What’s everyone views on the bully xl ban?

we could excile them to the moon https://youtu.be/xo2A_YXarUM

I'm in favour of the chav ban

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...

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

A dog doesn’t have a right to respect for private and family life, a right to avoid prison without judicial process. A dog doesn’t even have a right to life, it can be put down on a whim. The animal welfare act if anything maybe extended the right to avoid Torture to dogs.

In 2006 the Animal Welfare Act went some way to giving animals 'rights'.

But it’s not the same thing of course. If you neuter a dog to prevent inconvenient pregnancies (to you as a caregiver) no one will criticise you for it in fact some people are likely to praise you for it. Try doing it to a human being we’ll have you in the dock in 2.5 seconds.

I've neither the time nor the stomach for what might evolve or erupt within this thread under the current inevitabilities that I now see are inextricably linked and inherent with a written open forum like this one....and it's infrastructure.

I hope my opinions on "animal rights" are as transparent as they are obscure.  I value peace.

I'm "peace out" from this thread.  The XL ship sailed, let's think harder next time.

Number.

I'm no expert on the safety of this particular breed, although there does seem to have been a disproportionate number of attacks, but I'm definitely not happy about the number of stories about owners sending their dogs up to Scotland, where the rules haven't changed yet. This could be causing an influx of potentially dangerous dogs separated from their homes and families and any knowledge about their history or temperament lost.

We thank you.

Wagging tail emoji.

As this has veered a little into animal 'rights' I thought I'd put in my tuppenny's worth and recommend a charity I know of.

It's called 'Compassion in World Farming'.

I used to be a volunteer for a chap who worked there and we collected from the public for that charity and other animal rights charities.

I found out via CIWF the best supermarkets for buying meat products so on the rare occasions we buy meat we buy from one of the top two if possible.

Trigger warning: you may see some unpleasant sights upon opening this:

https://www.ciwf.org.uk/

Supermarket awards:

https://www.ciwf.org.uk/our-impact/food-business-programme/good-farm-animal-welfare-awards/retailer-awards/

If I buy bacon (again, rarely) it's always free range.

Farmed animals can have awful lives, especially outside of the UK.

You’re far more likely to be attacked by a human than a dog. As usual it’s humans that mess up a dog enough for it to feel threatened and attack. I’ve worked with dogs for more years than I care to remember, met and worked with thousands of dogs. Only bitten once, by a cockapoo… 

Look at the statistics. People need to calm down. 

Maybe we should ban cars because people get run over. 

Number said:

dogs have no rights because they are dogs.

In 2006 the Animal Welfare Act went some way to giving animals 'rights'.

Of course it's dependent on those unreliable animals humans to respect and institute it.

Thank goodness for animal advocates such as the RSPCA and yourself.

Under 'Defra' you can see the details for each animal.

https://www.rspca.org.uk/whatwedo/endcruelty/changingthelaw/whatwechanged/animalwelfareact

Yes, I do appreciate the point you are making.....we have human rights because we are human...dogs have no rights because they are dogs.

Perfectly simple when it is stated in such absolutist terms....as with all things.

I'm broader in my thinking, an advocate of nuance and consideration and thought.  I'll never make it as a populist. Woe is me.

What's the biggest number?  What's the smallest number?How many numbers are there?

Kind regards

Number.

The law says all dogs must be kept under control at all times in public places. (It doesn’t specify leash control versus verbal control but it does require control) autistic people are free individuals they do not need to be controlled, doing so is likely a violation of human rights. Likewise autistic people have not been created through selective breeding, a selective breeding program to create autistic people would likely be a violation of human rights.

The situation is not comparable

So? Dogs are not people, they do not have human rights. Autistic people are people they do have human rights. it’s like comparing apples and oranges.

The question ’should dogs be allowed in public?’ Is more comparable to the question ‘should e scooters be allowed in public?’ than autistic people.

There are plenty of non autistic people who posit similar arguments against autistic people.

Looking at pet dogs as a whole I sometimes wonder it might not be a good thing if we banned them all together a lot of them are horribly inbred and have all kinds of unpleasant medical conditions as a result.

they are yappy messy creatures that don’t respect personal space. Short of keeping them on the lead at all times there is no way to control them in a public space, not properly, not unless they've maybe had an absurd amount of training to voice commands, which almost none of them have.

I can see the argument for working dogs, sheep dogs, guide dogs et cetera. But pet dogs? do we really need them? If in order to get a license to own a dog you had to prove you were able to train a dog to the level where it would stay or come or be silent on voice command how many people would actually have dogs?

Every dog and every human can have their innate traits "brought to the fore" with training and/or conditioning.

So breeds that are physically capable, should be exterminated?.....if they are generally big and scary looking?.....irrespective of the individual's behaviours?.....just because they CAN be trained and conditioned to be dangerous?

Dangerous territory Martin.....I hope AI isn't training itself from this thread....or they will be making some rash decisions about the fate of various groups of humansl?  Should we exterminate humans who cage fight - violent "criminals" etc?

Human's inexorable selfishness and ignorance of sentience other than themselves is the problem.

Better the devil's pet you know?  I wonder how many people commenting on this matter have ever met an XL bully or have even met a dog.....on their terms....EVER?

When I was a lad, Doberman's were the "fearsome" breed.  Then came the rottweiler.  Then came the pit bull.  Then came the XL bully.  Next, will be a Caucasian Shepard "cross" of some description....or something similar.  If you ban ALL the dogs (shudder)....then the humans will simply breed a mutant Shetland / wolf / squirrel / rat "cross" breed........or perhaps we're reaching a DARPA dog epoch?

So why do so many humans believe that "certain breeds" of dogs are the problem?

The humans who ACTUALLY know ANYTHING about this topic ALL agree that this ban will be ineffective at changing anything or preventing harms......but it is popular with the masses who know virtually nothing about this topic.....so guess what has happened?.......the wrong thing has been done and most humans are happy......non-humans suffer....nothing will change.....and the cycle will continue - rinse and repeat.  Typical AND symptomatic of the REAL problem regarding "dangerous dogs.".

[Disambiguation - This rant is not aimed at you personally Martin, but your (surprising) comments did provoke it.....and to save you the agg - I do know that we can't cross breed as stated above - but allow me my own hyperbole to match that of the dog-haters out there!  With respect to you, personally, always.]

The ban only covers England and Wales.  Some owners are moving to Scotland and Northern Ireland where the ban is not in place yet.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-67847397

thats the thing, you think they are no threat because they are small and not as muscular? 
but yet they are fast and always more aggressive and always charge at you to bite your ankles.... while a staffy or a bulldog is calm and chill and wont really attack you unless you really did something to provoke that.

a bite from a small dog is just as dangerous as a bit from a big muscular dog.... in the end its not really the bite but rather all the germs on the teeth which then cause a infection and can cause potential loss of limbs or even blood poisoning or other disease.

even a cats bite is deadly... i know a person who got bit on the thumb by a cat, it got infected and his hand swollen up and he was in the most pain of his life.