Published on 12, July, 2020
Today the day the bully xl ban starts now. I am dead against the ban as I feel it’s not the dog it’s the owner. Also this won’t stop dog attacks and breeders are moving on to bigger dogs now. As a dog owner myself I love my baby I have a 12 year old Dalmatian called Lucy and I see myself as a responsible owner. I have also met some beautiful bully XLs and they were gentle giants the owners were genuine to. What everyone else’s thoughts on this do you agree with what I’m saying or do you agree with the ban? I won’t judge anyone opinion.
i think bulldogs pitbulls and staffies are the most harmless dog.
i dont understand why they ban them, but yet they allow violent yapping aggressive jack rustles and terriers and all of that to go on ok... what because they are small? and so we judge by appearance.... to me a jack rustle or a terrier is more dangerous and each one you meet will charge you and try to bite you. i dont understand why this dog is bad but yet a pacifist smiling harmless type of dog gets banned just because it looks intimidating.
Caelus said:to me a jack rustle or a terrier is more dangerous
I understand where you're coming from with their general temperament and a bite from any dog large or small can be a pretty big deal when thinking of infection, but I'd have to disagree on them being inherently 'more dangerous' as such as it still is much to do with the owner whether they're a biter. I think it's due to people being more accepting of bad behaviour in their small dogs because they see it as being less dangerous and easier to control so it seems to me still an ownership thing. I have a terrier and she is not violent and doesn't bite. One problem can be when considering from the perspective of potential where I think it can be important to consider too. Personally every big so-called 'dangerous' breed I've experienced are the loveliest sweet and gentle animals and I think any bad encounters are due to persistent mistreatment from the owners but when that happens it's pretty hard to deny the capability of these dogs is much greater. If my terrier was ever to go wild I could easily physically hold her with one arm, a larger out of control dog I don't think I could come out as squeaky clean with and I'm a relatively fit fully grown adult, let alone a young child (or elderly, or physically disabled). Its like for me, comparing weapons such as a knife to a fully automatic rifle. A rifle in the hands of a calm trusted individual who won't misuse it will be less dangerous than a knife in the hands of a maniac but both placed in similarly violent ownership the rifle wielder has far more capacity to do increased harm than the knife wielder and likewise both placed in the hands of someone sensible should do no harm. The difference being with animals is they have more purpose beyond being capable to do harm like the rifle or knife so banning them because of the misuse from some feels unfair. I think instead if picking and choosing which breeds people can have it should instead be picking and choosing which people can be allowed to have any animal whatsoever, people seem to always be the common problem.
In general, breed bans make me sad because some people do end up losing their beloved animals in the process despite them having never done any harm and being responsible owners with a well behaved dog
we could ban chavs, as chavs seem to be the types that mistreat dogs and turn them dangerous and into weapons lol but then when we talk of banning chavs a type of human, then it changes perspective and people dont like it.... although i wouldnt mind a chav ban to be fair...
we could excile them to the moon https://youtu.be/xo2A_YXarUM
I'm in favour of the chav ban