I am a great believer in the above statement,if the goverment has there way every dog they consider to be dangerous would be listed on the DDA.Why punish the breed because of the actions of one dog or it's owners who have failed in one way or another?

Too true.  I should think that most of the incidents that happen are due to bad handling and not actually the dog. 

I do wholey agree with the statement, however I can see why the government are trying to "predict" which breed of dog's can have more dangerous tendancies, or who can cause the most damage, and maybe try to prevent things like the little lad that was killed happening.

I don't know what the right answer is, because if you did punish the deed, the deed has to have alread happened, by then it is too late, people or dogs are badly hurt or even killed, surely this is too late to do anything with the dog.

I suppose in a way, going back to having a dog license would help, but it could only work if each owner was 'vetted' and this just isn't possible.

What do you think would be a solution?

Will you be happy for anything above 19" to be classed as a dangerous dog as this is what is happening in other countries?  This is the last thing we need, God most of our favourite breeds would be gone.

It's about time that maybe people had to do some sort of course or something before owning a dog to make sure that they are suitable.  I actually don't know what the answer is but it's a shame tht a number of breeds are called because mainly of irresponsible ownership.

SWD,

I said I agreed with the statement, but then asked if there was another way of preventing these incidents BEFORE they happen rather than waiting for something to happen before a dangerous dog, of ANY breed, is dealt with. By saying 'dealt with' I don't mean put every dog that gives a growl to sleep, but maybe re-train them, have them seen by a behavourist, maybe even work them as guard dog or something along those lines.

I certainly didn't say anything about the size of dog, and for your information, the puppy that we are getting will be over 19" when fully grown, so I don't know where that outburst came from? Unless I am just reading it wrong, in which case, sorry :D

Yep that is mine too, and most of the Gundog breeds that are renowned for theri even temper toward people.  Many of the more likely to bite breeds are not large at all, though large ones that do can cause more damage.

Research shows that Labradors are more likely to bite their owners than any other breed......... I can't see the goverment banning them next!!!
These incidents are terrible but really who would leave a child on it's own with any dog let along such a powerful one especially in this heat!!

ICACIA, I asked what would be the right thing to do to help prevent these attacks happening, not that yet another breed should be banned :D

in my opinion i think that dogs should be licensed again, where you have to pass tests of competence by law before being able to own a dog or ANY breed, and if you are found to own a dog without legal proof of licensing, then some consequence i havent thought of yet should be implemented.
i used to walk a staffie as a job and people would run away and shout at me, and yet, he was on a lead and no harm to them, but i wasnt allowed to say anything when their yorkie or lab went for him.
i had a similar problem with a utonagan i was walking recently, he was 8months old, and beautiful, not an aggressive bone in his body, and i was shouted at to keep him on a lead, (he was on a lead) because he 'looked too much like a wolf' (the breed is bred to look like one with no wolf in it), she was afraid my dog would eat her pom, but he was on lead and unbothered by her dogs yapping!
i just hope a canine hollocaust does not happen here like in other places like germany.

What are the laws in Germany? From what you have just said, I guess they are on the extreme side, but maybe there would be a few that we could implement, that would stop breeds getting banned, but to have more legal control over aggresive dogs?

sorry, the certificates were in america, in germany, i do not know of the laws, other than most large breeds are being either in the process of being banned, or are facing discrimination. dogs such as bernese mountain dogs, all kinds of masstiff, rottweilers, bull terriers, and other larger dogs are facing bad times. a jack russel was attacked in the street by an angry group of people and when the owner tried to defend the dog, they too were beaten. things for many dogs are chaotic over there, so i hope none of that is implemented!
i will try and find examples of exact laws, and get back to you

Oh perhaps we won't borrow any of their laws then ;)

Don't worry about searching for the laws, I think I have seen enough from your description! Thanks anyway :D

I think Havoc may be on to a good idea, about extending ASBO's to dog ownership. I know I certainly wouldn't mind answering a few questions, or whatever to show anyone I will try to be the best owner I can.

http://www.german-embassy.org.uk/legislation_against_dangerous_.html

The staffordshire bull terrier is on that list and it is not considered to be a danger,and it because of this stupid legislation in germany that we are in danger of losing one of the uks most popular breeds.I consider any dog to be dangerous,they all have the capability to turn!

Goodness me, that is a very long list of 'dangerous' breeds, I am surprised they have many dog's left that are legal!

I'm not sure about dog breeds, but there are certain types of dog owner that should only be allowed out when muzzled, restrained and accompanied by a responsible adult. Compulsory neutering would also seem prudent. ;-)

Given that there are 45 thousand labradors registered every year (plus the non-reg ones) its not surpising that they would top every 'worst (take your pick of undesirable dog behaviours).... breed' poll that anyone would care to run.

Nevertheless, common sense would indicate that there are some breeds that are far less suitable for the average idiot to own than others. Any blanket legislation is likely to hit responsible owners, but perhaps (for example) extending ASBOs into restricting dog ownership could be a reasonable start?

>I suppose in a way, going back to having a dog license would help

Does dog licensing not happen in England, then? We have it in N.Ireland but I don't see how it would help as lots of people don't get a licence anyway. Generally only the responsibel dog owner have one and they're aren't the people we should be concerned about.

Natalie you definitely was reading it wrong :d  I wasn't getting at you just advising what's going on elsewhere in the World !!!  If you read my post I too agree that it's hard to know what to do.  I think we need to tread very carefully or we could end up having big problems in a few years to come.

I know that there's a dog in this country from Germany I won't say which breed although he is shown and he had all of his teeth taken out a number of years ago due to German laws !!

perrodeagua aka spanishwaterdog :d

Personnely I would hate to see the old dog licence come back. To me its just another tax and we already pay enough for the clowns to go play gods. I also think they don't work either as there are always fiddles going on or those who will not buy one like driving licences or fishing licences.
Its very sad that some see dogs as a macho image. I walked by my local infant/middle school a few weeks ago and saw 2 guys, one with a dobe and the other a staff. Both had puffer jackets on, big boots with trousers inside them and giant chain leads on both dogs as to make a macho image for all to see.
For some reason the children kept away from them and I kept an eye on them with the help of my newf who was being covered in hugs by the kids. For some it seems a dog is much like a car, a statement about themselves or the lack of what's in their you not what :)
I've no idea how to improve the situation and its just a shame that a few wreck it for all.

Ok :D Sorry it just seemed like you were specifically asking me if I wanted every dog over 19" to be banned!

I suppose at the end of the day, whether the law is right or wrong, we don't have much chance of getting it changed. It would be interesting to see what people think is the 'right' way to go about preventing dangerous dog's (of any breed) from being owned by time wasters!

I don't know if this has already been posted, so I apologise if it has, as I only scanned this thread, but I think the current laws on dangerous dogs are actually very poor in terms of their implementation juding by something I came across in the newspaper.
There was an article in the press recently, and I apologise that I cannot remember the specific breed involved, but it was a dog that required a license to be owned, and also under the dangerous dogs act, needed to be muzzled at all times in public (?? I am a novice when it comes to dogs, so I have no clue about the exact breed, but I know what it looks like). The owner took this dog out on one occasion without a muzzle, and now the dog will be destroyed, despite appeal, because the owner broke the conditions of the license. The dog had no history of aggression, and was in no way aggressive in public. The article also listed the instances in which dogs had been repreaved on appeal, and this included a number of dogs who had actually savaged children and adults (I am not going to mention the breeds involved in this instance, as I actually believe this to be irrelevent as they represent a minority and I don't wish to tarnish any breeds reputation). These dogs had been sentenced to destruction but had been let off. Now it seems absolutely ludicrous to me that the present laws on licensing should see a dog who was taken out on one occasion unmuzzled (which was the owners responsibility, and not the dogs, so the owner should be fined) be destroyed for showing no aggressive behaviour at all, and dogs who had savaged being able to go to appeal successfully. I didn't follow up this story, and so the facts of the story may not have been those that I read in the intial report (the press being what it is), but I just felt I should mention this and see what people think.

Yes, but the same applies over the whole English judging system, you can get put in prison for 2 years for giving someone a black eye, but then get a year for sexually assulting someone. Yes no one should go around giving others black eyes, but I think the punishment should be in line with the crime.

I realise that, the whole system needs to be overhauled.

But this is an issue/discussion/thread about dogs and dog laws, but I do agree with your point.

Just re-read that and realised it could come across as quite rude. Hope I didn't. I just wanted to say that your point is correct, but I was just wanting to relay something I saw in the press regarding the issue of dog laws.

It's ok, I didn't think you were being rude, I actually said the exact same thing to someone yesterday :D

I am certainly not saying that the laws are right as they are, but no one so far, has been able to come up with their own ideas of what the law should be to protect people/dogs/anything from dangerous dog's. I have been trying to think what would be the best way to do it, and I can't, so it must be a difficult one for the Gov. to work out.

I think your right, and any adaptations they make in light of situations like the one I mentioned that was recently in the press will just bring up other problems. It is a really difficult issue.

(Glad you didn't take offence...)!!

WHAT MAKKES YOU THINK THE GOVERMENT CAN PREDICT WHAT BREEDS WILL GO BAD, ALL DOGS CAN BITE, BAD OWNERS NOT BAD DOGS, AND SOME GENUINE ACCIDENTS

Well let's get rid of the dangerous dog law, and have absolutely no laws that TRY to protect people/dogs before the attack happens. Will you be happy then Jimmybonez? :( We have all agreed that what laws are in place now, are unfair and don't work, I was trying to see what others thought the Gov. (as the law-makers in this country) could do to pretect people/dog's/anything from dangerous dogs BEFORE any damage is done. What do you think would be the right way to go about it? :D

To train the people before having the dogs!!

Yes but there is no way they would put the money into doing that.

I am not knocking it down, I am just trying to find out what people think the laws SHOULD be, that the Gov. would actually have the decency to carry out. It would need to cost little or no money, not take up too much police time, and not make it so that genuine dog lovers feel like they are punished for others mistakes, but most of all, PROTECT people/dogs/anything BEFORE any attack. As I have said I don't know what the law SHOULD be, but I was wondering what the people who think the dangerous dog act is way out of order think the laws should be. I don't personally agree with the law, but I can't think of how it could be made better.