The home secretary is seeking "urgent advice" about banning American XL Bully dogs as footage shows one of the animals attacking an 11-year-old girl and a man in Birmingham. Suella Braverman has said the animals are a "clear and lethal" danger after the video of the attack in Bordesley Green emerged on the social media platform TikTok. West Midlands Police are investigating after two men, who were bitten and left with injuries to their shoulders and arms, were taken to hospital to be treated for their injuries after the incident on Saturday.
I can see an argument for the proposition that maybe we don’t need dogs that are big and powerful enough to injure or kill people.
But, I take claims about how a breed “is gentle” with an entire ocean of salt- individual dogs might be calm and well-trained or socialized, it’s the ones churned out of puppy mills to be sold at top dollar to shitty people who want a tough, scary dog that seem to be sketchy.
I’ve been around lots of well-adjusted big dogs that are just big hunks of love and slobbery affection, but really I hate seeing stories about how some dog that “is a good boy” mauled a child and if I had my druthers, dog owners would be required to carry liability insurance proportionate to the dog’s size or bite force or some factor correlating to its breed, and to the dog owner’s income or wealth. Oh, that would make big, dangerous dogs too expensive to own? Maybe they should be.
Its not really about the size, though. These dogs have been bred to have a trait called “gameness”, which is prized in fighting dogs, because it means they will disregard exhaustion, injury and all other distractions when in aggressive mode. They don’t let go, ever. Where most dogs, even big ones like German shepherds or rottweilers, will bite and tear and then let go and usually retreat, bull terriers will not stop until they or the prey are dead or incapacitated. Sometimes they will continue to attack even when their prey has stopped moving. That’s why these dogs are dangerous. Any dog can snap and attack. Yes, even your auntie’s 17-year old Bassett hound. Any dog. But when a bull terrier snaps it’s potentially life threatening.
Well to start, your answer is in their name; terrier.
If a jack Russell was the size of a small pit, lol oh God that thing would be unstoppable.
I had a rescue pitbull he was a nice hog but when he switched into that game mindset he was dangerous to everyone including me.
That’s an untrained dog, sorry.
I think this is what so many people miss from both sides of the argument. I don’t think pits are naturally violent or aggressive dogs, someone further down talks about how they were originally bred to be loyal family dogs and that makes a lot of sense to me with the pit bulls I’ve known in life. I’m sure for many others as well.
The problem is that when they do bite it has potential to be more dangerous and deadly than other common breeds. On top of that they are like alligators and lock their jaw, and some of the breeds are extremely muscular too. No dog owner should ever consider “bad” or dangerous behavior to be impossible for their pet. Respect you own a breed that has the potential to be deadly if anything goes wrong. That really actually should probably go for most larger dogs too.
But ffs can we stop acting like the 10s of pit bull dogs attacks a year in a country filled with hundreds of them mean the breed itself is bad and violent? Dogs snap. When this breed does it makes the news.
Hate to tell you this, but ‘locking jaw’ in any breed is a myth. There’s no such thing; ‘lockjaw’ is a bacterial infection, but has no relationship to breed (and in any case, won’t result in the jaw locking only after a bite).
Source: https://thesmartcanine.com/pitbull-lockjaw/
It’s a metaphorical lock jaw. For instance, most dogs will let go when being attacked in the face and eyes. Pits will not. This ability to continue a hold, even in the face of danger is what people mean by jaw locking. So yes, it absolutely exists.
Oh! That’s fascinating thank you!! I’ll read the link when I have the time but I always appreciate learning something new, it is especially fun when it’s about common myths.
deleted by creator
The problem is not the dogs size. A Golden Retriever is about the same size as an American Bulldog (bitches usually a bit taller). The problem is which type of people a breed tends to attract. Retrievers are considered a nice cuddly family dog, bulldogs are seen as aggressive protection dogs.
However a retriever can be a dangerous dog and very able to kill humans if trained the wrong way. Protection dogs need to be trained to the highest degree, never go for the throat and immediately release on command.
It would also put an undue burden on people who need larger dogs for medical reasons…
It would be pretty easy to make an exception for those cases
Yep, exactly. We already have exceptions for these dogs now in many cases.
Genuine question, not trying to be said, but what medical reasons necessitate a large dog?
A lot of guide dogs are larger, so they line up with the persons hand. Poodles, yellow/golden labs etc
In the US most home insurance policies charge more or require and additional rider for some breeds of dog because of the increased liability. If you have a “dangerous breed” and don’t notify your insurance company, you might not have the liability insurance you thought you did.
I had only pits when we got our insurance and they were not an issue.
Not saying it doesn’t happen. When we rented we had to find places that would allow the breed.
Edit: breed was never an issue with renters insurance either.
I have a lab. She’s 30kg and the textbook “good girl” - a decent depiction of the breed standard.
I got her because her terperment was semi predicted in line with her breed, but I still have public liability insurance and don’t let her approach kids because she’s still a dog.