10y old killed by dog

[Craig W]

Legitimate question (from a dog lover): what would we be losing out on by banning these breeds?

The list of breeds involved in fatal dog attacks is entirely predictable. Why is the UK's dangerous dogs act comparatively un-restrictive?

[Harry H]

Maybe if the owners of the dog were charged with manslaughter it might send out the right type of message. Keeping this type of dog is stupid let alone with children. They should be made to pay.

By all means have any type of dog you like but you will be held responsible for its actions. Get a dog and you the owner are responsible.

[NMNeil]

If you are horrified by the death of a 10 year old, how about 2 infants both about 1 month old.
https://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-fatal...

[Plymo]

Craig W said:

Legitimate question (from a dog lover): what would we be losing out on by banning these breeds?

The list of breeds involved in fatal dog attacks is entirely predictable. Why is the UK's dangerous dogs act comparatively un-restrictive?

Or even not banning those breeds, but requiring some sort of licence, perhaps with some sort of training course - wouldn't have to be much to weed out the usual suspects...

[rlg43p]

Tommo87 said:

okgo said:

otolith said:

The dog has apparently been a nuisance on the estate for some time, which suggests it's often been on the loose.

The places where this happens always look depressingly alike.

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5915069,-3.2372146...

All got Sky tho.

I was going to ask, if there had been any warning signs. But that partially answers it.

People say there are no bad dogs, only bad owners, yet (very) occasionally you hear of dogs from presumably mild breeds having to be put down, because they attack people.

I read that this dog was known locally to be a bit unpredictable. The owners should be held responsible for this - preferably by jail time or worse.

To have to live with the thought that your 10 year old son died in this fashion and what he went through would be unbearable.

[Zoon]

okgo said:

All got Sky tho.

Some even have those fancy metal windows and a 55" TV.

[Craig W]

Plymo said:

Or even not banning those breeds, but requiring some sort of licence, perhaps with some sort of training course - wouldn't have to be much to weed out the usual suspects...

While that would be better in a perfect world, we know that to implement a system like this would require all sort of administration behind it, time, personnel, tax payers money and would likely fail in a number of unforeseen ways.

Surely it is simpler just to say that you can't own Staffies?

The loss of human life is tragic and of course far more important than the following, but the number of other pets which have been killed by dogs like this is no doubt enormous, which causes significant suffering for the owners' families.

I genuinely cannot see a downside to this.

[NMNeil]

Plymo said:

Or even not banning those breeds, but requiring some sort of licence, perhaps with some sort of training course - wouldn't have to be much to weed out the usual suspects...

Or just like a car, mandatory liability insurance.
And just like a car some would simply not pay, so there must be legislation in place for this eventuality.

[V8covin]

I know a bloke who has staffies and Rotties....only 1 at a time....and he trains them to defend him and his property and to attack anything else.
He revels in the fact one of his dogs bit his brother.He's a moron who can't be reasoned with.

You also get the owners who say my dog is a softie and it's never bitten anyone....which is true until the 1st time they do in which case it may be too late.
I person mauled by such a dog is 1 person too many

[-crookedtail-]

So sad that this has happened, again. The poor kid.

The last time this happened, and we had a thread, I stated that this often is a result of the dogs upbringing, more so than the breed. Whilst I still agree with that statement, its the owner who should mitigate any risk, keep the dog inside or on a lead if outside. Let the dog get used to people but supervised.

Too many idiots about. My dog, a ridgeback, is mostly a big softy but there is no way I'd leave him running about outside with kids, I just don't know what would happen and he could cause havoc if he wanted to.

[Huskyman]

Craig W said:

Plymo said:

Or even not banning those breeds, but requiring some sort of licence, perhaps with some sort of training course - wouldn't have to be much to weed out the usual suspects...

While that would be better in a perfect world, we know that to implement a system like this would require all sort of administration behind it, time, personnel, tax payers money and would likely fail in a number of unforeseen ways.

Surely it is simpler just to say that you can't own Staffies?

The loss of human life is tragic and of course far more important than the following, but the number of other pets which have been killed by dogs like this is no doubt enormous, which causes significant suffering for the owners' families.

I genuinely cannot see a downside to this.

Trouble with banning a breed they’ll come up with something else. I’ve come across a few aggressive Bully XL type dogs which seem to attract the mouth breathers…
I reckon a dog license(remember those?!?) that has an annual fee that covers DNA sampling, a basic assessment of the dog owner and liability insurance. Criminal record checks wouldn’t be a bad thing either. I wouldn’t trust some of these Cupid stunts with a three legged gerbil.
Edit to add I’ve kept Siberian Huskies for 17 years, and I would never leave children on their own with them even though they were all well trained and adjusted to home life. Simply not worth the risk

Edited by Huskyman on Tuesday 9th November 15:57

[rampageturke]

eldar said:

It appears Labradors bite most people.

https://metro.co.uk/2016/08/02/the-type-of-dog-res...

its not very surprising when you stop and actually think that the most popular dog breed results in most bites

but well done for falling for the clickbait

Edited by rampageturke on Tuesday 9th November 15:55

[Flying machine]

eldar said:

It appears Labradors bite most people.

https://metro.co.uk/2016/08/02/the-type-of-dog-res...

It's a bit of silly clickbait type of article really - "Labradors, the most popular breed in the UK, are the culprit for more personal injury claims than any other type, according to data from pet insurers Animal Friends". Although to be fair it does acknowledge the large weakness in such a daft assertion by stating "While the large number of Labradors is likely to blame for the amount of claims". What the purpose of finishing the sentence with "many of the dogs are friendly in nature" is anyone's guess. It might be interesting to read what sort of personal injury is being claimed for as that usually opens up all sorts of daft sounding scenarios. Note that there are no recorded Labrador caused UK fatalities on that wiki page and anyone with a functioning brain would realise that a dog shouldn't be left unsupervised with children (or some adults it seems). Nothing to see here and perhaps a reason not to use 'Metro' as a reference?

It is sad to read these sorts of headlines, and the types of dog breeds responsible is entirely unsurprising, and I bet the circumstances and owners of such animals are also similarly unsurprising.

[J4CKO]

I think the issue is that breeds get demonized, because cretins get hold of them and dont train them, actively make them aggressive and/or neglect them.

Then the simple fact is bigger breeds have more capability to inflict injury, suspect there are many other dog attacks but they dont make the news as nobody generally dies from a Cavalier King Charles Spaniel having a pop, dont get me wrong any dog can leave you bitten and bleeding, even a Chihuahua but its not going to kill you, maybe going to casualty for a tetanus shot and some stiches at the worst, in a lot of cases I think it gets clothing of a bit of a nip that doesnt break the skin.

Compare and contrast with a Rottweiler, Pit Bull, American bulldog etc, breeds that can overwhelm even a large adult male human in a lot of cases, never mind a child.

I got us a dog that I knew, even if he went mental he wasn't killing anyone, he has bitten me when I was training him out of some guarding behaviour and it hurt but didnt break the skin, now he knows if I want what he has got he gives it, I inspect it and will let him have it back if I choose, wouldn't fancy that with a Rottie. You tend to find bigger breeds are more placid by breeding as they dont survive long enough if thy take chunks out of their handlers/owners, we inherited a vicious Chinuahua, utter dickbag of a dog but its almost funny how he was but wouldnt be with anything bigger, would have been put down.

Any dog can get ill, confused, distressed or just get it wrong, they can snap and I prefer not to have anything around that I cant subdue, especially if its known for aggression, Labs are lovely dogs but can also bite, wouldnt fancy my chances against one.

Always amazes me how people post pictures of some Pitbull with a baby of a few months old, and 99.999 percent of the time its fine, the dog will put up with all sorts, guard the child and would never harm it, but its that 0.001 percent risk, you cant eradicate it all but I dont think very small children should be with dogs unspervised, and even when supervised if a bigger dog does go for it, they are way too quick, its all over in seconds and having tried to retrieve the aforementioned Chihuahua from the jaws of a moderate sized mongrel they are amazingly tenacious and strong.

There was another attack where a small child was killed in Caerphilly ten years ago or thereabouts,

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/7876508.stm

[otolith]

The trouble with licensing / training schemes is that the responsible owners who aren't actually causing the problem would end up funding the policing of the feral underclass who like to keep a shark on a rope.

[Super Sonic]

otolith said:

The trouble with licensing / training schemes is that the responsible owners who aren't actually causing the problem would end up funding the policing of the feral underclass who like to keep a shark on a rope.

People w no licence could have their dogs removed. People w bity dogs could
have their licence removed.

[Biker 1]

I read about a German Shepherd that attacked a young child & was subsequently put down. The vet carried out an autopsy & found a pencil shoved down its ear canal. No doubt this was so painful that the hitherto placid dog simply snapped.....
So yes, leaving any type of dog unattended with a young child can have disastrous consequences.

[otolith]

Super Sonic said:

otolith said:

The trouble with licensing / training schemes is that the responsible owners who aren't actually causing the problem would end up funding the policing of the feral underclass who like to keep a shark on a rope.

People w no licence could have their dogs removed. People w bity dogs could
have their licence removed.

Yes, and policing this would be paid for by the responsible owners because the kind of people whose dogs eat kids faces won't register their dog. Most likely outcome is a middle class dog tax that the people causing the problem just ignore.

[LeadFarmer]

MrJuice said:

Innocent 10y old boy though. What has the world come to

What would possess someone to keep such a thing?

What? Keeping a 10y old boy?

[MissChief]

LeadFarmer said:

MrJuice said:

Innocent 10y old boy though. What has the world come to

What would possess someone to keep such a thing?

What? Keeping a 10y old boy?

Pretty crass mate.