? What happens when that owner gets a different breed of dog they can't handle properly? Yet more examples of heavy handed restrictions and bans "that feel good" but, do nothing to really solve the core issue.

 

[Wildgoose]

Guns aren’t totally banned in the UK, but are capability restricted and their (legitimate) supply restricted.

BB gun with low power and generally low harm. Little restriction.

AK47 with high power and capability to do serious harm - banned.

In theory I could have that AK in my house, mounted on my wall or even locked away and it wouldn’t cause any harm, BUT if I have a moment of anger or a mental health emergency and the capability to do serious harm is apparent.

Chemicals, explosives, vehicles, we have restrictions on all these things.

 

[Wildgoose]

Look at big cats in captivity, many a zoo keeper has been killed by the animals in their care.

 

[Mesquite]

Look at big cats in captivity, many a zoo keeper has been killed by the animals in their care.

There's been more deaths by dog attacks in 2023 in the UK than there have been zoo keepers killed by big cats or other animals. A quick search shows there's been only 2 recorded zoo keepers dying from animal attacks in the past 11 years.

 

[Wildgoose]

There will always be more dog attacks because there are more dogs. If we could keep tigers in the home that figure could rise

My point is that even in a highly skilled and controlled environment these incident's can occur and be fatal. These are handlers who have known and loved their beasts for many years.

 

[gibson 175]

It all sounds a bit 'ruff' to me.

 

[sidpost]

Guns aren’t totally banned in the UK, but are capability restricted and their (legitimate) supply restricted.

BB gun with low power and generally low harm. Little restriction.

AK47 with high power and capability to do serious harm - banned.

In theory I could have that AK in my house, mounted on my wall or even locked away and it wouldn’t cause any harm, BUT if I have a moment of anger or a mental health emergency and the capability to do serious harm is apparent.

Chemicals, explosives, vehicles, we have restrictions on all these things.

The 6ft-lb rule on airguns in the UK and a lot of Europe always seemed ridiculous to me, especially since a lot of the 25~35ft-lb air rifles were made there! There is a lot of need for things like that in more rural parts of the UK which seems to be possible with some licensing but, that is largely an academic exercise for me to research the specifics on.

In terms of serious harm, military firearms have a huge potential for damage just like cars. In terms of a "moment of anger" or "mental health emergency", those almost never happen in isolation. To be honest, I don't want someone like that to have access to a common kitchen knife, axe, or baseball bat either. A "moment of anger" or "mental health emergency" with a lot of common items in a house may not kill hundreds of people but, the carnage is still there.

The USA Safari market really blossomed when all those older Double Rifles out of England came over to our shores. I doubt there was much, if any carnage, with British Rigby and similar Double Rifles in the UK. Same on this side of the Ocean too with no reports I recall of one being used in a criminal context.

A good responsible owner could safely own a dog that many of us could not control or manage. Just because I can't, or shouldn't, own one doesn't mean I should prevent someone else from owning one. Like owning a AK-47 or M-16, there is some responsibility of the owner to prevent it falling into the wrong hands.

"Blind Bans" rarely attack the real core issue of the problem trying to be solved. An emotional "feels good" solution really doesn't help in most cases. The people that can't get an XL Bully and really want one will likely just get another similar breed. Education and Awareness would be a much better plan of attack IMHO. Big Cats are rarely legal to own as a private citizen but, that doesn't mean people don't buy them anyway. A little education about that cute cub would likely deter some people from buying one in the first place and would slow down the illegal trade in them as just one example. You achieve your goal by killing demand to acquire whatever it is your are trying to ban.

 

[Wildgoose]

So because people will get one anyway we shouldn’t bother with a ban?
Should we do away with driving licences, as someone who wants to drive will do so anyway?

The ban will limit or reduce the problem. Hardcore XL bully fans will get one, but most people who want one won’t get one as they won’t want the hassle or to break the law.

 

[Stew]

There's been more deaths by dog attacks in 2023 in the UK than there have been zoo keepers killed by big cats or other animals. A quick search shows there's been only 2 recorded zoo keepers dying from animal attacks in the past 11 years.

Probably because there are sensible controls put in place...

The 6ft-lb rule on airguns in the UK and a lot of Europe always seemed ridiculous to me, especially since a lot of the 25~35ft-lb air rifles were made there! There is a lot of need for things like that in more rural parts of the UK which seems to be possible with some licensing but, that is largely an academic exercise for me to research the specifics on.

In terms of serious harm, military firearms have a huge potential for damage just like cars. In terms of a "moment of anger" or "mental health emergency", those almost never happen in isolation. To be honest, I don't want someone like that to have access to a common kitchen knife, axe, or baseball bat either. A "moment of anger" or "mental health emergency" with a lot of common items in a house may not kill hundreds of people but, the carnage is still there.

The USA Safari market really blossomed when all those older Double Rifles out of England came over to our shores. I doubt there was much, if any carnage, with British Rigby and similar Double Rifles in the UK. Same on this side of the Ocean too with no reports I recall of one being used in a criminal context.

A good responsible owner could safely own a dog that many of us could not control or manage. Just because I can't, or shouldn't, own one doesn't mean I should prevent someone else from owning one. Like owning a AK-47 or M-16, there is some responsibility of the owner to prevent it falling into the wrong hands.

"Blind Bans" rarely attack the real core issue of the problem trying to be solved. An emotional "feels good" solution really doesn't help in most cases. The people that can't get an XL Bully and really want one will likely just get another similar breed. Education and Awareness would be a much better plan of attack IMHO. Big Cats are rarely legal to own as a private citizen but, that doesn't mean people don't buy them anyway. A little education about that cute cub would likely deter some people from buying one in the first place and would slow down the illegal trade in them as just one example. You achieve your goal by killing demand to acquire whatever it is your are trying to ban.

what have guns got to do with it? A daft argument to compare the two things. Leave a gun on its own and it’ll do…..nothing.

 

[MikeLA]

When I owned a dog I never took it off it’s lead at anytime, not once Walks, Beaches and especially hillwalks just in case.

 

[Billy-o]

There's a school of thought that says dogs misbehave on leash (barking at others etc) because they feel trapped by the leash and can't control the situation spatially (i.e. get out of the way etc.) because of it. No clue if it's actually like true or anything. Dog psychology isn't my field, but it sounds plausible.

 

[Paul_B]

Bans affect the law abiding but perhaps misguided more than the criminal or thug. If your nice next door neighbour can't own a xl bully without safeguards then perhaps that's a good thing. It won't stop the irresponsible but perhaps make a very valid point that xl Bullies are not in the same league in terms of potential for harm as your neighbourhood labrador dog. Imho it takes specialist knowledge to handle such dogs which most don't have.

 

[FerlasDave]

There's a school of thought that says dogs misbehave on leash (barking at others etc) because they feel trapped by the leash and can't control the situation spatially (i.e. get out of the way etc.) because of it. No clue if it's actually like true or anything. Dog psychology isn't my field, but it sounds plausible.

Definitely true for my collie. But he has to learn to trust me as the master as it’s not always safe for him to be off lead.

 

[Lean'n'mean]

There's a school of thought that says dogs misbehave on leash (barking at others etc) because they feel trapped by the leash and can't control the situation spatially (i.e. get out of the way etc.) because of it. No clue if it's actually like true or anything. Dog psychology isn't my field, but it sounds plausible.

Leads/leashes are excellent conductors of the handler's fears & anxieties too.

 

[Billy-o]

Definitely true for my collie. But he has to learn to trust me as the master as it’s not always safe for him to be off lead.

Collie here, too. She's much more readily controlled off-leash. But obviously, there are circs where off-leash just isn't sensible. We hike the ravines a lot, where she is in her element, cyclists and coyotes or not. But, if she sees a white SUV she will try to chase and eat it. So, it's on-leash near traffic and, as a result, we avoid traffic.