Welcome to PetForums

Join thousands of other pet owners and pet lovers on the UK's most popular and friendly pet community and discussion forum.

Sign Up

Dangerous dog regulations!

Discussion in 'Dog Chat' started by Nina, Feb 18, 2008.


  1. Nina

    Nina PetForums VIP

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Messages:
    4,921
    Likes Received:
    230
    I have read with interest, numerous topics of discussions regarding the above and the list of breeds which are currently under review.

    I would like to add my thoughts on this matter, since working with dogs every day of my life, I see first hand the trouble that can be caused by ignorant owners.

    Firstly I would like to say that ALL breeds should be supervised at ALL times in public places, not just those which are constantly mentioned in earlier posts. Any dog can attack, regardless of size, and ALL can be dangerous.

    Jack Russells can be extremely snappy, but they have great characters and I am only using Jacky's as an example because of their size. I have witnessed a Yorkshire Terrier grabbing a German Shepherd by the ear, granted the damage may be minimal but nevertheless an injury did occur, and all because the owner was busy chatting to a friend leaving her dog unsupervised.

    Luckily the German shepherd - mine, did not retaliate, but I can just imagine the uproar, had he done so!

    I hope and pray, that a law is passed making it illegal to allow your dog off lead in public places. This would certainly protect these much maligned breeds, who are a potential targets from ignorant owners who allow there dogs cart blanch to cause chaos by allowing them off lead.

    Yes, Labs and Retrievers seldom have unsound temperaments, but when off lead, they do not understand that leashed dogs are leased for a reason!
     
  2. Jenny Olley

    Jenny Olley PetForums VIP

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,963
    Likes Received:
    448
    And i hope there is never a law which prevents dogs off lead in public places, why should all dogs and owners suffer for the ignorance and laziness of the few. I agree with Nina as I have done on other occasions some people do allow their dogs to run wild in public areas, so ban them, not the well behaved ones who return when called and cause no hassle to anyone. One of my greatest pleasures of owning dogs, besides training and competing with them, is watching them run and sniff, go in and out of the water, generally just being a dog in its natural environment, a dog imprisioned on its lead for the rest of its life, the thought fills me with dread.
     
  3. Debbie

    Debbie PetForums VIP

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2007
    Messages:
    1,800
    Likes Received:
    56
    I have to agree with Jenny here - not being able to let mine run and play freely really does sadden me, they come back when called, they dont cause any problems at all - they are let off away from people and other animals - but the few that do let theirs off just anywhere to do just anything angers me - the amount of times I have had to ask people to put their dog on a lead while out walking and mine are on leads but being harrased by another dog ...its not fair at all....and then there are the few strays that have been kicked out of the back door for the day makes my blood boil......but banning all owners and dogs from having free running and play is not the answer....only the responsible will take notice - and its not the responsible that are the problem!
     
  4. AJ

    AJ Guest

    I've got to agree with Jenny & Debbie also, banning dogs from being allowed off the lead in public places will cause more harm than good. Stopping all their natural instincts to explore and sniff can't be healthy and i would expect it to cause more problems with the dogs tempremant, in the same way not socialising your dog can. I deliberatly walk my dog places where either the majority of dogs are off lead or in quiet places where I don't have to worry about keeping an eye out for dogs on leads. However he is good at following recall and stop commands so isn't a nuisance anyway. I generally follow the rule that if another dog is on the lead I will put mine on, but at any other time he's free to roam.
     
  5. claire

    claire Guest

    i think all dog should be on leads because if it prevets one child getting attacked its worth it, its just ashame on the dogs and owners who are in control, once again a case on the minorty spoiling it for the majority
     
  6. Jenny Olley

    Jenny Olley PetForums VIP

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,963
    Likes Received:
    448
    I admire your sentiments, however as the majority of attacks happen on private property, it would not help those. I think we would also see an increase, as dogs such as border collies could not have a run, so increasing frustrations, more likely to lead to an increase in bite situations.
     
  7. claire

    claire Guest

    i agree most attacks are on private propety but same as i said i would behind keeping all dog on leads if it stopped just ONE child getting hurt, i know in some cases its not the dogs fault and is down to the owner but a child life is much more important.
     
  8. garryd

    garryd Guest

    so what is wrong with having a special licence for type breeds that have killed alot !? Where only pacific breeders could sell only to pacific buyers/owners by law ! The breeders/buyers must meet a pacific criteria by law to obtain the licence to own or buy such a breed ! And would be accountable for what there dog does by law ! this could be backed up by a minimum jail term for any infringement! wouldent that be better than banning the breed and spoiling it for all those responsible owners that love there dogs!
     
  9. claire

    claire Guest

    i agree and i think it should be monitored like a gun licence with an interview and constant monitoring to check they are kept properly and for the correct purpose
     
  10. sallyanne

    sallyanne Guest

    But by placing restrictions on certain breeds you are making a statement that all dogs of that breed are dangerous,that is simply wrong and not true.

    How could this sort of thing be enforced and policed?

    52 breeds world wide are responsible for killing people and children.

    It's time for a change in the law that covers ALL breeds,no one breed is anymore dangerous than another,a dog is only as dangerous as it's owner allows it to be.
     
  11. englishrose943

    englishrose943 PetForums VIP

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,221
    Likes Received:
    63
    Here Here Sally ann, that is so true i have had Rottys, German Shepherds, Dobermans in the past and they were a joy to own very nice natured. People these days seem to get dogs like this as it makes them look matcho and dont know how to train them and just let them roam. Thats why these breeds get a bad name. You usually get gangs of young ones with breeds like these in the park off the lead and i really frustrates me. They are not monitoring these dogs and just let them roam and cause caos.:mad::mad::mad::mad:
     
  12. garryd

    garryd Guest

    But cant these dogs be very dangerous ???So what your saying then sally is that a 15kg jack russell can and does kill more so than a 60kg rotty ! :rolleyes: thats a silly statement sally !
    I just think there should be restrictions on who owns powerfull dogs like the rotty and a lot of other breeds !
    I dont think its right that any jack the lad can go buy such a dog and so easy !
    Thats what i think is the only thing that will stop these killings happening every other month! That is if it can all be down to bad ownership and not the breed !?
     
  13. minnie

    minnie PetForums VIP

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2008
    Messages:
    1,901
    Likes Received:
    51
    i belive what she is saying is that jrts bite/are nasty just as much as rottys but because of their size their power is limited:confused:
     
  14. garryd

    garryd Guest

    Never mind the bite :rolleyes: A jack russel hasnt killed 20 kids in the last 4 yrs ! And if a 10kg jack russel atacked even a child would stand a better chance of fighting it off more so than a dog weighing 65kg ,dont you think!??
     
  15. sallyanne

    sallyanne Guest

    No Garry thats not what i'm saying,all breeds have the potential to be dangerous,granted a larger breed may do more damage,but a Westie an JR have killed children FACT!

    As I said we need a change in the law to cover ALL BREEDS,we don't need to place restrictions on any breed,it's wrong,we have endured 16 yrs of the DDA/BSL and it has not worked.The current legislation does not leislate for attacks on private property nor does it get to the root of the problem,irresponsible owners.
    We should have legislation in place whereby an owner gets charges of Murder,manslaughter,ABH,etc brought against them, regardless of breed.
     
  16. garryd

    garryd Guest

    Toataly agree sallyanne ,thats the way to go ,thats sort of what i have been trying to say:)
     
  17. Jo P

    Jo P PetForums VIP

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,203
    Likes Received:
    134
    God Garry you should change your log in name to Drama Queen - are you sure you're a car dealer and not a headline writer for The Sun :D:D:D:D:D:D:D
     
  18. claire

    claire Guest

    Any dog big enough to cause damage should be included and i guess that includes all of them
     
  19. sallyanne

    sallyanne Guest

    Yes it does,a JR could do as much damage to a 12 month old child as a rott could do to a 12 year old.

    Placing restrictions on breeds doesn't work,we saw an attack by a pitbull new years day 2007,now they have been banned for 16 ys.

    Breed doesn't enter into it for me,it's irrelavant,there are many contributing factors why a dog attacks,the breed of dog isn't one of them.
     
  20. Nina

    Nina PetForums VIP

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Messages:
    4,921
    Likes Received:
    230
    Jenny, these flexi leads offer my dog complete protection and allowed him to run, sniff and enjoy being a dog. He was extremely well trained, and would hardly ever leave my side, so the flexi did not restrict his enjoyment of the outside world.

    Even the best trained dog can be spooked by a back firing car, bitch on heat etc. etc. There really is no such thing as a dog being 100% under control. hence my point.

    It is far too easy for a child to get in the way of a potential dog scuffle or fight. I have had dogs flying towards Zak on numerous occasions, some with good intentions and some with bad. Either way, my dog was leashed for a reason, to protect him and others.

    Their enthusiasm knows no bounds, and a couple of occasions I have seen young dogs bring down a small child. I have witnessed more dog scuffles then I care to remember, heard nasty confrontations, and been on the receiving end, when my dog was leashed!

    I am not advocating a complete ban on allowing dogs off lead, just so long as they are not in public places. Prevention is far better than a cure and unfortunately, these days, sensible dog owners are at a premium.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice