Bull terriers- and why i now think they should be banned.
Comments
-
Yep. Fair comment.wildmoustache wrote:what about bites ... can anyone work out whether you're more likely to get bitten by a dog or a human?
Human bites are pretty rare.
From an article published on The Times website last month...
"NHS figures released yesterday showed that 3,800 people were treated in hospital for dog bites last year".
I realise that this figure only counts people presenting themselves at hospital but I can't find anything official that gives an overall number.
There is one anti-doggish website that suggests 500,000 a year in the UK but I suspect that is ever so slightly exaggerated.0 -
richardast wrote:
Yep. Fair comment.wildmoustache wrote:what about bites ... can anyone work out whether you're more likely to get bitten by a dog or a human?
Human bites are pretty rare.
From an article published on The Times website last month...
"NHS figures released yesterday showed that 3,800 people were treated in hospital for dog bites last year".
I realise that this figure only counts people presenting themselves at hospital but I can't find anything official that gives an overall number.
There is one anti-doggish website that suggests 500,000 a year in the UK but I suspect that is ever so slightly exaggerated.
yeah ... that NHS figure will only be what's recorded and then submitted though, which is probably far lower than the actual number of dog bites taken to a doctor each year.
7 million dogs ... 200,000 bites = 1 in 35 dogs biting someone once in the year. Maybe sounds a little high but not too wide of the mark I suspect.0 -
So whats the attraction of these 'Staffies' ?- why do the chavs/ plastic gangsta morons go for them as the dog of choice and not say a 'Labbie' ?. Intimidation? - Image ? Why would anyone want to be associated with this evil ?
A cute little 'Staffie' went for me some time ago as I walked past with my bike on the pavement and the 'owner' didn't appolgise but just explained that 'he (the dog) dont like bikes'
WTF !?
sw0 -
saveswalking wrote:So whats the attraction of these 'Staffies' ?- why do the chavs/ plastic gangsta morons go for them as the dog of choice and not say a 'Labbie' ?. Intimidation? - Image ? Why would anyone want to be associated with this evil ?
A cute little 'Staffie' went for me some time ago as I walked past with my bike on the pavement and the 'owner' didn't appolgise but just explained that 'he (the dog) dont like bikes'
WTF !?
sw
haha! yes... the fact that so many gangsta/wannabe gangsta characters own these dogs ... and the dogs are capable of inflicting more harm than most breeds ... rather seals the argument I'd suggest (even by the logic of the dog loving majority on this board)
Prediction: we'll have legislation within the next two years to control dog ownership and it will stem from concern about gangstas and their pitbulls0 -
So whats the attraction of these "bicycles"?- why do the lycra clad morons go for them as the carriage of choice and not say a "car"?. Intimidation? - Image ? Why would anyone want to be associated with this evil ?saveswalking wrote:So whats the attraction of these 'Staffies' ?- why do the chavs/ plastic gangsta morons go for them as the dog of choice and not say a 'Labbie' ?. Intimidation? - Image ? Why would anyone want to be associated with this evil ?
A cute little 'Staffie' went for me some time ago as I walked past with my bike on the pavement and the 'owner' didn't appolgise but just explained that 'he (the dog) dont like bikes'
WTF !?
A cute little "Roadie" went for me some time ago as I walked on a zebra crossing. He didn't appolgise but just explained that "I dont like stoppin at crossins or red lights".
WTF !?
Just change a couple of words and you realise that anyone can sound like Matthew Parris when they talk about a subject they've only read about in the tabloids.
As a well informed individual has already pointed out, Staffs are not naturally aggressive to humans - quite the opposite. You can easily train a labrador to be aggressive to humans if you are suitably inclined.
Sensible staff owners dislike being compared with the moron yoofs with staffs just the same way that sensible cyclists dislike being compared with RLJers and pavement cyclists.
The dog does not get to choose it's owner.0 -
richardast wrote:saveswalking wrote:So whats the attraction of these 'Staffies' ?- why do the chavs/ plastic gangsta morons go for them as the dog of choice and not say a 'Labbie' ?. Intimidation? - Image ? Why would anyone want to be associated with this evil ?
A cute little 'Staffie' went for me some time ago as I walked past with my bike on the pavement and the 'owner' didn't appolgise but just explained that 'he (the dog) dont like bikes'
WTF !?
As a well informed individual has already pointed out, Staffs are not naturally aggressive to humans - quite the opposite. You can easily train a labrador to be aggressive to humans if you are suitably inclined.
Sensible staff owners dislike being compared with the moron yoofs with staffs just the same way that sensible cyclists dislike being compared with RLJers and pavement cyclists.
The dog does not get to choose it's owner.
the point though is the differing levels of potential harm that can be done by the animals when trained or just when not properly socialised.
Just because a labrador CAN (in theory) kill someone ... it does not make them as potentially dangerous as a pitbulll terriier or a rottweiler
just because an air rifle CAN kill someone ... it does not make it as dangerous as an M16
in the wrong hands ... but as stated above it is precisely because these dogs ARE increasingly in the wrong hands that there is an issue.
if the gangsta types had attack labradors (what a thought) there would still be an issue ... but less so ...0 -
wildmoustache wrote:Gr.uB wrote:Tom Butcher wrote:Dog attacks cat - not exactly news is it. Many dogs will attack cats - just as cats kill birds and mice etc Most sight hounds and terriers have a high prey drive - although it isn't unique to those types of dog. It doesn't mean they are the dogs most likely to attack a person.
Yes a Staffy could likely kill a child - just as any powerful breed of dog could - German Shepherd, labrador, golden retriever, greyhound. If you don't think a Shepherd can be as powerful as a Staffy then I think you are mistaken - yes Staffies are strong for their size - but they are fairly small to medium dogs typically weighing no more than 40lbs. The fact they are involved in so few incidents considering there are so many of them about now and that a percentage of the owners probably aren't the best dog owners is testament to their temperament with people.
If she's having her dogs put down for attacking a cat then she shouldn't be allowed to own a dog in the future.
Many years ago Staffordshires were also known as the Nanny dog as they were so reliable with young children. The Staffordshire is one of only two breeds that has this in their breed standard with the Kennel Club.
just a question for fellow forummers ... can anyone here produce convincing evidence of a single case where a labrador killed a child?
I am not aware of a case of a Labrador killing a chuild but I do know of at least two very serious attacks on adults by Labradors, one on a colleague.
ANY large breed could be potentially dangerous if provoked or maltreated. There are individuals in any breed who I firmly believe are "born bad" - I don't necessarily think this is the case for these two bull terriers/ Staffies though.
Rather than licencing against specific breeds I think we need to look at more responsible dog ownership.
BTW I have dealt with quite a few Pit Bulls (in South Africa) and they were all very nice - to humans. Murder to other dogs!0 -
By combining data from the National Center for Health Statistics and computerized searching of news stories, we identified 157 dog bite-related fatalities that occurred in the United States from 1979 through 1988. Of the 157 deaths, 70% occurred among children who were less than 10 years of age. The death rate for neonates was almost 370 times that of adults who were 30 to 49 years of age. Pit bull breeds were involved in 42 (41.6%) of 101 deaths where dog breed was reported, almost three times more than German shepherds, the next most commonly reported breed. The proportion of deaths attributable to pit bulls increased from 20% in 1979 and 1980 to 62% in 1987 and 1988. Pit bull attacks were almost twice as likely to be caused by strays as attacks by other breeds. Extrapolated estimates suggest 183 to 204 dog bite-related fatalities from 1979 through 1988. To prevent such deaths, we recommend stronger animal control laws, public education regarding dog bites, and more responsible dog ownership. Parents and physicians should be aware that infants left alone with a dog may be at risk of death.
now ... is that statistically significant ... I THINK SO!0 -
Well, to be pedantic all that shows is that Pit Bulls appear to be overepresented in fatal attacks on children. To draw meaningful conclusions from it you would need to look at a bunch of other factors as well - how many Pit Bulls vs how many German Shepherds in the country etc. More importantly youi need to look at exposure to risk - I suspect you would find a strong link between children left unsupervised in the company of dogs and Pit Bull ownership in certain types of households.
All that said I agree that the numbers quoted above are very worrying indeed!0 -
clanton wrote:Well, to be pedantic all that shows is that Pit Bulls appear to be overepresented in fatal attacks on children. To draw meaningful conclusions from it you would need to look at a bunch of other factors as well - how many Pit Bulls vs how many German Shepherds in the country etc. More importantly youi need to look at exposure to risk - I suspect you would find a strong link between children left unsupervised in the company of dogs and Pit Bull ownership in certain types of households.
All that said I agree that the numbers quoted above are very worrying indeed!
not just pedantic ... but ignorant or US pet culture? Ignorant generally?
So you can sleep easily, rest assured that far less than 42% of US dogs are pit bulls0 -
Only if we're talking about the good old US of A, which I didn't think we were (a country where 30,000 citizens per year are killed with legally held firearms).wildmoustache wrote:now ... is that statistically significant ... I THINK SO!
The UK averages about 3 deaths per year from dogs. Sorry, but that's the headline statistic. It's a problem, but it's still lower than the number of deaths caused by bee-stings or peanut allergy.
Although a handful of illegal animals obviously still exist here, Pit Bull breeds effectively became illegal in the UK 15 years ago.
Staffs are not Pit Bulls.
As also pointed out previously, the most mundane, harmless everyday object can become a lethal weapon in the hands of a moron.
Ban the morons, not the otherwise harmless objects.0 -
Woah mate - sensible discussion going on here - no need to sling tags like "ignorant" around.
My point is this - individual dogs within any single breed can and do attack people, sometimes with fatal results. The figures you've quoted above would appear to strongly suggest Pit Bulls are highly dangerous. For the record - I agree. I would point out though that there are decent Pit Bulls out there too and I believe that those attacks reflect the type of owner of Pit Bulls as much if not more so than the breed itself. Banning Pit Bulls is fine and well (and I support that ban) but those same owners will then aquire and neglect Rottweilers/ Staffies or whatever other macho dog breed is the current flavour of the month and we will then see an upsurge in attacks by that breed.0 -
As others have said - Staffys are not pitbulls.
it's a hard life if you don't weaken.0 -
I've come back to CyclingPlus to give it another go.
Where I went wrong previously was I took some of the posts too seriously and actually cared what people posted.
I don't care what people think about Staffordshire Bull Terriers. I don't care what people quote from endless web searches.
I have owned 2 Staffordshires over a 16 year period. During this time we have raised two children ( and still are ), shared the space with 4 rabbits, one cat and two guinea pigs. All the small animals and children played with the dogs and there were no incidents during this time. I joined two breed clubs and went to and participated in breed shows and obedience shows / trials. I therefore talk from experience - personal experience.
Any Staffordshire Bull Terrier owner will relate to this.
You have to own one to understand just what they are like.
I therefore will not contribute anymore to this as it is a talk amongst amateurs, and one I can't be bothered to worry about as life is too short.0 -
Gr.ub - I think you're getting the wrong end of the stick here - the thread overwhelmingly supports the case that Staffies are by and large a trustworthy, safe breed. For what its worth I have an extensive "professional" experience with Staffies and I find them by and large to be lovable, "safe" dogs.
As Tom said above - Staffies are not Pit Bulls. I would like to add that cats are not children!0 -
richardast wrote:
So whats the attraction of these "bicycles"?- why do the lycra clad morons go for them as the carriage of choice and not say a "car"?. Intimidation? - Image ? Why would anyone want to be associated with this evil ?saveswalking wrote:So whats the attraction of these 'Staffies' ?- why do the chavs/ plastic gangsta morons go for them as the dog of choice and not say a 'Labbie' ?. Intimidation? - Image ? Why would anyone want to be associated with this evil ?
A cute little 'Staffie' went for me some time ago as I walked past with my bike on the pavement and the 'owner' didn't appolgise but just explained that 'he (the dog) dont like bikes'
WTF !?
A cute little "Roadie" went for me some time ago as I walked on a zebra crossing. He didn't appolgise but just explained that "I dont like stoppin at crossins or red lights".
WTF !?
Just change a couple of words and you realise that anyone can sound like Matthew Parris when they talk about a subject they've only read about in the tabloids.
As a well informed individual has already pointed out, Staffs are not naturally aggressive to humans - quite the opposite. You can easily train a labrador to be aggressive to humans if you are suitably inclined.
Sensible staff owners dislike being compared with the moron yoofs with staffs just the same way that sensible cyclists dislike being compared with RLJers and pavement cyclists.
The dog does not get to choose it's owner.
:roll: that is a piss poor analogy sunshine ... the rest of the post is pretty simplistic too and you have avoided the question (?)
sw0 -
If your post raised any question that was not rhetorical, I didn't see it.
The random smattering of question marks gave it more the appearance of a rant.
Parris and other people of an anti-cyclist persuasion see one cyclist RLJ, ride on a pavement or drop litter and use it as a stick with which to beat all cyclists, even though the vast majority of us find the antics of that anti-social minority very annoying too - bikes and bike ownership in itself are not the problem.
You and other people of an anti-Staff persuasion see one Staff owner using it as a gangsta status symbol, encouraging it to growl at passers-by and use it as a stick with which to beat all Staff owners, even though the majority of us find the antics of that anti-social minority very annoying too - Staffs and Staff ownership in itself are not the problem.
The analogy applies to lots of situations but I chose a cycling one for obvious reasons. If I had leafed through one of today's newspapers I could probably have found any number of others where the public are being programmed to distrust a section of society based on sensationalized reporting of the antics of a small minority of them (think religeon, nationality, public service, military, etc).
Some people will choose an arbitrary reason to have a go at anyone.
If you can't see it, it's because you don't want to.0 -
Gr.uB wrote:I've come back to CyclingPlus to give it another go.
Where I went wrong previously was I took some of the posts too seriously and actually cared what people posted.
I don't care what people think about Staffordshire Bull Terriers. I don't care what people quote from endless web searches.
I have owned 2 Staffordshires over a 16 year period. During this time we have raised two children ( and still are ), shared the space with 4 rabbits, one cat and two guinea pigs. All the small animals and children played with the dogs and there were no incidents during this time. I joined two breed clubs and went to and participated in breed shows and obedience shows / trials. I therefore talk from experience - personal experience.
Any Staffordshire Bull Terrier owner will relate to this.
You have to own one to understand just what they are like.
I therefore will not contribute anymore to this as it is a talk amongst amateurs, and one I can't be bothered to worry about as life is too short.
To disregard other peoples experiences just because they dont agree with your own is, in my opinion, short sighted and narrow minded. Especially when you dont even appear to have read the majority of the posts which support staffies and have made a conscious effort to seperate them from the other breeds which are considered dangerous. Your experience of staffies is of them as harmless - I had a friend who had one from a rescue home (with mysterious scars all round its muzzle...) and around kids and other dogs it was fine even under provocation...
...Except the one time some yappy thing surprised it from behind at night whilst we were walking it and practically got torn in 2 for its trouble before we could seperate them. Or the time it went utterly mental and attacked a huge rock - sounds funny but wasn't. On another occasion it bit my arm and held on for approx 45 minutes - didnt cause any pain or break the skin or anything but made it clear it wouldnt let go untill it was ready. These incidents all occured within days of the dog being rescued and as far as I know nothing similar happened again but its certainly a different viewpoint to yours.
My mate went on to own a few staffies over the last few years and I'd be happy around any of them, they're not a breed I'd choose personally but I'd not be upset if the mrs came home with one. I believe that a well trained staffie (as opposed to the ones of dubious origins that my mate and his family rescued) is about as safe a dog as you'll find - despite my experiences. But what do I know? -afterall, I'm just an "amateur", not an experienced professional like yourself
0 -
Jam1e,
My experience is not all one sided. I have met Staffordshires that have been used for fighting. I have seen videos of dog fights. I have seen Staffordshires in a show hall fight when their owners were taken by surprise. But understanding the origin of the breed and the actual breeding that went into it makes these aspects not shocking or horrid but actually quite normal and understandable.
Initially this thread started from what I would call a blinkered view - from someone less than an amateur it would appear. Then it became sensible with several Staffordshire owners honestly commenting from experience. Then in my opinion, it went down hill again with forum baiting occurring. That is the point that I decided enough was enough - although I am contradicting myself in coming back
In your own words you are an amateur. You have not owned a Staffordshire. Your mate has owned a Staffordshire of unknown breeding - or did his rescue dogs come with a pedigree certificate?
Anyone that can abandon a dog ( let alone a Staffordshire ) is suspect in my mind. I appreciate there are people that accept they can't cope and then get the animal rehomed or rescued - well done to that person. Most reputable breeders will take an unwanted animal back if the circumstances change and the animal can no longer be part of the family to which it was sold.
Sadly the Staffordshire is maligned because of it's power, it's looks, it's size and in-breed nature than can easily be brought to the fore with some careful and deliberate training.
Perhaps I was a bit strong in my narrow sighted approach, for that I stand corrected.
0 -
Well, it,s been a long time coming, but have just met the owner of the cat that was killed by the two dogs. Both dogs have been destroyed. the owner, in return for accepting this decision will not be prosecuted and no damages will be sought by the cat owners. The owner of the dogs faced several charges as a result of this incident and if found guilty could also have been banned from owning a dog for a certain length of time. Apparently the main reason that he decided not to fight the decision was that he would have had to pay a substantial solicitors fee and the cost of the dogs, during there stay in police kennels(said to be very expensive).
A number of issues have been raised by this thread, and while i must admit i was a little bit emotional on writing my thoughts at the time it would certainly help if owners really new what they were letting themselves in for.An untrained dog of this type, it can only be a question of time before something goes wrong.
The owner has never been to apologise to the owners of the cat, shown no remorse at all, other than to blame his girlfriend for everything that happened. The owner was also informed of the girl who was taken to hospital suffering from shock, he has never made any effort to contact her or even ask how she is.IMHO this owner should never be allowed to keep a dog again. Greetings Ademortademort
Chinarello, record and Mavic Cosmic Sl
Gazelle Vuelta , veloce
Giant Defy 4
Mirage Columbus SL
Batavus Ventura0 -
When you know what this type of dog is capable of then IMHO it needs to be well trained from the onset. To leave these dogs with his partner and expect her to control them was a real blunder I have no idea how long the man and woman have been together. But as i said owners or potential owners should know what they are letting themselves in for. These are very strong and powerful dogs with an incredible bite and not a status symbol as many seem to think. I truly feel sorry for the dogs, perhaps with a good owner they may never have got into this situation.Greetings Ademortademort
Chinarello, record and Mavic Cosmic Sl
Gazelle Vuelta , veloce
Giant Defy 4
Mirage Columbus SL
Batavus Ventura0 -
ademort wrote:When you know what this type of dog is capable of then IMHO it needs to be well trained from the onset. To leave these dogs with his parner and expect her to control them was a real blunder I have no idea how long the man and woman have been together. But as i said owners or potential owners should know what they are letting themselves in for. These are very strong and powerful dogs with an incredible bite and not a status symbol as many seem to think. I truly feel sorry for the dogs, perhaps with a good owner they may never have got into this situation.Greetings Ademort
I own a Staffie and made sure she socialised with other dogs and people of all ages as soon as she was old enough and had her innoculations and I would of done that what ever breed I decided to bring into the family.
A dog owner needs to train the dog and bring it up in a sensible way regardless of breed not just because its a Staffie.
I can always remember my late grandfathers mongrel, the only dog I have ever been scared of, he made it that way through choice and you can do that with anything from a Staffie to a Labrador.
Glad you feel sorry for the dogs, so do I as the blame lies 100% with the owner.
0 -
I do not know the owner of the dogs, but when you add all the things up, ie never contacted the owners of the cat to offer an apology or the girl who was taken to hospital and then attacking police officers and spending a night in jail, this is definitely down to the owner. As you say you can train any dog to do what you want it to do (within reason)and the dog cannot choose it,s owner. It is a no-win situation for the dogs. One of my best mates had a staffie and it was brilliant, daft as a brush. My only hope is that if this man does get another dog, that he takes the time to train it, regardless of what breed of dog it is.Greetings Ademortademort
Chinarello, record and Mavic Cosmic Sl
Gazelle Vuelta , veloce
Giant Defy 4
Mirage Columbus SL
Batavus Ventura0 -
One last question for you Ademort, you titled this post as ' Bull Terriers - Why I Think They Should Be Banned '
Do you still feel this way?0 -
ademort wrote:.An untrained dog of this type, it can only be a question of time before something goes wrong.
Greetings Ademort
No more so than many other breeds of dog, less so than quite a few. Yes they are powerful for their size but in terms of temperament I reckon they are probably less likely to bite a person than most breeds.
it's a hard life if you don't weaken.0 -
Tom Butcher wrote:ademort wrote:.An untrained dog of this type, it can only be a question of time before something goes wrong.
Greetings Ademort
No more so than many other breeds of dog, less so than quite a few. Yes they are powerful for their size but in terms of temperament I reckon they are probably less likely to bite a person than most breeds.
they are the least likely to bite a person than ANYother breed. true story.
my friends 18 month old boy has just been attacked in the park by an out of control yorkshire terrier wearing a wee jumper, a diamond collar and a bow in it's hair. he's at the hospital now having stitches to his face, neck arms and back. if my friend hadn't been so quick to get it off it would certainly have killed him. do i think yorkshire terriers should be banned? no. i think the owner should be banned from keeping any dog. for life.
will this story be in the papers tomorrow? will there be a campaign in the Sun? no. it's not exciting enough and won't stir up the publics interest or get them scared enough.0 -
One of our cats was savaged by a Jack Russell just before Christmas. The Jack Russell escaped from its own garden and locked onto the cat; my parents managed to prise them apart after about 5 minutes, during which my mother was so badly clawed and bitten that she had to go to A&E. Apart from a tooth having gone right through her leg and out the other side, the cat was luckily unscathed and just needed a precautionary shot of antibiotics.
The dog, I'm sorry to say, is still at large, although the blows my parents were raining on it to try and make it release the cat will hopefully have shortened its miserable lifespan. It's already killed about 6 of my parents' chickens, all its owners' geese and another cat. it should have been destroyed years ago.--
I am become Death, the destroyer of cake0 -
What a load of tosh .The most dangerous animal is the human who owns a dog etc. They bomb the $hit out of ther own kind for WMD it is called OIL :evil: No bad dogs just owners . Human race ....clearly bent on self destructon. :Our people ARE coming home in BODY BAGS. Thanks TONY .. Rant over. I reckon GB had a lead for him.bagpuss0
-
3 human deaths from dog attacks in the UK in a year? If accurate, I think we can safely worry about something besides banning dogs!
I would never consider owning a dog, and I'd like it if people kept their animals well away from me, but no way am I going to support further bans, mandatory training sessions or any such pointless schemes. If I did I could have nothing to say on the subject of bicycle number plates, bicycle road tax, mandatory bicycle proficiency tests, mandatory use of cycle paths etc.
I think we can live and let live on this one.0
