Dangerous Dogs in Victoria

[BFZF8]

Originally Posted by Tuddy200

Interesting! So with your line of thinking, if I came up to you and started pushing and shoving you, then gave you a punch to the jaw, your going to take it or 'defend' yourself? Should we then remove you from society because you 'will' end it?

Not taking dogs to a dog park on health reasons? How is that any different to any other part of the city/town/world people walk and play with thier dogs?

Anyone who is genuinely interested should read this.

http://www.gopitbull.com/general-dis...dog-parks.html

[SEZ213]

I don't believe in punishing breeds, I believe in punishing deeds, and I'm a firm believer in people being responsible for the actions of their dogs. In saying that, if a stranger enters your home and threatens you, what do you think your animal would do, regardless of the breed? Your family is your dogs 'pack' and I would bet that your dog would defend you and your family. Should you be responsible then for your dog taking a chunk out of someone in your defence?

In the 'early' days pits were the 'family dog'...little rascals, shoe shops, everywhere in America they were part of the 'family'. Now it seems they have been cast out...everywhere.

I'm not for BSL at all, I don't think it has any positive outcome in anything - there was word some time back about putting SBT's into the BSL, for what reason I don't know. The pit has been deemed a 'dangerous' breed by the powers that be and as such there are restrictions. I don't agree with them; my neighbours shitzhu is more likely to have a chop at another dog (and has done) than any pit bull or staffy I've ever encountered, and I worked in a vet clinic for four years. The ones that proved to be vicious time and time again - the small (toy) breeds, pomeranians and the like. There were a few larger breeds that had to be muzzled, cattle dogs, a couple dalmations and one big boofy boxer (he just hated the vets - the owner would perpetuate this by dragging the poor bugger through the door, adding to his already sky high anxiety).

There was a report some years back published in the Herald Sun that named the top most dangerous breeds - the pitbull and staffy weren't at the top of the list...funnily enough, the golden retriever was...I had a retriever at the time and thought, 'you've got to be kidding me'...

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

A lot of dog attacks are not even close to being pitbulls.
The media (like speeding kills etc) has focused on one breed.

Dogs attack for a number of various reasons, poor training, lack of socialising and because they are scared. I also note A LOT OF HUMANS HAVE NO CLUE how to approach a dog they are not familiar with.

Some dogs also dont understand that children are little humans and think they are small animals or even nip them when playing.

The media and a lot of the public (moslty people who have never owned a dog) become very emotional when a dog attacks someone (understandable) however it needs to be said in what context did the dog bite someone, was it being annoyed? Is it a dog with puppies? Has the dog been abused by its owners?......Humans are the real issue.... by not training their dogs, incorrect training or not knowing how to approach.

No such thing as a dangerous dog breed..

In my perspective....most of what you've said, is, unfortunately, the truth... :(

I believe it's people who perpetuate the fighting portion of SBT's and pit's (usually those that have nothing better to do than watch perfectly good animals chew each other to death...)

It's also my personal belief that all the 'cross breeding' that floats about is responsible for the problems.

In saying all this, if my staffy's attacked someone, or another animal - I'd be the first one to put them down, providing it was an uprovoked attack...if someone is stupid enough to provoke a 'domesticated wild animal', staffy, pit bull or otherwise...they probably deserve it, and I'll fight tooth and nail to make sure they're held responsible for their behaviour as they would hold me responsible for mine. I'm not suggesting that all attacks are provoked, just so we're clear.

A responsible owner makes sure their animal is contained when they aren't home, a responsible owner makes sure their animal is properly trained and socialised with people, a responsible owner, is always aware that their animal is just domesticated...and not necessarily tame.

I am an advocate of animal rights, particularly when it comes to dogs. There is a case regarding a dog named 'Lennox' (UK) and his separation from his family simply for 'looking like a banned breed' - his brother, who looks the same, has not fallen under this status though...I have also followed quite closely the story of Patrick, a red pitbull who was starved on a balcony while his owner went out of town, to return, put him in a bag and throw him down a rubbish shoot, a total of 18 stories...and Tofu (another pit bull) who was used as 'bait' in dog fighting, he now has one eye and is recovering quite well, strangely enough, living with two other dogs...'humans' (and I use the term loosely) are responsible for these things, but very rarely do they get punished for their actions...

I've rambled, I'm sorry...I get a little passionate...

[krzysiek]

I love dogs and support this 100%. I didn't read it, I will admit - but anything that removes these dangerous dogs from society gets my support no doubt. When you start getting human casualties or injuries from a "pet", something needs to be done.

It's really a case of the "minority" screwing it up for the majority. As with things like P plate laws, etc. Unfortunately, that it just how it has to be for the better of society.

[BFZF8]

Originally Posted by krzysiek

I love dogs and support this 100%. I didn't read it, I will admit - but anything that removes these dangerous dogs from society gets my support no doubt. When you start getting human casualties or injuries from a "pet", something needs to be done.

It's really a case of the "minority" screwing it up for the majority. As with things like P plate laws, etc. Unfortunately, that it just how it has to be for the better of society.

Well there's your problem. And this is generally what society does. It's too hard to actually find out the facts so they're happy to go along with the half truths they're fed through the media.

[wildxy]

Very interesting to read everyone point of view.

I am sure every owner of a placid pit bull will say ' my dog wouldn't hurt a fly' and 'any dog can attack'. That may be well be true but if you speak with the owner of a dog who has killed their young child you will also hear 'I just never thought he could snap like that'.
It comes down to what are you willing to gamble. I wouldn't take the chance owning a dog with such strength in it's jaw and history of fatal attacks. How often have you heard 'my laborador killed my child'.
I would hate someone to loose a precious family pet but I say registering and owner training will go a long way. In particular, training on how a new child will affect your dog. As they are a pack animal they will fight the new pack member for a place in the pecking order I would also be in favour of seeing the breed slowly removed from our society.

Remember, if you have to have it because it's tough then it might also be the reason you shouldn't have it.

[zdcol71]

Damo....stop using that same quote!!!

"Mate I hear what you're saying but staffords have no business being at a dog park either.You have to remember that your dogs might not start a fight but they will end it. Dog parks are a stupid idea anyway and I wouldn't take any breed of dog to one from a health point of view alone.

Fun fact about staffords: They're Australia's second most poplular dog and are genetically no different to an APBT. What does that tell you?"

Interesting call...I do not take my Staffordshire to a dog park any more because he invariably ends up "finishing the fight".
I think other breeds tend to see them as dominant or "alpha" dogs, and the resultant agro sometimes scares the bejesus out of me.
As for the Stafford being no genetically different to the APBT....Not so sure that I agree with that given the pit bull is not much more than a bastard mix to start with, (in terms of recent breeding) as opposed to something that has been a recognised breed for quite some time longer.

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by dlayton

How often have you heard 'my laborador killed my child'.
.

Early this year a Malamute killed a child (sydney i think)... barely rated a mention in the media.
(And I had a malamute for 7yrs)
Its easy to say... "how often do you hear it?" But in case you missed it, the media only reports certain things in order to give people the perception that pit bulls are the only dogs out there which have killed people, when in fact dog attacks from all sorts of breeds is quite common.

[pottery beige]

Ranga is a red healer..... Ranga will bight you..... Woof........

[GT69]

I find this a touchy subject. At the end of the day, a dog with 'street cred' gets bought by people who want 'street cred' so its a dangerous mix. I work with a guy that wants a mastiff/pit bull, for no reason at all, except its 'cool', he has a 3 year old daughter and i couldn't think of a worse pet owner. If he doesn't kill it with neglect, it either runs away or his mother kills it for him. So in the hands of such an individual, I wouldn't trust any dog breed.

With all the back yard breeding bogans around, who knows what the hell your buying. I've seen 'staffy/mastiffs' that look like kelpie x lab's for crying out loud. Dumb people shouldn't be allowed to breed themselves, let alone selectively (or not so selective) animals.

So we have domesticated pack hunters as pets, for all sorts of reasons. We get people with bad attitudes buying dogs with bad attitudes (or just bad training) and people get hurt or killed......Not a surprise is it?

I have a staffy. If he attacks you, I'm willing to bet you had it coming. Break into my house while I'm not home, he'll most likely lick you to death, but if he does sink his teeth in, what bloody leg does anyone have to stand on? Outrageous that the owner would be responsible for such things.

Now, owners who walk their dogs off leash, I don't agree with it.Not just because mine would do the bolt, but because the leash is to control the animal, and if all animals are under control, you no longer have a problem. Just because your dog is awesome and walks happily next to you without a leash, doesn't mean he wont get a wiff of a kangaroo or something and run off. So leash the dog and she's all sweet.

Dogs in yards that get out, well it happens. Mine wont ever get out (mind you he was let out by the neighbour at one point in time) He gets locked up on the deck, if he got off that, he has full fencing front and back to contend with. I got attacked when i was 11, ripped the back of my leg open. The owners had just gotten home, opened the garage and the dog bolted, such is life, if i was smaller it might have killed me. If i was an apple I would be in a fruit salad.

I love my dog, I take precautions so he cannot be a danger to others, even if he wanted to. If everyone did the same thing (in every aspect of their lives) Life would be a lot better for all.

Lack of responsibility seems to be the order of the day once again, unfortunately you can't stop people buying dogs, or training them badly, or forcing them to be responsible (well maybe the last one you can) So there will always be a risk when you bring an unknown into the equation.

Also, if someone breaks into my house, the dog will be the least of their worries.

On a side note, I know plenty of humans that have killed other humans for no particular reason, I know people who have king hit unsuspecting people in pubs/clubs. I have met rapists and pedophiles and people who want to be the worlds best serial killers. All deserve your raging hatred and lethal injection lust, but somehow, a proven bad-egg human gets rehab for the rest of their lives, but any other animal should be put to death for 'looking' like an illegal breed?

Interesting.....

[XARATE]

Plenty of reports of golden retriever attacks including the death of a young boy

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread376227/pg1

http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...lab%200710.pdf

http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Art...ver%200610.pdf

[petermic]

not before time no need for these breeds, they are time bombs

[mik]

i look at it like this, some of these dogs are almost unstoppable if they have a bad mood day and decide to maul even some one that`s young and fit , so imagine an oldie or a child trying to fend one off, yes i know a Shepard or half a dozen other dogs can do a lot of damage too, but some of these bred fighting dog breeds you can hit them with a lump of 4 x 2 and they will still keep coming, can anyone say...... UNACCEPTABLE RISK??

[nstg8a]

as someone thats been the 'victim' of a dog attack i still dont agree with the out and out banning and destruction of any dog purely based on its breeds, or worse, its looks.

im a dog lover, always have been, always will be.

i was 15 when i was attacked early one morning when i was doing the milk run before school. i was lucky, i had lived with dads pig dogs my whole life so i wasnt intimidated by aggressive dogs, and i was able to deal with it but yeah i have no doubt if it had been one of the young girls that also did the same run then it would have been a very different story.

but was it the dogs fault? no, i dont think it was. it was a guard dog, and the owners simply didnt have it secured well enough.

the dog was a rottweiller, really was a beautiful dog. but do i tar all rotty's with the same brush? hell no.

in fact dads pig dogs were probably the most unpredictable, aggressive dogs ive ever seen. what breed were they? who knows. mongrels, every single one of them.

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by mik

i look at it like this, some of these dogs are almost unstoppable if they have a bad mood day and decide to maul even some one that`s young and fit , so imagine an oldie or a child trying to fend one off, yes i know a Shepard or half a dozen other dogs can do a lot of damage too, but some of these bred fighting dog breeds you can hit them with a lump of 4 x 2 and they will still keep coming, can anyone say...... UNACCEPTABLE RISK??

So is putting an inexperienced driver in a high powered car...

[Geez Louise]

That is not the topic at hand... This is about dogs and dog breeds and should the owner and dog be punished for attacks and to what extreme. Please keep it on topic...There have been some great replies but if this thread heads south...mods will have no choice but to close it.

Cheers
Col

[Jim Goose]

Yes and people take unaccpetable risks every day in life... yet no one calls for their immediate deaths do they?

What gets up my nose is how a lot of the responces here are clearly aimed towards the dog breed and not the owners... us humans.

We love to pass the buck on nearly everything to take the blame away from us.... so how is owning a particular breed an unacceptable risk?

Blue Heelers have a habbit of biting ankles....

My previous dog used to bite my arm quite hard when she played...

Townsville Council a few weeks ago declared a almost blind geriatric chiwawa as a dangerous dog because it bit a little old lady... over reaction?

We are VERY quick to lay the blame elsewhere

[SEZ213]

Originally Posted by mik

i look at it like this, some of these dogs are almost unstoppable if they have a bad mood day and decide to maul even some one that`s young and fit , so imagine an oldie or a child trying to fend one off, yes i know a Shepard or half a dozen other dogs can do a lot of damage too, but some of these bred fighting dog breeds you can hit them with a lump of 4 x 2 and they will still keep coming, can anyone say...... UNACCEPTABLE RISK??

You're absolutely right...'some' of these dogs, not all, but sadly they all get tarred with the same brush...and that's simply not the case. A fact that makes me sad and angry all at the same time.

2009 had the Australian Cattle Dog as the worst for attacks in Sydney, followed by the Alaskan Malamute...Staffy's with their 'lock jaw' as people like to proclaim, came fifth but not before the Sunday Telegraph reported they were the most dangerous. Statistics are skewed in either direction, dependent on who you talk to or who has done the research.

I found it rather interesting that Monash uni are suggesting this is not such a clever idea...and so are quite a few vets.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/bre...-1226118317206

Jim raised a really valid point earlier regarding why a dog behaves the way it does, particularly when fronted with provocation or threat. As humans we have a fight or flight mechanism, so do animals. When working for the vets there were a few that came in with their dogs, advising the dog had snapped at them, completely out of character, only to find out at a later point in time that their pet had a terminal illness.

If a dog has acted aggressively, and there is no reason for it, medical or otherwise, then by all means, put the dog down, and hold the owner responsible. I made the assumption a long time ago (after being dragged off my bike by a Blue Heeler), that it's a sure bet that something else has caused the animal to snap...turned out the dog that attacked me, a mild cut, but another woman had a chunk taken out of her leg, had been chastised by the local school kids as they walked past. They would bang on the fence. He dug his way out of his yard and ran from the side of the road at me, I was 10... What stopped the heeler from attacking further as I was on the ground...? A boxer and a dalmation...old spotty is ranked ten on the dangerous dogs list...dependent on which list you read.

It's not always cut and dry...although most of us wish it was.

There was also a suggestion that most people at the time of an attack aren't sure what kind of dog has bitten them...and it could go something very similar to this...although on the other side of that the 60% of attacks that occur in the home, they should know what dog they own - but even then it's sometimes hard to distinguish what breed the dog is..

Originally Posted by Dogzonline

If it was a brown crossbred dog with a heavy set head it will probably get reported as a Pittbull.
If it was a black crossbred dog with a heavy set head it will probably get reported as a Rottweiler (or Rockwheeler)
If it was a large white crossbred dog with patches it might get reported as a Dalmatian.
If it was a dog with blue or red markings on it, it will be reported as a Cattle Dog.
If it was a small terrier of any sort, it will probably be reported as a Jack Russell.

NONE OF THE ABOVE DESCRIPTIONS OF BREED MAY BE TRUE but they are the easiest ones for people to remember.

The dog could be a mixed breed dog that has nothing to do with the real breeds at all.

But, the breeds wear the blame - when the dog that was involved may NOT be that breed at all.

The stats also take into account ANY reported attack - including dogs chasing cats in trendy inner Sydney suburbs, and attacks on stock on farms.

[gtxb67]

no one seems to be blaming the dogs as such - the dogs cannot be trusted for sure, but if the "owners" could be, there would be no problem. the idiots of the world get a dog that cannot be trusted and guess what . . .

the new rules are only to take an unregistered dog aren't they. they aren't going to take a legitimate family pet to my understanding. maybe they should be banned, but that doesn't mean killing the dogs, it just means they are stopped from breeding - big deal - the dog doesn't know the species will end with it . . . like most pets, it will be muted - so what

[nstg8a]

the amount of times ive heard people talking about neighbours pitbulls, esp back in nz, only to have the dog pointed out and what a surprise, not a pitty.

nb: this is not a pit bull lol.

but its amazing how many people think they are.
i think theyre awesome dogs, dumb as a piece of wood but awesome dogs.

[V8XTasy]

the is no reason for anyone to be keeping a dangerous animal in there house or in public.

The dogs in question are a lethal weapon, just as a car is when driven dangerously. If these dogs are allowed to attack someone by the owner, the owner should be punished the same as if they injured/killed someone whilst driving dangerously.

[nstg8a]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

maybe they should be banned, but that doesn't mean killing the dogs, it just means they are stopped from breeding - big deal - the dog doesn't know the species will end with it . . . like most pets, it will be muted - so what

so your advocating what would amount to genocide because of the actions of a minority? seems far too heavy handed to me.

[cheap]

What a timely thread, we’re currently looking at dogs. Here are my choices;

1) Doberman
2) GSD
3) Bullmastiff
4) Rotty

I'm not wishing the dog to harm anyone, but I do want a deterrent, a guard dog and family companion. Keeping the every increasing numbers of losers away from my family and house is becoming more important to me.

As for pitbull's, they're certainly mean and tough but not easy to train/control. They do have a place out in the bush chasing down vermin like wild boars and goats, but not in suburbia.

[Tuddy200]

Originally Posted by V8XTasy

the is no reason for anyone to be keeping a dangerous animal in there house or in public.

The dogs in question are a lethal weapon, just as a car is when driven dangerously. If these dogs are allowed to attack someone by the owner, the owner should be punished the same as if they injured/killed someone whilst driving dangerously.

...again, by your thoery, we should ban all cars, "just in case" it's driven dangerously.

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by Tuddy200

...again, by your thoery, we should ban all cars, "just in case" it's driven dangerously.

no, the car is operated by a human

the dog has a mind of it's own

[Tuddy200]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

no, the car is operated by a human

the dog has a mind of it's own

That's it then, we kill all humans because we know that some can "snap" and kill, assult etc?

I do not agree with the law targetting a few "breeds" because of what I consider media cashing frenzy. However, if it applied to all ANIMALS not just dogs, and not just certain breeds then great!

Owners should be held accountable yes, but only after it's investigated. Provoked, Defending itself etc.

I think it's been mis-read that they want to ban these breeds all together, but they are just saying they must be registered and the owners will be held more liable, but, as above, all animals someone wishes to have.

Snakes, Spiders, Scropians?

[gtxb67]

I haven't misread it - but if they are banned, then there is no real loss

[SEZ213]

They wanted to ban pit bulls completely a while back, along with Staffy's...I don't think it really hit the ground. They attempted to do it up here too...a mate actually put her pit bull down because she was told he was a banned breed, turned out later that she had to do no such thing, she just had to get him fixed to comply with council regulations.

[nstg8a]

yeah only unregistered ones will be seized and destroyed, but in order to register one you have comply with very stringent conditions, because of them being classified as a dangerous breed.

[SEZ213]

And admit that your dog is dangerous, even if it isn't...

[kinksta]

I agree that the owners should be punished for not registering their dog, especially is it is a dangerous breed. But this isn't a debate I want to get into as I work in the RSPCA and it is a constant topic.

We have people surrendering their dogs because of the chance it may have APBT in it, or because it snapped at someone 2 years ago or looks at them funny (not joking). DNA testing is the only way to determine if a dog has APBT in this country, majority of people don't even know what a pitbull is, even some people I work with think they lock their jaws, and we are supposed to be in the know! I say it is the deed and not the breed.

Sort of like cars, if you have a high powered car, you have to look after it, you drive it sensibly, because you know of what it can do.

And cheap, a prefect example of what the problem is, you saying the APBT is "mean,tough and hard to control". The pitbull can be a beautiful and loving dog, but people put labels on the whole population and it isn't fair.