American bully XL dogs to be banned, Sunak says(bbc.co.uk)
bbc.co.uk
American bully XL dogs to be banned, Sunak says
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66820591
47 comments
I love dogs. There is no way I'd want a Pitbull or close relative. As a kid my dad took in a Bull Terrier, a relatively small but absolutely ferocious dog. We were pretty good buddies and I owe at least one count of 'not being beaten up' to that dog (I was mobbed in an Amsterdam park while walking the dog). Even so I would never want one or an even larger breed from the same family. I've seen what she could do and how quickly she could go from the world's nicest pet to absolute killer mode. Animals like that should not be held in society. I've also had an Irish Wolfhound and even though it too was fiercely protective of us and children I would have absolutely no problem trusting her.
Dog breeds have built-in character. Hunting dogs are on a different plane than fighting dogs and just like you don't bring a drugged up cage fighter into your home you shouldn't bring a fighting dog into your home. They simply do not belong there. The people that have these dogs usually just have them to show off, they don't understand the first thing about dog training/rearing and will happily put the dog in extremely dangerous situations without thinking twice about it. Many such owners end up being mangled by their own dogs.
There are other dogs that are on my 'would not have' list, either because I don't see the dog as suitable for living in a home with people or because the dog has a disposition that makes it a ticking time bomb. Where to draw the line is tricky, any dog if sufficiently pissed off is going to attack. But small dogs will likely not do a while lot of damage (unless you are a small child) and most dogs tend to require a lot of pushing before they get angry and as a rule they'll give plenty of warning.
Dog breeds have built-in character. Hunting dogs are on a different plane than fighting dogs and just like you don't bring a drugged up cage fighter into your home you shouldn't bring a fighting dog into your home. They simply do not belong there. The people that have these dogs usually just have them to show off, they don't understand the first thing about dog training/rearing and will happily put the dog in extremely dangerous situations without thinking twice about it. Many such owners end up being mangled by their own dogs.
There are other dogs that are on my 'would not have' list, either because I don't see the dog as suitable for living in a home with people or because the dog has a disposition that makes it a ticking time bomb. Where to draw the line is tricky, any dog if sufficiently pissed off is going to attack. But small dogs will likely not do a while lot of damage (unless you are a small child) and most dogs tend to require a lot of pushing before they get angry and as a rule they'll give plenty of warning.
Unfortunately, I think this is going to be a cyclical game of whack-a-mole. Pitbulls were already banned, but they just renamed them to Staffies or American bully, and business continued as usual.
Really, this needs to be combined with a more blanket system of holding the dog owner responsible for the damage/'crimes' that their dogs commit. If your dog mauls someone, it should be treated the same as if the owner had done it themselves with their own hands -- including jail time and massive fines. Dogs should all be chipped (with unchipped dogs being subject to immediate seizure and potentially destruction) so owners would be less inclined to maul-and-run.
After all, one of the favourite arguments made by bully-breed supporters is that it's not the breed, it's the owners. I say fine, lets hold the owners appropriately responsible for their dog, for all breeds.
Really, this needs to be combined with a more blanket system of holding the dog owner responsible for the damage/'crimes' that their dogs commit. If your dog mauls someone, it should be treated the same as if the owner had done it themselves with their own hands -- including jail time and massive fines. Dogs should all be chipped (with unchipped dogs being subject to immediate seizure and potentially destruction) so owners would be less inclined to maul-and-run.
After all, one of the favourite arguments made by bully-breed supporters is that it's not the breed, it's the owners. I say fine, lets hold the owners appropriately responsible for their dog, for all breeds.
Not just the owners: also the breeders. Once the remedies against the owners are exhausted breeders should be held responsible for each and every dog they send out into the world.
List of already banned dogs https://www.gov.uk/control-dog-public/banned-dogs
That list is way too short.
As the saying goes, better late than never. I hope the rest of the world follows suit soon.
brianjking(1)
Just like a human or a family of humans destined to be and wired like killers and assassin's (a la the Hashashin), so too are dogs, if not more. Pitbulls are way too aggressive to be kept as ordinary pets and I don't mind if they're wiped out of existence by eradicating their breeding. Fuck pitbulls, except for that Red One which raps.
.
I just gave you a whole tonne in a different thread but I'm starting to suspect no amount of evidence will satisfy you.
Yes, that's what separates an opinion for a belief. You don't argue online to satisfy the other person, anyway - you do it for the silent 3rd party
Im not a fan of the premise that a small percentage of a population being responsible for an outsized percentage of violence is a result of their breeding. It's the environment and socialization factors that drive this.
> It's the environment and socialization factors that drive this.
Then why is it overwhelmingly this breed that attacking people?
We accept that certain breeds have innate instincts and traits - border collies herd, labradors retrieve, greyhounds run, pointers point, small terriers chase - but you argue that this breed of dog that was (when you trace its lineage [1]) originally bred to bring down bulls and be aggressive and fight can't possibly be aggressive because of its breed?
It's been recently reported that half of all of these XL Bully dogs in the UK are descended from a single dog called "Killer Kimbo" which itself was inbred [2] and its first and second generation offspring were responsible for killing a 4 year old child and a grown man respectively.
1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Bully#History
2 - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/09/14/britains-xl-bull...
Then why is it overwhelmingly this breed that attacking people?
We accept that certain breeds have innate instincts and traits - border collies herd, labradors retrieve, greyhounds run, pointers point, small terriers chase - but you argue that this breed of dog that was (when you trace its lineage [1]) originally bred to bring down bulls and be aggressive and fight can't possibly be aggressive because of its breed?
It's been recently reported that half of all of these XL Bully dogs in the UK are descended from a single dog called "Killer Kimbo" which itself was inbred [2] and its first and second generation offspring were responsible for killing a 4 year old child and a grown man respectively.
1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Bully#History
2 - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/09/14/britains-xl-bull...
Fact remains these dogs are literally killing people; over 50% of deaths in recent years.
I don't care one iota if it's "breeding" or "environment and socialization factors" or "CIA dog mind control"; this is a problem and these people remain dead.
I don't care one iota if it's "breeding" or "environment and socialization factors" or "CIA dog mind control"; this is a problem and these people remain dead.
It's time to stop spreading this false narrative. It's genuinely baffling how many people will disregard hard evidence and statistics simply because it doesn't fit their world view.
[deleted]
This is absolutely fantastic news. The pushback against it by people who say that this is the same thing as racism is ... more telling about those people's beliefs.
People are actually not the same as dogs who have been bred for aggression, and who have enormously outsized injury rates.
People are actually not the same as dogs who have been bred for aggression, and who have enormously outsized injury rates.
Small dogs are more aggressive, big dogs can do more damage. Ultimately, it’s a matter of training - how are they raised? - and a matter of the owner maintaining control. I really don’t believe in the whole “some breeds are inherently evil” thing.
I used to think this, but then I talked to a doctor friend and they explained that most of the dog bites they see in their hospital come from pit bulls with good owners. The dogs had never acted out in the past and were loving family dogs, until something snapped and out of seemingly nowhere the dog attacked someone.
The statistics on dog bites in many countries are also pretty clear that some breeds, like pit bulls and German shepherds are responsible for a disproportionate amount of attacks on humans.
So while the great majority of pit bulls are loving dogs without any aggression, I would never take the risk of owning one.
The statistics on dog bites in many countries are also pretty clear that some breeds, like pit bulls and German shepherds are responsible for a disproportionate amount of attacks on humans.
So while the great majority of pit bulls are loving dogs without any aggression, I would never take the risk of owning one.
I've had multiple family members and close friends with pit bulls. They are all extremely affectionate, loving dogs. I've also seen several of the aforementioned dogs turn aggressive in the blink of an eye. I think what makes them so dangerous is that people let their guard down because they think that their dog is special and not aggressive.
What makes them dangerous is that they have the capacity to cause massive amounts of damage with no recourse unless people have a knife or gun nearby.
We do not let people walk around society with hyenas and tigers and lions and wolves and chimpanzees. What makes a dog with "pit" or "bull" in its name any different? And maybe this applies to other dog breeds too, I am not a dog person, but the point is if an animal is capable of causing serious harm to people, then society has an interest in restricting its population where people do not want to worry about being attacked by animals.
We do not let people walk around society with hyenas and tigers and lions and wolves and chimpanzees. What makes a dog with "pit" or "bull" in its name any different? And maybe this applies to other dog breeds too, I am not a dog person, but the point is if an animal is capable of causing serious harm to people, then society has an interest in restricting its population where people do not want to worry about being attacked by animals.
It'd probably be better to look at bite statistics normalized against the population size of a particular breed rather than "which breed causes more bites". Popularity of a particular breed can skew that statistic.
No, it wouldn't be better. Because besides a sepsis issue a Chihuahua biting me isn't going to worry me one bit whereas a Pitbull biting me would be a serious problem even if it had just flossed and brushed.
I'm not arguing that a large dog bite vs a small dog bite is better or worse nor am I arguing that your opinion and risk tolerance is somehow invalid. I certainly wouldn't want to be bitten by any large breed dog.
I've personally never seen an aggressive pit bull but I've seen aggressive mixed breeds and german shepherds. I don't think it would be reasonable for me to conclude based on my observations that no pit bulls are vicious - and thus I'd rather look at actual data that has been normalized when judging the relative merit of one large dog breed vs another.
I've personally never seen an aggressive pit bull but I've seen aggressive mixed breeds and german shepherds. I don't think it would be reasonable for me to conclude based on my observations that no pit bulls are vicious - and thus I'd rather look at actual data that has been normalized when judging the relative merit of one large dog breed vs another.
I've seen multiple instances of people being bitten by Pitbulls, also by Bull Terriers, which , while much smaller than Pitbulls are no less dangerous.
.
I think your incessant spamming of this thread with nonsense has more or less disqualified you from the discussion so forgive me if I won't respond to you 'just asking questions'.
> I really don’t believe in the whole “some breeds are inherently evil” thing.
I don't think anyone really claims that; or at least very few people claim that. It's about averages in behaviour, combined with the greater damage you mentioned. I think almost everyone agrees that on average there are differences in personality between dog breeds. These dogs have been responsible for more than half of deaths in recent years, and I don't think half the dogs in the UK are Bully XLs.
In the end basically nothing at all is lost by banning a few breeds beyond upsetting a few people who want a dog in a very peculiar shape and accept no other shapes, to which I say: "if you're such a dog lover then why do you care so greatly about the exact shape of your dog?"
I don't think anyone really claims that; or at least very few people claim that. It's about averages in behaviour, combined with the greater damage you mentioned. I think almost everyone agrees that on average there are differences in personality between dog breeds. These dogs have been responsible for more than half of deaths in recent years, and I don't think half the dogs in the UK are Bully XLs.
In the end basically nothing at all is lost by banning a few breeds beyond upsetting a few people who want a dog in a very peculiar shape and accept no other shapes, to which I say: "if you're such a dog lover then why do you care so greatly about the exact shape of your dog?"
Dogs are a great example of breeding behavior in. Dogs with a hunting lineage will point spontaneously. Dogs bred for fighting and attack will fight and attack. Go try into pet a chow. I guarantee it will snap at you if you are not known friendly. Because we bred them as guard dogs and that behavior is literally passed on genetically.
Think that’s impossible? Ask a dog breeder. It’s possible, it’s practiced.
Go find that video of the guy stealing a bike and the house golden coming up for belly runs.
Dog breeds have different behaviors that we’ve deliberately bred into them.
It’s not the dog’s fault. It’s our fault. And our responsibility.
Claiming that it’s not real in the face of evidence is an example of dangerous, willful ignorance.
Think that’s impossible? Ask a dog breeder. It’s possible, it’s practiced.
Go find that video of the guy stealing a bike and the house golden coming up for belly runs.
Dog breeds have different behaviors that we’ve deliberately bred into them.
It’s not the dog’s fault. It’s our fault. And our responsibility.
Claiming that it’s not real in the face of evidence is an example of dangerous, willful ignorance.
"Between 2013 and 2021, Pitbulls Were Involved in the Most Dog Bites in 20 States. In many states, pit bulls are responsible for almost half of all dog bite injuries. Research conducted in Harris County, Texas, also concluded that pit bull bite incidents were 213% more likely to be severe than other breeds."
https://worldanimalfoundation.org/dogs/pitbull-statistics/#:....
https://worldanimalfoundation.org/dogs/pitbull-statistics/#:....
Stop with this nonsense already; some people believe the earth is flat but that doesn't make it correct. This exact mindset contributed to unnecessary deaths. There are many other strong and big breeds and yet pit bulls and their derivatives are responsible for overwhelming majority of serious incidents.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_dog_attacks_in...
Let's skip the emotionally charged words like "evil". Do you believe some breads are more likely (statistically speaking) to kill a human than others?
- I would wager that a Chihuahua is less likely to kill an adult human than a Bullmastiff, just because it is less capable of it.
- Many small dogs, in general, are poorly behaved because you can just pick them up and move them instead of having to train them.
- People also make sweeping statements about breeds like the American Pit-Bull Terrier when the variation within the breed is very large.
- If I'm an asshole who's going to train a dog to be aggressive I'm going to pick one that looks scary.
- Selective breeding within a breed can change temperament as well.
- Banning individual breeds is stupid whack-a-mole. People will just pivot to a different large-dog breed.
- If you want to make people not use dogs as weapons, about your only choice would be to ban dogs over a certain weight. This would almost certainly ban e.g. Bloodhounds (males commonly exceed 100lbs when at a healthy weight) though so isn't going to happen.
- Many small dogs, in general, are poorly behaved because you can just pick them up and move them instead of having to train them.
- People also make sweeping statements about breeds like the American Pit-Bull Terrier when the variation within the breed is very large.
- If I'm an asshole who's going to train a dog to be aggressive I'm going to pick one that looks scary.
- Selective breeding within a breed can change temperament as well.
- Banning individual breeds is stupid whack-a-mole. People will just pivot to a different large-dog breed.
- If you want to make people not use dogs as weapons, about your only choice would be to ban dogs over a certain weight. This would almost certainly ban e.g. Bloodhounds (males commonly exceed 100lbs when at a healthy weight) though so isn't going to happen.
I will never stop finding it hilarious how quickly progressives run to racial crime statistics and hold demographic breakdowns of violence sacrosanct when it comes to dogs breeds.
With humans, we first thought "let's give all people equal rights" and then "let's stop discriminating against people who used to not have those rights", not the other way around...
Can't believe I need to remind you, but humans still actually own dogs, like property. And wait till you hear what some humans do to other animals and sea creatures. Apparently humanity collectively decided it will not treat animals like humans so here we are. If you go vegan and propose a plan to ban all that injustice maybe some will agree with you. But otherwise there's much worse stuff than "dog racial crime statistics" to think about, stuff we do to animals that don't even murder us unlike these dogs
Can't believe I need to remind you, but humans still actually own dogs, like property. And wait till you hear what some humans do to other animals and sea creatures. Apparently humanity collectively decided it will not treat animals like humans so here we are. If you go vegan and propose a plan to ban all that injustice maybe some will agree with you. But otherwise there's much worse stuff than "dog racial crime statistics" to think about, stuff we do to animals that don't even murder us unlike these dogs
There is no contradiction if you do not think a dog should have the same rights as a human.
Progressives are against dog breed bans because of ^^^, which is absolutely wild to me.
Humans are different than dogs! Believe it or not!
Humans are different than dogs! Believe it or not!
Pitbulls were originally bred for bull baiting and dog fighting.
Dogs have instinctual purpose. Social justice keyboard warriors will overlook this and think the common person can own a pitbull and they are a product of their environment... not nature.
lol