9 3 mins 15 yrs

I’m once again appalled to read about yet another case where a vicious wild animal has mauled a child to death. ("Oh, but it was so out-of-character for poor Wuffles! Honestly, he wouldn’t scratch the wings of a butterfly, yeah, like, y’know, like, yeah?")

Let’s cut out the nonsense and get straight to the heart of the matter: Dogs such as Pit-Bull Terriers and Rotweillers are not suitable as domestic pet dogs, full stop. They are unpredictable and potentially vicious wild animals, no matter what their sanctimonious, smug, self-satisfied owners might say about them. "Ooh, it’s alright, he wouldn’t hurt a fly" – complete and utter bollocks, I’ve heard it all before, and it’s always too late. Ownership of these wild beasts ought to be banned and dealt with in the same way as if one owned a rattlesnake and let it loose.

I do have to say, though, that from a certain pont of view I have some sympathy with the owners of pit-bulls and rottweillers: We aren’t allowed to defend ourselves with firearms, and the police "service" is about as useful as a tuna sandwich at defending us; therefore I can see that many people see ownership of a wild animal as their only means of carrying some form of weapon (and let us make no mistake here: that is the real reason why they own these beasts. They are not meant to be pets, but weapons). I can identify with that outlook, in a basic sense. However, here’s where such reasoning falls down: One can be in perfect control of a gun – but one can NEVER stay in perfect control of a wild animal.

Isn’t there supposed to be a "Dangerous Dogs Act" in force in the UK? Hah. Didn’t help that little girl much, did it?

Here’s what I would do if I was in charge: Right, you have to have a licence to own a dog, I believe, therefore the government presumably has some sort of record of what sort of dog you are in possession of, just like they know from your vehicle plate, what sort of car you own. Right then: All owners of pit-bulls and rotweillers have 30 days to hand over their wild animals, after which armed police will come after them and shoot their wild animal dead.  That’s what I call proper law enforcement. 

 

 

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

9 thoughts on “Thugz wiv Dogz, (a.k.a. “Oh, he wouldn’t hurt a fly”….)

  1. I hope the grandmother gets a good slap in the courts, the parents ought to be prosecuted too for leaving their with such a woman..! They must have known what she was like. On the day of the attack the gran had smoked cannabais and taken alcohol. She needs locked up for a long time.

  2. That’s an incredibly tragic story. Typhoo’s comments are laser accurate.

    This dog had attacked two other people previously, it should have been put down long ago. What were they thinking?

    I’ve owned pit bulls in the past, their nature’s weren’t any different than the two Labs I own now. I’m going to caveat this big though, my Pit’s came from family homes, not breeders, and were raised in a very loving environment. Pit Bull’s jaws lock down when they bite making them lethal when they attack and since you can’t be sure of breeding practices, they should never be in a home with children. Any dog can become vicious because of poor breeding or abuse, but the large breeds are extremely dangerous when they decide to bite. I tend to agree with you Tom, that these particular dogs (Rotts and Pits) should be outlawed or at least highly regulated, most pet owners are not responsible enough to handle these animals properly. Besides, there are plenty of other large breed dogs to choose from that make wonderful pets…like black Labs!

  3. There was a study a few months ago looking at the owners of dangerous dog breeds compared to owners of other dogs which found that:

    "People who own vicious dogs such as pit bulls have significantly more criminal convictions — including crimes against children — than owners of licensed, gentler dogs such as beagles, researchers reported on Thursday.

    A study of 355 dog owners in Ohio showed that every owner of a high-risk breed known for aggression had at least one brush with the law, from traffic citations to serious criminal convictions.

    And 30 percent of people who owned an aggressive breed of dog and who also had been cited at least once for failure to register it had at least five criminal convictions or traffic citations."

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15755870/

    So not only are the dogs intrinsically more dangerous the owners are more likely to be the sort of people who can bring out the worst in them.

  4. I think that the city and county of Denver has outlawed the ownership of pit bulls completely. I’m okay with that, but I know a couple owners of pit bulls who adore their dogs and insist that they are the best, most well-behaved dogs. They also insist that if a pit bull has attacked anyone in the past, they’re a bad dog and not to be trusted ever again. This woman should never have kept this dog. Period.

    There are 3 Rottys on my block – all great dogs. I’m not worried about any of them at all, because I know the owners and the dogs know me and my family. They would not hurt us, but I pity the person who tries to come after their family or someone that the dog knows and feels protective of.

    Come to think of it though, I think all the owners of the Rottys DO have a bit of a history with the police… All ancient history, of course! lol.

  5. Tom

    Your suggestion is undermined that the dog licences usually lie about the breed. The Panorama programme last week showed that pitbulls are invariably described as various cross-breeds.

    The people who own these dogs are usually low-life scum. If they’re not into illegal dog fighting they’re usually into other illegal activities such as drugs.

  6. There’s a certain breed of dog that is just not social enough. Yes, they can be lovely 99% of the time, but, they, like all dogs to a certain extent, see certain humans as a threat. And it’s in their nature to attack – Some dogs, more than others, are more lethal. This should be a consideration.

    Unfortunately we cannot trust their human owners to control such dogs. Therefore, I’d be in favour of compulsory neutering of certain breeds and banning them in a certain number of years time. This would include cross breeds.

  7. As a major league dog lover, i suggest that owners should be held responsible.

    Dog kills someone in an unprovoked attack? Jail the owners for manslaughter, and put down the dog. don’t just put down the dog!

    But i couldn’t condone putting down a certain breed just because some of them are dangerous, that just wouldn’t be fair.

    Puppy farms should all be outlawed though, they churn out terrified, mixed up little doggies, its horrendous, its horrendous, and that’s something we can work towards stopping with this petition;

    http://www.petitionthem.com/default.asp?sect=detail&pet=619

    The welsh assembly is proposing to subsidise them as if they were just another type of farmer, and the puppies just another produce. That petition is against it, and i have signed it of course.

  8. Pit-bulls and rottweilers need not be dangerous, at least no more than any other dog. There are plenty of responsible owners in the US and elsewhere who raise their dogs to be safe. The problem is not that these particular breeds are incapable of being domesticated, only that some people raise them specifically to be dangerous, and not just guard-dog dangerous, I mean really dangerous. Sometimes dogs go crazy (hear about the man mauled by chihuahuas?) and that’s tragic and I personally don’t think you can hold the owner responsible, at least not enough to send them to jail. Othertimes, more commonly, irresponsible owners raise their dogs poorly or act negligently or even malicously with them. In such cases the owner should feel the full force of the law.

Comments are closed.