Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You've described the reason banning dog breeds is so difficult. AFAIK, the AB XL is not a recognised breed by the main national kennel clubs, it's just a bunch of hacks breeding dogs to make them larger. When you take a fighting dog like the American pitbull and then breed for size and not temperament whatever you create will be a disaster waiting to happen. There is absolutely no reason why anyone needs to own such a dog. And the people who do want them are the least equipped to handle them.
I have seen that attack by that XL bully. It is not normal dog behaviour to go around chasing people trying to kill them. That has unfortunately been bred into those dogs by humans.
In terms of UK legislation it has been more balanced in relation to targeting all dog owners and not just certain breeds.
There are Community Protection Notices, which require dog owners to take appropriate action to address behaviour and to keep their dogs under control in public, whilst legislation in relation to controlling your dog in public is aimed at making owners more responsible.
It's also worth noting that certain non traditional dog breeds are often linked to dog fighting rings, something that result in the most horrific animal injuries and animal suffering beyond the comprehension of most people, and this is another reason as to why legislation and law enforcement needs to be effective in relation to both dog attacks and animal suffering.
As fr banning the Bully XL, it is recognised as a breed by Kennel Clubs such as the US Kennel Club, however it is not recognised by the British Kennel Club, precisely because of the problems relating to the breed and in relation to not wanting the breed at dog shows or other events.
The Home Office is currently seeking the advice of leading experts in relation to dog breeds and attributes, as well as law enforcement, the medical profession in relation to injuries and numerous other experts across a wide array of fields, and after it has considered the evidence in the subsequent report they will take the appropriate steps to ensure the safety of the public, the safety of other animals including working dogs live stock or domestic pets. In terms of sheep and live stock, any dog that is not on a leash or out of control, and worries, injuries or kills such animals can be legally shot dead by farmers and land owners in the UK.
The review will also look at the dogs links to organised crime and dog fighting, as well as the welfare of the animals themselves, and I don't see any problem with banning certain breeds in this respect, and new legislation merely makes it less difficult for specialised police units who often work alongside under cover units such as the RSPCA Special Operations Unit, whop often infiltrate organised gangs involved in illegal breeding, dog or **** fighting, badger baiting and other such types of animal cruelty.
Last edited by Brave New World; 09-13-2023 at 10:17 AM..
Law enforcement, at least in my area, does not take leash laws seriously at all. Even though we have numerous dog parks, owners will let their dogs off leash in the regular parks, on greenways and trails. Maybe if the rules regarding controlling a pet animal were taken more seriously by authorities, there would be fewer incidents.
I'm familiar with bully breeds in general...but what's THIS exactly? And what does XL stand for? All I can think of is Extra Large.
I have no idea. I have a Staffy mix and she's roughly 35 pounds and wouldn't hurt a flea. When I hear about these breed bans I get very nervous because they are so broad brushed. There are places that ban German Shepherds for being a "dangerous breed" and Shepherds are wonderful dogs.
Why not punish irresponsible breeders who purposefully breed for aggressive traits? Why not hold irresponsible owners accountable to the fullest extent possible? Put them in jail and maybe some of this reckless breeding and negligent/abusive handling will stop.
As fr banning the Bully XL, it is recognised as a breed by Kennel Clubs such as the US Kennel Club, however it is not recognised by the British Kennel Club, precisely because of the problems relating to the breed and in relation to not wanting the breed at dog shows or other events.
It is not recognised by the American Kennel Club. The United Kennel Club recognises it – but the UKC is not affiliated with the FCI (the international association of kennel clubs). But really, it doesn't matter. Getting around a breed standard isn't that hard. Most working dog (dogs being breed to do actual work not dog breeds with a working pedigree) breeders have about as much interest in a kennel club breed standard as backyard breeders. That's why it's so hard to ban a breed. They will just shapeshift it enough to get around the legislation. If the end goal is an oversized, powerful and aggressive dog, I can breed that without going near a bully breed.
It is not recognised by the American Kennel Club. The United Kennel Club recognises it – but the UKC is not affiliated with the FCI (the international association of kennel clubs). But really, it doesn't matter. Getting around a breed standard isn't that hard. Most working dog (dogs being breed to do actual work not dog breeds with a working pedigree) breeders have about as much interest in a kennel club breed standard as backyard breeders. That's why it's so hard to ban a breed. They will just shapeshift it enough to get around the legislation. If the end goal is an oversized, powerful and aggressive dog, I can breed that without going near a bully breed.
There are four variations: standard, pocket, classic and XL. The American bully is regarded as a specific breed in the US. However it is not recognised as such by the main British dog associations, such as the Kennel Club. So it's the other way around.
As for breeds, certain attributes and breeding can be legislated against making it far easier for authorities to take action, and along with breed legislation, there is also increasing legislation regarding dog ownership.
If a dog is added to the banned dogs list, it means it is illegal for anyone in the UK to own, breed, or sell them, making it far easier for the authorities to take action, and in terms of what constitutes a dog breed that is for the Courts to decide, and the it's the owners responsibility to prove your dog is not a banned type. If you cannot prove the animal is not banned (or you plead guilty), you’ll be convicted of a crime and can be subject to an unlimited fine or be sent to prison for up to 6 months (or both) for having a banned dog against the law. As for the dog it will be destroyed.
So the onus of proof is not on the authorities, and they can produce expert witnesses in relation to breed or the injuries caused by such animals, and this can prove very useful in terms of court cases, which are generally heard by a panel of Magistrates (Judges) and not a Jury.
In the last few years Bully XL have been responsible for up to 60% of serious dog attacks in the UK and the breed have been responsible for the deaths of 11 people, so it's highly likely that there will be new legislation and restrictions.
I am for training and licensure requirements for owning certain dog breeds but definitely not a proponent of banning. Not to say people don't circumvent it but even good intentioned novice owners can be unprepared (I was). For decades I have studied and/or been involved with molosser breeds and having owned several fila brasileiro, been around presas, dogos, neos, etc. so I understand what these dogs can do. When I showed one of my filas a couple times the judge did not touch the dog (not sure if that is still the case) as protocol because, well, the fila was bred not to trust strangers.
I took my first fila to K9 police dog academy and was kicked out because of his aggression towards the instructor. They are bred to be property and person protectors, that is what they do and once they engage without substantial training it can be extremely difficult to get them out of the red zone. We had to kennel our fila at a kennel that had no touch facilities so that we walked him into the kennel and they let him in/outside and fed him without having direct access.
Anyway you need experience and a willingness to put in the time and effort to have breeds like this but once you do they can be amazing. Like anything though, there are degrees within breeds - I had to have one my dogs fixed because he was just too aggressive outright for my liking but the next one was moderate. I am sure many of these XL breeds or whatever are similar its just that, unlike a Chihuahua (the meanest overall dog breed I have ever encountered), they can inflict serious damage if they are on the higher end of the aggression scale.
I am for training and licensure requirements for owning certain dog breeds but definitely not a proponent of banning. Not to say people don't circumvent it but even good intentioned novice owners can be unprepared (I was). For decades I have studied and/or been involved with molosser breeds and having owned several fila brasileiro, been around presas, dogos, neos, etc. so I understand what these dogs can do. When I showed one of my filas a couple times the judge did not touch the dog (not sure if that is still the case) as protocol because, well, the fila was bred not to trust strangers.
I took my first fila to K9 police dog academy and was kicked out because of his aggression towards the instructor. They are bred to be property and person protectors, that is what they do and once they engage without substantial training it can be extremely difficult to get them out of the red zone. We had to kennel our fila at a kennel that had no touch facilities so that we walked him into the kennel and they let him in/outside and fed him without having direct access.
Anyway you need experience and a willingness to put in the time and effort to have breeds like this but once you do they can be amazing. Like anything though, there are degrees within breeds - I had to have one my dogs fixed because he was just too aggressive outright for my liking but the next one was moderate. I am sure many of these XL breeds or whatever are similar its just that, unlike a Chihuahua (the meanest overall dog breed I have ever encountered), they can inflict serious damage if they are on the higher end of the aggression scale.
What I don't understand is why the constant need to produce ever larger and more aggressive breeds.
Why not just buy a traditional British breed such as a normal traditional English Bulldog or a Staffordshire Bull Terrier, English Bull Terrier, English Mastiff etc.
In terms of Staffordshire it is even an historic county in England dating back to the 6th Century, and is where the Staffordshire Bull Terrier originates from, and the breed has lots of historic local ties.
However in terms of what is now known as American Staffordshire Bull Terrier breed it's very different to the traditional Staffordshire Bull Terrier, and the same is true of other British Bull and terrier breeds when compared to their modern American equivalents.
For instance American Staffordshire Terriers are very different to the traditional English breed, and the same applies to American Bullies and other breeds, which are nothing like the traditional breeds, and by taking these already massive new breeds and then further crossing them is just asking for trouble.
I am all for allowing traditional British breeds, however in terms of non-native breeds which are often bred by organised crime and used increasingly in dog fighting, I am all for restrictions, just as I am all for restrictions in relation to problematic evasive non native species full stop.
Dogs are wild animals, and the difference between these breeds and more traditional breeds is becoming akin to the difference between a large wild cat and a domestic cat, and the same applies to the damage such animals can inflict.
No, absolutely not. I've never seen ANY dog behave in that manner. I certainly don't condone that, there is something wrong with a dog that would do that.
Our Staffy, also in the "dangerous breed" category, is a gregarious little girl who LOVES people and has never met a stranger.
That's what I mean by a broad brush ban. I have zero familiarity with this XL breed but some breeders and owners are not responsible. You don't purposefully create a dog like that, fail to control it and then unleash it on unsuspecting people and/or animals. You just don't.
No, absolutely not. I've never seen ANY dog behave in that manner. I certainly don't condone that, there is something wrong with a dog that would do that.
The problem is that all dogs exist on a spectrum of behaviours. Almost any dog can be taught a basic retrieve with enough reward, but for a gun dog the retrieve is the reward. There's just a lot gameness in terriers and fighting breeds and while it doesn't mean they will do something like in that video it does predispose them genetically to that sort of behaviour. Absolutely though, bad breeding, and very poor handling is on display there, and I'm definitely not trying to suggest that is "normal" behaviour for any dog.
What I can say though, is I would be beyond shocked if a GSD ever behaved that way. While the video itself is shocking, that a bully breed behaved that way is not itself shocking to me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
