Puppy savaged to death near play area in Bourne Valley (From Thisisdorset)

Dog owners are always convinced that their pets are saintly, or that it is only certain breeds which are dangerous. I have utterly trusted dogs which are lovely and loving, but have seen those same dogs go for a stranger, often at the door. My schoolfriend was scarred for life by her German Shepherd who just attacked her without warning, and my own daughter was bitten and bleeding on her face when her little rescue dog just leapt snarling at her on the sofa without warning. Those who trust dogs with children are asking for trouble. Dogs should at least be supervised at all times. And no, I don't hate dogs, in fact I would consider having one.

I think that all of these sort of dogs are potentially dangerous, ugly and have no place in a modern society.
Why people feel the need to own such monsters is beyond belief.

Whilst I agree all dogs should be on leads when out, this scenario sounds like a typical one in which a small dog rushes up to other dogs to play and the bigger dog attacks as if the small one is a predator. Sadly it is nature to do that and while I am not condoning the act itself, yappy little dogs rushing at your legs would be enough to make any of us react .....

Having said that, in this case the large dog was being walked by someone who possibly does not know the dog well enough and may have been taken up with her child to notice warning signs?

With regard to muzzles on dogs in public, then if large dogs should have them, so then should small ones - and I say this after one of my dogs got bitten on the lower leg by a jack russell last summer. My dog (lab cross) was on his lead having a wee against a tree when it happened, so was hardly able to defend himself and the owner just walked off, leaving me a with a £100 excess to pay on my pet insurance!

After witnessing several dog on dog attacks over the last couple of years and usually in public parks, I always keep my dogs on their lead and under control - what a pity other people don't do the same :(

At least the Mastiff owner did the responsible thing.

RIP Benji.

I keep saying this I know, but dog owners need to be trained in dog behaviour and licensed after taken a written exam before owning a dog. Dogs on the Dangerous Dog list should only be owned by people with a special qualification to ensure they know how to handle them.

Dogs should be on leads in public places and we should take a leaf out of the US practice of having "Bark Parks", areas fenced off for dogs to be exercised off the lead. Selsey has had one for years.

Dogs are pack animals and by nature will protect the top dog (the owner). The owner needs to curb this and can only be done by proper training methods.

I have two dogs that follow behind me when they are off the lead and wait for my commands. This shows that they recognise me as the pack leader. Its not rocket science but does need commitment and it also makes for happy dogs as they are not confused about their place in hierarchy.

Sad, but sensibly handled by all parties.

Very sad for the owners but I fear that the vet making such off the cuff and remarkable ridiculous statements will only fuel the anti dog movement.
I think what is needed is a level headed approach. How many dogs are walked everyday in the UK and how many attacks happen? I doubt if the statistics are available but I would guess the number would be minimal. We must remember dogs are animals and so things do happen, and its all very sad but the instances are very small.
If a teenage attacks someone in Bournemouth do we all start shouting that all teenagers are banned from Bournemouth or their hands are tied behind their backs so they can't fight? No we don't. One bad teenager does not mean that all teenagers are the same. The same applies to animals.
A think a version of the dog license should be brought back and that if you wish to own a breed of dog that is classified as possibly hard to control and maybe aggressive then you have to show to a police handler and a councillor that you are a 'proper person' and that you can handle the dog and have control.
You have to over 21 to own a dog and that if you have convictions for drugs, fighting, asbo etc you are banned from owning dogs.
Controversial yes, but not a knee jerk reaction which is not needed from a vet trying to get 15 minutes of fame.

I used to be afraid of dogs, based on my numerous experiences of aggressive behaviour by them, in public places. All too often, the owners come out with the pathetic, "He / she won't hurt you" line, instead of admonishing the dog and apologising. However, having watched many episodes of The Dog Whisperer, I now understand dog behaviour much better, and how much of it is down to the lack of leadership shown by the owners. But that said, there are some breeds that are just time-bombs waiting to go off. If a Yorkshire terrier decides to nip you, it isn't a problem. If a Staffie, German shepherd, Rottie, etc, decides to do it, you have a dangerous situation on your hands.

I saw someone walking 5 dogs along Herbert Avenue yesterday, 3 off the lead and all bull terriers. They might be lovely dogs but that is totally irresponsible.

Reader Echo wrote:
I think that all of these sort of dogs are potentially dangerous, ugly and have no place in a modern society.
Why people feel the need to own such monsters is beyond belief.

Totally agree. When there are so many breeds to choose from why would you want to own these dangerous dogs. I agree all dogs can 'turn', BUT you stand a much better chance of fighting off most dogs then these Staffs and Bull Terrier types. There has to be a deterant such as long prison sentences for the owners, if their dog does the crime- they pay the time. I wouldn't like to see dogs not being able to run free, but think certain dogs should have to wear a muzzle when out. Surely that's going to help. We'd all feel alot safer and it doesn't cost alot or hurt the dog.

Member of the anti-dog society here.
Why the hell dont these irresponsible dog owners wake up?
Those things inside their dogs mouths are called teeth!
You cant walk anywhere on any open space around Bournemouth without "Fido" being in your space.
"Fido" may be some squirt that needs to be stepped on or some gargantuan monster that should have been destroyed at birth!
What gives these "Fido" owners the right to invade the space of REAL people?
If I own a car I have to make sure that it does not invade any-one elses space.
If I have kids, I am responsible for them.
What is it about dog owners?
Divine intervention?
Selfishness?
"Up yours Jack"?
Or all of the above?
Wake up dog owners, we are not all sucked in by a wagging tail!

goatty wrote:
Very sad for the owners but I fear that the vet making such off the cuff and remarkable ridiculous statements will only fuel the anti dog movement.
I think what is needed is a level headed approach. How many dogs are walked everyday in the UK and how many attacks happen? I doubt if the statistics are available but I would guess the number would be minimal. We must remember dogs are animals and so things do happen, and its all very sad but the instances are very small.
If a teenage attacks someone in Bournemouth do we all start shouting that all teenagers are banned from Bournemouth or their hands are tied behind their backs so they can't fight? No we don't. One bad teenager does not mean that all teenagers are the same. The same applies to animals.
A think a version of the dog license should be brought back and that if you wish to own a breed of dog that is classified as possibly hard to control and maybe aggressive then you have to show to a police handler and a councillor that you are a 'proper person' and that you can handle the dog and have control.
You have to over 21 to own a dog and that if you have convictions for drugs, fighting, asbo etc you are banned from owning dogs.
Controversial yes, but not a knee jerk reaction which is not needed from a vet trying to get 15 minutes of fame.

The vet know more than your 'guess' about how many attacks happen!

Ollieblog wrote:
I saw someone walking 5 dogs along Herbert Avenue yesterday, 3 off the lead and all bull terriers. They might be lovely dogs but that is totally irresponsible.

One of those dogs now wears a muzzle after attacking a larger dog. Was dealt with between the owners without contacting the dog warden which is always a bad idea. Dog warden now has no idea that this dog has 'previous'.

elite50 wrote:
Member of the anti-dog society here.
Why the hell dont these irresponsible dog owners wake up?
Those things inside their dogs mouths are called teeth!
You cant walk anywhere on any open space around Bournemouth without "Fido" being in your space.
"Fido" may be some squirt that needs to be stepped on or some gargantuan monster that should have been destroyed at birth!
What gives these "Fido" owners the right to invade the space of REAL people?
If I own a car I have to make sure that it does not invade any-one elses space.
If I have kids, I am responsible for them.
What is it about dog owners?
Divine intervention?
Selfishness?
"Up yours Jack"?
Or all of the above?
Wake up dog owners, we are not all sucked in by a wagging tail!

@elite50 - I myself am a "responsible" dog owner that you seem to have inadvertently tarred with the same brush as the "irresponsible" ones, you start off making the all important distinction between the two, but it gets lost later in your comment.

You mention the invasions into your personal space, I myself also suffer with personal space invasions on a daily basis, mine come from the charity collectors that chase you through the town centre, the double glazing sales men who call at the door, the cold calls on the phone etc. but I would never dream of adopting your stance and suggesting that the shorter ones need "to be stepped on" or the bigger ones "destroyed at birth!". At the end of the day we are ALL part of a wider society, the dog owners have the same rights to walk (in the designated areas) that you do. There are a number of "dog free zones" in Bournemouth, you could try walking there instead.

Reader Echo wrote:
I think that all of these sort of dogs are potentially dangerous, ugly and have no place in a modern society.
Why people feel the need to own such monsters is beyond belief.

Totally disagree with that generalisation i have been walking dogs on and off lead for 10+ years both my dogs have never been shown aggression by staff/mastiff type dogs in fact they are quite abundant in my area and they play well together again as with all things in life the minority that misbehave get the publicity

The simple answer is to enforce the section of the dangerous dogs act of 1991 which covers banned breeds including pit bull type dogs, American bull dogs and Irish Staffies and anything that resembles a pit bull. The police don't bother enforcing the act any more. Added to that list should be all large bull breed type dogs or large dogs that were originally bred to fight/kill/be aggressive. Why anyone would want to own something big enough to kill them is beyond me. I'm not saying that existing dogs should be destroyed or anything but if breeding from them was stopped now then in a few years time they wouldn't be available for morons to buy.

Here we go again, the anti-dog brigade out in force. Terrible as these attacks are the Echo does seem to have an anti-dog agenda. Labelling all dogs as vicious and every owner as irresponsible doesn't resolve the problem.
.
When theres an attack by drunken yobs in the town centre on a Friday night perhaps we should ban all young people from pubs and bars and label their parents as irresponsible.
.
elite50, given the choice of having my space invaded by dogs or a bitter and twisted individual like you the dogs would win every time.

Im an owner of a English Bull X Staffie Terrier.He stays on the lead at ALL TIMES.This way I cant get blamed for having an unruly/dangerous dog.Its interesting to note though that more people get bitten by Black Labs & Border Collies than any other breeds.
All dogs should be chipped but this wont stop dogs biting or attacking.It would however put some people off who buy dogs on a whim.Im also for compulsary jabs every year.This too would put off certain irresponsible people.All dogs on a lead in public unless in designated 'Dog Area' is good idea.

In Malta the morons run all over the Island with guns shooting at anything that flies. This is seen as a Statement of Manhood. It appears that the Statement of Manhood here is to own a mastiff or beast of some description. Could it be there is a basic underlying psychological problem in all this manhood nonsense?

I am at a loss as to understand why some people put humans and animals in the same bracket as if the animal has an equal right. They do not.
Seems to me that Benjis owner let him run about off the lead? The bigger dog was therefore protecting its walker and self from what it perceived as an attack?
I have owned dogs and am a dog lover, but never lose sight that they are animals and that when out ANYWHERE, and especially where there are other people around, public they are ALWAYS on a lead and under control.
about time that people were put first and animals second and comparing dogs to drunken teenagers is a poor reason to excuse irresponsible dog owners letting their dogs do as they please and blaming people for complaining as if the dog has a right. It does not.
designated dog areas for off lead exercise is a great idea but until then ALL dogs little and large should be on a lead end of.

Dazzan wrote:

elite50 wrote: Member of the anti-dog society here. Why the hell dont these irresponsible dog owners wake up? Those things inside their dogs mouths are called teeth! You cant walk anywhere on any open space around Bournemouth without "Fido" being in your space. "Fido" may be some squirt that needs to be stepped on or some gargantuan monster that should have been destroyed at birth! What gives these "Fido" owners the right to invade the space of REAL people? If I own a car I have to make sure that it does not invade any-one elses space. If I have kids, I am responsible for them. What is it about dog owners? Divine intervention? Selfishness? "Up yours Jack"? Or all of the above? Wake up dog owners, we are not all sucked in by a wagging tail!

@elite50 - I myself am a "responsible" dog owner that you seem to have inadvertently tarred with the same brush as the "irresponsible" ones, you start off making the all important distinction between the two, but it gets lost later in your comment. You mention the invasions into your personal space, I myself also suffer with personal space invasions on a daily basis, mine come from the charity collectors that chase you through the town centre, the double glazing sales men who call at the door, the cold calls on the phone etc. but I would never dream of adopting your stance and suggesting that the shorter ones need "to be stepped on" or the bigger ones "destroyed at birth!". At the end of the day we are ALL part of a wider society, the dog owners have the same rights to walk (in the designated areas) that you do. There are a number of "dog free zones" in Bournemouth, you could try walking there instead.

Do you realise what you have just said?
Do you realise just how FEW dog free zones there are?
O.K. I will drive my car on any footpath that strikes my fancy as long as it doesn't say "car free zone".
You see, the "dog people" seem to have a different grasp on reality than every-one else!

elite50 wrote:

Dazzan wrote:

elite50 wrote: Member of the anti-dog society here. Why the hell dont these irresponsible dog owners wake up? Those things inside their dogs mouths are called teeth! You cant walk anywhere on any open space around Bournemouth without "Fido" being in your space. "Fido" may be some squirt that needs to be stepped on or some gargantuan monster that should have been destroyed at birth! What gives these "Fido" owners the right to invade the space of REAL people? If I own a car I have to make sure that it does not invade any-one elses space. If I have kids, I am responsible for them. What is it about dog owners? Divine intervention? Selfishness? "Up yours Jack"? Or all of the above? Wake up dog owners, we are not all sucked in by a wagging tail!

@elite50 - I myself am a "responsible" dog owner that you seem to have inadvertently tarred with the same brush as the "irresponsible" ones, you start off making the all important distinction between the two, but it gets lost later in your comment. You mention the invasions into your personal space, I myself also suffer with personal space invasions on a daily basis, mine come from the charity collectors that chase you through the town centre, the double glazing sales men who call at the door, the cold calls on the phone etc. but I would never dream of adopting your stance and suggesting that the shorter ones need "to be stepped on" or the bigger ones "destroyed at birth!". At the end of the day we are ALL part of a wider society, the dog owners have the same rights to walk (in the designated areas) that you do. There are a number of "dog free zones" in Bournemouth, you could try walking there instead.

Do you realise what you have just said?
Do you realise just how FEW dog free zones there are?
O.K. I will drive my car on any footpath that strikes my fancy as long as it doesn't say "car free zone".
You see, the "dog people" seem to have a different grasp on reality than every-one else!

@Elite50, I assure you that there are considerably more dog free zones in bournmouth, than there are dogs only ones !!! I will deal with the rest of your comments in a moment.

elite50 wrote:

Dazzan wrote:

elite50 wrote: Member of the anti-dog society here. Why the hell dont these irresponsible dog owners wake up? Those things inside their dogs mouths are called teeth! You cant walk anywhere on any open space around Bournemouth without "Fido" being in your space. "Fido" may be some squirt that needs to be stepped on or some gargantuan monster that should have been destroyed at birth! What gives these "Fido" owners the right to invade the space of REAL people? If I own a car I have to make sure that it does not invade any-one elses space. If I have kids, I am responsible for them. What is it about dog owners? Divine intervention? Selfishness? "Up yours Jack"? Or all of the above? Wake up dog owners, we are not all sucked in by a wagging tail!

@elite50 - I myself am a "responsible" dog owner that you seem to have inadvertently tarred with the same brush as the "irresponsible" ones, you start off making the all important distinction between the two, but it gets lost later in your comment. You mention the invasions into your personal space, I myself also suffer with personal space invasions on a daily basis, mine come from the charity collectors that chase you through the town centre, the double glazing sales men who call at the door, the cold calls on the phone etc. but I would never dream of adopting your stance and suggesting that the shorter ones need "to be stepped on" or the bigger ones "destroyed at birth!". At the end of the day we are ALL part of a wider society, the dog owners have the same rights to walk (in the designated areas) that you do. There are a number of "dog free zones" in Bournemouth, you could try walking there instead.

Do you realise what you have just said?
Do you realise just how FEW dog free zones there are?
O.K. I will drive my car on any footpath that strikes my fancy as long as it doesn't say "car free zone".
You see, the "dog people" seem to have a different grasp on reality than every-one else!

@Elite50, looking at the number of comments we have received on each of our postings... more people appear to have reacted negatively to your comments than mine... perhaps it is you that has a slightly misguided grasp on reality.

I love your pavement driving comments, most amusing... but hang on a minute did you not say in your original post that "If I own a car I have to make sure that it does not invade any-one elses space". I really think you ought to make up your mind!! I also think the pedestrians may have something to say about that argument.

Good luck with the pavement driving I am sure that will work out well for you in the end, that'll teach those irresponsible pedestrians a lesson.

Look at the picture and tell me that cat did not arrange this entire turn of events.

elite50 wrote:
Member of the anti-dog society here.
Why the hell dont these irresponsible dog owners wake up?
Those things inside their dogs mouths are called teeth!
You cant walk anywhere on any open space around Bournemouth without "Fido" being in your space.
"Fido" may be some squirt that needs to be stepped on or some gargantuan monster that should have been destroyed at birth!
What gives these "Fido" owners the right to invade the space of REAL people?
If I own a car I have to make sure that it does not invade any-one elses space.
If I have kids, I am responsible for them.
What is it about dog owners?
Divine intervention?
Selfishness?
"Up yours Jack"?
Or all of the above?
Wake up dog owners, we are not all sucked in by a wagging tail!

I have to agree with pretty much of what you say. There is far too much emphasis on dogs in todays society often at the expense of humans. At my local park myself and friends enjoy a kickaround and rarely get to do it without being harrased by dogs whose owners dont give a stuff. Its not until i tell the owner if they dont remove their dog immediately i will kick it, that they will actually do something

Dazzan wrote:

elite50 wrote:

Dazzan wrote:

elite50 wrote: Member of the anti-dog society here. Why the hell dont these irresponsible dog owners wake up? Those things inside their dogs mouths are called teeth! You cant walk anywhere on any open space around Bournemouth without "Fido" being in your space. "Fido" may be some squirt that needs to be stepped on or some gargantuan monster that should have been destroyed at birth! What gives these "Fido" owners the right to invade the space of REAL people? If I own a car I have to make sure that it does not invade any-one elses space. If I have kids, I am responsible for them. What is it about dog owners? Divine intervention? Selfishness? "Up yours Jack"? Or all of the above? Wake up dog owners, we are not all sucked in by a wagging tail!

@elite50 - I myself am a "responsible" dog owner that you seem to have inadvertently tarred with the same brush as the "irresponsible" ones, you start off making the all important distinction between the two, but it gets lost later in your comment. You mention the invasions into your personal space, I myself also suffer with personal space invasions on a daily basis, mine come from the charity collectors that chase you through the town centre, the double glazing sales men who call at the door, the cold calls on the phone etc. but I would never dream of adopting your stance and suggesting that the shorter ones need "to be stepped on" or the bigger ones "destroyed at birth!". At the end of the day we are ALL part of a wider society, the dog owners have the same rights to walk (in the designated areas) that you do. There are a number of "dog free zones" in Bournemouth, you could try walking there instead.

Do you realise what you have just said? Do you realise just how FEW dog free zones there are? O.K. I will drive my car on any footpath that strikes my fancy as long as it doesn't say "car free zone". You see, the "dog people" seem to have a different grasp on reality than every-one else!

@Elite50, looking at the number of comments we have received on each of our postings... more people appear to have reacted negatively to your comments than mine... perhaps it is you that has a slightly misguided grasp on reality. I love your pavement driving comments, most amusing... but hang on a minute did you not say in your original post that "If I own a car I have to make sure that it does not invade any-one elses space". I really think you ought to make up your mind!! I also think the pedestrians may have something to say about that argument. Good luck with the pavement driving I am sure that will work out well for you in the end, that'll teach those irresponsible pedestrians a lesson.

The pedestrians have a right to their space.
The fleabags have NO rights.
Their owners have a, (wait for it), RESPONSIBILITY to keep their MUTTS in control at all times.
This does not happen.
If any dog annoys anyone, it should be the right of that person to eliminate it.
I mean, if a fly annoys you, you swat it. What is the difference?
I know that this is beyond comprehension to the dog lovers(???).
Reality is often a bitter pill to swallow.

s-pb2 wrote:

elite50 wrote: Member of the anti-dog society here. Why the hell dont these irresponsible dog owners wake up? Those things inside their dogs mouths are called teeth! You cant walk anywhere on any open space around Bournemouth without "Fido" being in your space. "Fido" may be some squirt that needs to be stepped on or some gargantuan monster that should have been destroyed at birth! What gives these "Fido" owners the right to invade the space of REAL people? If I own a car I have to make sure that it does not invade any-one elses space. If I have kids, I am responsible for them. What is it about dog owners? Divine intervention? Selfishness? "Up yours Jack"? Or all of the above? Wake up dog owners, we are not all sucked in by a wagging tail!

I have to agree with pretty much of what you say. There is far too much emphasis on dogs in todays society often at the expense of humans. At my local park myself and friends enjoy a kickaround and rarely get to do it without being harrased by dogs whose owners dont give a stuff. Its not until i tell the owner if they dont remove their dog immediately i will kick it, that they will actually do something

My point exactly. Well said!

elite50 wrote:

Dazzan wrote:

elite50 wrote:

Dazzan wrote:

elite50 wrote: Member of the anti-dog society here. Why the hell dont these irresponsible dog owners wake up? Those things inside their dogs mouths are called teeth! You cant walk anywhere on any open space around Bournemouth without "Fido" being in your space. "Fido" may be some squirt that needs to be stepped on or some gargantuan monster that should have been destroyed at birth! What gives these "Fido" owners the right to invade the space of REAL people? If I own a car I have to make sure that it does not invade any-one elses space. If I have kids, I am responsible for them. What is it about dog owners? Divine intervention? Selfishness? "Up yours Jack"? Or all of the above? Wake up dog owners, we are not all sucked in by a wagging tail!

@elite50 - I myself am a "responsible" dog owner that you seem to have inadvertently tarred with the same brush as the "irresponsible" ones, you start off making the all important distinction between the two, but it gets lost later in your comment. You mention the invasions into your personal space, I myself also suffer with personal space invasions on a daily basis, mine come from the charity collectors that chase you through the town centre, the double glazing sales men who call at the door, the cold calls on the phone etc. but I would never dream of adopting your stance and suggesting that the shorter ones need "to be stepped on" or the bigger ones "destroyed at birth!". At the end of the day we are ALL part of a wider society, the dog owners have the same rights to walk (in the designated areas) that you do. There are a number of "dog free zones" in Bournemouth, you could try walking there instead.

Do you realise what you have just said? Do you realise just how FEW dog free zones there are? O.K. I will drive my car on any footpath that strikes my fancy as long as it doesn't say "car free zone". You see, the "dog people" seem to have a different grasp on reality than every-one else!

@Elite50, looking at the number of comments we have received on each of our postings... more people appear to have reacted negatively to your comments than mine... perhaps it is you that has a slightly misguided grasp on reality. I love your pavement driving comments, most amusing... but hang on a minute did you not say in your original post that "If I own a car I have to make sure that it does not invade any-one elses space". I really think you ought to make up your mind!! I also think the pedestrians may have something to say about that argument. Good luck with the pavement driving I am sure that will work out well for you in the end, that'll teach those irresponsible pedestrians a lesson.

The pedestrians have a right to their space.
The fleabags have NO rights.
Their owners have a, (wait for it), RESPONSIBILITY to keep their MUTTS in control at all times.
This does not happen.
If any dog annoys anyone, it should be the right of that person to eliminate it.
I mean, if a fly annoys you, you swat it. What is the difference?
I know that this is beyond comprehension to the dog lovers(???).
Reality is often a bitter pill to swallow.

I have a right to walk my dog (on a lead) where I want as long as I do it responsibly. Same goes for walking with my child and driving my car. I have the right to go places without breathing in cigarette smoke, having to cope with drunken idiots, aggressive teens or being hassled by street charity workers BUT these things do still happen. As for the dog lead laws, it's the same as anything else, if a dog is not seen to be off the lead in a public place by a suitable member of authority it will not be enforced. Unfortunately there are people out there who don't bother training their dog, or dogs who instinctively follow their age old instincts and fight something smaller than themselves.
Very sad and awful thing to happen, though it does seem to have bp been dealt with well.

elite50 wrote:

Dazzan wrote:

elite50 wrote:

Dazzan wrote:

elite50 wrote: Member of the anti-dog society here. Why the hell dont these irresponsible dog owners wake up? Those things inside their dogs mouths are called teeth! You cant walk anywhere on any open space around Bournemouth without "Fido" being in your space. "Fido" may be some squirt that needs to be stepped on or some gargantuan monster that should have been destroyed at birth! What gives these "Fido" owners the right to invade the space of REAL people? If I own a car I have to make sure that it does not invade any-one elses space. If I have kids, I am responsible for them. What is it about dog owners? Divine intervention? Selfishness? "Up yours Jack"? Or all of the above? Wake up dog owners, we are not all sucked in by a wagging tail!

@elite50 - I myself am a "responsible" dog owner that you seem to have inadvertently tarred with the same brush as the "irresponsible" ones, you start off making the all important distinction between the two, but it gets lost later in your comment. You mention the invasions into your personal space, I myself also suffer with personal space invasions on a daily basis, mine come from the charity collectors that chase you through the town centre, the double glazing sales men who call at the door, the cold calls on the phone etc. but I would never dream of adopting your stance and suggesting that the shorter ones need "to be stepped on" or the bigger ones "destroyed at birth!". At the end of the day we are ALL part of a wider society, the dog owners have the same rights to walk (in the designated areas) that you do. There are a number of "dog free zones" in Bournemouth, you could try walking there instead.

Do you realise what you have just said? Do you realise just how FEW dog free zones there are? O.K. I will drive my car on any footpath that strikes my fancy as long as it doesn't say "car free zone". You see, the "dog people" seem to have a different grasp on reality than every-one else!

@Elite50, looking at the number of comments we have received on each of our postings... more people appear to have reacted negatively to your comments than mine... perhaps it is you that has a slightly misguided grasp on reality. I love your pavement driving comments, most amusing... but hang on a minute did you not say in your original post that "If I own a car I have to make sure that it does not invade any-one elses space". I really think you ought to make up your mind!! I also think the pedestrians may have something to say about that argument. Good luck with the pavement driving I am sure that will work out well for you in the end, that'll teach those irresponsible pedestrians a lesson.

The pedestrians have a right to their space.
The fleabags have NO rights.
Their owners have a, (wait for it), RESPONSIBILITY to keep their MUTTS in control at all times.
This does not happen.
If any dog annoys anyone, it should be the right of that person to eliminate it.
I mean, if a fly annoys you, you swat it. What is the difference?
I know that this is beyond comprehension to the dog lovers(???).
Reality is often a bitter pill to swallow.

@Elite50... you are going to need to back up your (pavement based) car a moment and perhaps take time to try and develop a coherent argument...

(Also I completely concur with your comments about the pedestrians having the RIGHT to be there and am now at a loss as to why you were trying to run them over with your pavement driving in the first place).

But anyway, you now seem to be suggesting that if anything, interrupts your personal space you should have the right to kill it/ lash out at... referring you back to the comments in my original post... I feel sorry for any double glazing salesman that visits my house from now on!!! When plod comes to feel my collar, I will refer him to this exchange, saying you said it was ok.

Now, in the above response to my post, you once again seem to be suggesting that I am an "irresponsible" dog owner (after all you posted that mini, Death to all Dogs tirade), in response to my comment... I assume you can back up this assumption about my dog walking habits with a few facts.

I own 2 rottwiellers and have to say out of all the dogs I have owned (different breeds) these have been the easiest to train, I take them out always on leads as I know people are afraid of these dogs so wouldnt let them go near anyone for that reason, when I take my dogs out others have there little dogs running free and going up to people and other dogs barking surely everyone knows that a dog on a lead is threatened by the dog thats not and that is why they would attack, some people cant control there kids but we would never say they shouldnt have them

Here we go again. A dog owner is no different to a parent. Everyone has different ideas of what is responsible, but how many understand and abide by the law?

Understanding, and abiding by the law would help, so would enforcement of it.

The dangerous dog act is woolly it seems for some dog owners. What constitutes a dog being dangerously out of control in a public place? Going up and bothering someone or wildlife. That's even a sniff or a lick, or jumping up or running up too.

It is simple. ALL dogs, big AND small, must be under proper control. That is, they come when called and they don't bother anyone or anything by jumping up, licking, sniffing or barking.

I see others have tried to suggest about a dogs instincts on and off lead. Poppycock. A well trained dog is just that. They aren't interested in anyone else, and look for cues from their owners. A dog with a strong leader, doesn't try to protect them!

Dog owners, whether they call themselves responsible or not, can't argue with the law. If your dog won't come when called, if it bothers anyone else, then you are irresponsible, and the dog should be on a lead. If you have trained your dog so that you are abiding by the LAW, then you are a responsible owner.

I am not anti-dog, but I have experienced more than enough aggressive / confrontational behaviour from a variety of breeds when walking across Kings Park, that I just don't cross it any more - I take a longer route. I think it's a pretty ridiculous state of affairs when I can't even walk where I want to. FYI, all the owners were middle-aged. So, what's to be done, dog owners?

Ihave been a dog owner and a cat owner. My dogs although very well behaved and very soft dogs ,I would never let them off the lead in a public place why? Because no matter about your own dog you cannot garentee others. Neither can you garentee the behaviour of children or other adults for that matter. Just because you loves dogs others might not so it is not fair to enforce your likes on others.Mind that goes for so called dog haters the've no right to impose thier likes on others. Much the same goes for so called cat lovers who let thier cats become ferral by leaving them to do thier own thing for much of the day/night. The excuse a cat likes freedom is no excuse neither is you can't stop a cat wandering. Have been a cat owner for a large part of my life. It might be interesting for readers to know that much of diseases are spread by cats including the risk of blindness to children. Because they mess in soft ground including childrens sandpits exactly where children play. So even cats are dangerouse to children.Responcible ownership is needed that includes responcible housing and 24/7 care. Animals as pets do not fend for themselves they are domesticated not wild, treat them as pets as such or don't own them. Dogs/ cats same differance.

I think it's really very sad that so many people are so prepared to blame the breed of dog, rather than the owners.

The actual facts are that there are certain breeds that are more prone to aggressiveness than others, but Staffy's are not on that list. If people really examined these situations, rather than only responding with their emotions then they might realise that the problem is the owners, not the dogs. Of all these dogs out there, how many of them have been through proper training? And I'm talking in particular about the ones who have attacked other animals and/or people. Dogs NEED proper training and without it, ANY dog can display these tendencies. More so if they're raised by people with aggressive tendencies.

When will people learn that a dog is more than just a pet? If you want to get a dog - any sort of dog - either be prepared for the hard work of training it and understanding its nature, or don't get a dog. If this is too complex for you to believe or accept, get a goldfish.

:( So sad, but I agree it was handled responsibly but I feel for both owners they have both lost a pet. I also fully agree you should have to have some type of licence to keep a dog, I know too many morons who own large dogs and don't train them properly and have had to pull a staffy off my toddler who was 'playing'.

carrie54 wrote:
Ihave been a dog owner and a cat owner. My dogs although very well behaved and very soft dogs ,I would never let them off the lead in a public place why? Because no matter about your own dog you cannot garentee others. Neither can you garentee the behaviour of children or other adults for that matter. Just because you loves dogs others might not so it is not fair to enforce your likes on others.Mind that goes for so called dog haters the've no right to impose thier likes on others. Much the same goes for so called cat lovers who let thier cats become ferral by leaving them to do thier own thing for much of the day/night. The excuse a cat likes freedom is no excuse neither is you can't stop a cat wandering. Have been a cat owner for a large part of my life. It might be interesting for readers to know that much of diseases are spread by cats including the risk of blindness to children. Because they mess in soft ground including childrens sandpits exactly where children play. So even cats are dangerouse to children.Responcible ownership is needed that includes responcible housing and 24/7 care. Animals as pets do not fend for themselves they are domesticated not wild, treat them as pets as such or don't own them. Dogs/ cats same differance.

Quite agree, I cannot stand cat's for that reason, nothing worse than having to clear up someone else's animals cr@p in your garden! I do think although you make very good points about the dog walking it's a shame it has to come to that, we had a German Shepherd who we let off the lead and threw balls for etc but you told him to come back and he was back, never so much as curled a lip in his 13 years and was scared of little yappy dogs bless him!

stevobath wrote:
Im an owner of a English Bull X Staffie Terrier.He stays on the lead at ALL TIMES.This way I cant get blamed for having an unruly/dangerous dog.Its interesting to note though that more people get bitten by Black Labs & Border Collies than any other breeds.
All dogs should be chipped but this wont stop dogs biting or attacking.It would however put some people off who buy dogs on a whim.Im also for compulsary jabs every year.This too would put off certain irresponsible people.All dogs on a lead in public unless in designated 'Dog Area' is good idea.

Staffies cause terrible harm when they bite, a lab just snaps. I know what I would prefer be bitten by.Then you would have to deal with the owner, and same again.

poolebabe wrote:
Here we go again. A dog owner is no different to a parent. Everyone has different ideas of what is responsible, but how many understand and abide by the law?

Understanding, and abiding by the law would help, so would enforcement of it.

The dangerous dog act is woolly it seems for some dog owners. What constitutes a dog being dangerously out of control in a public place? Going up and bothering someone or wildlife. That's even a sniff or a lick, or jumping up or running up too.

It is simple. ALL dogs, big AND small, must be under proper control. That is, they come when called and they don't bother anyone or anything by jumping up, licking, sniffing or barking.

I see others have tried to suggest about a dogs instincts on and off lead. Poppycock. A well trained dog is just that. They aren't interested in anyone else, and look for cues from their owners. A dog with a strong leader, doesn't try to protect them!

Dog owners, whether they call themselves responsible or not, can't argue with the law. If your dog won't come when called, if it bothers anyone else, then you are irresponsible, and the dog should be on a lead. If you have trained your dog so that you are abiding by the LAW, then you are a responsible owner.

Does that mean if youre child annoys someone, doesnt come back when called & misbehaves,all things that kids/do/dont do, youre an irresponsible parent?
I suggest ALL dogs should be on a lead in public areas.All chipped & registered too.Im a dog owner & keep my dog on a lead at all times.I suggest the same for out of control brats, that I have to suffer while out walking my dog & minding my own business.
Just like there are irresponsible dog owners,there are irresponsible 'child owners'.My point being that there will always be those who are useless & dont care about other people, & are totally irresponsible be it with dogs,kids, guns or whatever.

stevobath wrote:

poolebabe wrote: Here we go again. A dog owner is no different to a parent. Everyone has different ideas of what is responsible, but how many understand and abide by the law? Understanding, and abiding by the law would help, so would enforcement of it. The dangerous dog act is woolly it seems for some dog owners. What constitutes a dog being dangerously out of control in a public place? Going up and bothering someone or wildlife. That's even a sniff or a lick, or jumping up or running up too. It is simple. ALL dogs, big AND small, must be under proper control. That is, they come when called and they don't bother anyone or anything by jumping up, licking, sniffing or barking. I see others have tried to suggest about a dogs instincts on and off lead. Poppycock. A well trained dog is just that. They aren't interested in anyone else, and look for cues from their owners. A dog with a strong leader, doesn't try to protect them! Dog owners, whether they call themselves responsible or not, can't argue with the law. If your dog won't come when called, if it bothers anyone else, then you are irresponsible, and the dog should be on a lead. If you have trained your dog so that you are abiding by the LAW, then you are a responsible owner.

Does that mean if youre child annoys someone, doesnt come back when called & misbehaves,all things that kids/do/dont do, youre an irresponsible parent? I suggest ALL dogs should be on a lead in public areas.All chipped & registered too.Im a dog owner & keep my dog on a lead at all times.I suggest the same for out of control brats, that I have to suffer while out walking my dog & minding my own business. Just like there are irresponsible dog owners,there are irresponsible 'child owners'.My point being that there will always be those who are useless & dont care about other people, & are totally irresponsible be it with dogs,kids, guns or whatever.

Here is another one!
You equate dogs with people!
I hate to tell you this but kids are PEOPLE. Dogs are ANIMALS.
If a kid mis-behaves they deserve a clip over the ear.
If an animal mis-behaves it should be put down.
I would hate to live in your world.
Kids in kennels, dogs on silk cushions.
I guess your "family" is of the four legged kind.

Im not equating kids with dogs.YOU are putting words into my mouth so to speak.It was a tongue in cheek comment.You must be a miserable person & probably does think of themselves as 'Elite' & better than most.Im all for keeping all dogs on leads, both 'good' & 'Bad'.That way it would avoid a lot of these incidents.I find it crazy that people walk their dogs in busy places off the lead without a thought for others.I own a dog of the Bull Terrier type.Hes ALWAYS been kept on a lead in public.At least it doesnt give dog haters & paranoics ammunition.You must be a ball of fun & I suggest you read my comment again.
Just out of interest.If someone kills someone else, are you for 'putting them down' too?

elite50 says... I hate to tell you this but kids are PEOPLE. Dogs are ANIMALS.
elite50, I'm afraid you didn't pay enough attention at biology classes when you were at school therefore I feel duty bound to inform you that we are all animals.

elite50 wrote:

stevobath wrote:

poolebabe wrote: Here we go again. A dog owner is no different to a parent. Everyone has different ideas of what is responsible, but how many understand and abide by the law? Understanding, and abiding by the law would help, so would enforcement of it. The dangerous dog act is woolly it seems for some dog owners. What constitutes a dog being dangerously out of control in a public place? Going up and bothering someone or wildlife. That's even a sniff or a lick, or jumping up or running up too. It is simple. ALL dogs, big AND small, must be under proper control. That is, they come when called and they don't bother anyone or anything by jumping up, licking, sniffing or barking. I see others have tried to suggest about a dogs instincts on and off lead. Poppycock. A well trained dog is just that. They aren't interested in anyone else, and look for cues from their owners. A dog with a strong leader, doesn't try to protect them! Dog owners, whether they call themselves responsible or not, can't argue with the law. If your dog won't come when called, if it bothers anyone else, then you are irresponsible, and the dog should be on a lead. If you have trained your dog so that you are abiding by the LAW, then you are a responsible owner.

Does that mean if youre child annoys someone, doesnt come back when called & misbehaves,all things that kids/do/dont do, youre an irresponsible parent? I suggest ALL dogs should be on a lead in public areas.All chipped & registered too.Im a dog owner & keep my dog on a lead at all times.I suggest the same for out of control brats, that I have to suffer while out walking my dog & minding my own business. Just like there are irresponsible dog owners,there are irresponsible 'child owners'.My point being that there will always be those who are useless & dont care about other people, & are totally irresponsible be it with dogs,kids, guns or whatever.

Here is another one!
You equate dogs with people!
I hate to tell you this but kids are PEOPLE. Dogs are ANIMALS.
If a kid mis-behaves they deserve a clip over the ear.
If an animal mis-behaves it should be put down.
I would hate to live in your world.
Kids in kennels, dogs on silk cushions.
I guess your "family" is of the four legged kind.

"kids in kennels, dogs on silk cushions" LOL!

I don't agree with your extreme views, but I can understand why you would hold such extreme views towards dogs and their owners. Especially when the defence is "what about drunks, hoodies, "bratts" litter louts, smokers etc?

What has one dog that was dangerously out of control, that killed another dog, got to do with dropping litter and children playing?

On that logic, a dog owner cannot have children, be a smoker, be a drinker, drop litter, or possess any kind of hooded garment...

In my experience, the more defensive the dog owner is about pooch, the more irresponsible they are.

ive said this all along that it should be illegal for dogs to be of a lead in a public place,there should be allocated places for dog walkers who want to let there dog run free,its not the dogs fault its the owners no if or buts simple as that,very sad story though,i had a dog kill my cat and when i tried to kill the the dog with a cricket bat suddenley i was the bad guy,an eye for a eye ,but like my moto the country is full of do gooder scum

There seem to be two arguments here… That certain dog breeds are inherently aggressive and dangerous to the public. And that irresponsible owners haven't trained their dogs properly. For the former, I suggest a ban on those breeds. For the latter, I suggest making the owners completely accountable for anything their dogs do.

Dear me, some people are so narrow minded! I have owned a cross staffie/collie for years & she is as soft as muck, barks if someone approaches the house & then licks them to death as soon as they are inside! I think staffies have been given a bad name! ALL dog breeds are capable of biting someone, it's the owners responsiblity to keep them under control & on a lead, it's not the dog's fault! Fine the owners! & stop generalising...

Was going to put some positive comments about staffies (we have one) but can't be bothered, too much negativity going on here and classing all "dangerous" dogs the same.

Bels302003 wrote:
Dear me, some people are so narrow minded! I have owned a cross staffie/collie for years & she is as soft as muck, barks if someone approaches the house & then licks them to death as soon as they are inside! I think staffies have been given a bad name! ALL dog breeds are capable of biting someone, it's the owners responsiblity to keep them under control & on a lead, it's not the dog's fault! Fine the owners! & stop generalising...

Agreed - our Staffie is lovely!

dogs are trained and humans are brought up if done properly dogs and humans are lovely but when treated terrible dogs become aggressive and children grow up to be horrid and put in prison.

I think people have been reading this wrong as the big dog was on a lead the toy poodle was not, if it had been the dogs would still be alive and this tradegy wouldnt have happened, it doesnt say if the poodle was barking or growling at the dog on the lead so we cant say the attack just came from no where and even if it didnt the dog on the lead may have saw the poodle as a threat to the child in the pushchair or the ladies walking it so was trying to protect them,

Here we go again, the anti dog squad going over the top as usual...some of you need muzzeling and putting on a lead!

So why isn't bournemouth and poole enforcing the dog bylaw which is to fine anyone with thier dog off lead. Except in designated areas.That way if someone wants to be trusting enough to let thier little dog off lead they go there. But to be honest licensing of dogs is not going to work.We had that system for over 50 years. Then it was only the responcible who licensed so those others didnot.It was stopped as it cost more money collecting than getting in.It did not stop dog attacks. Muzzling certain breeds did for a while but same thing happened. So no real answer except for everyone owning or looking after someone elses dog/cat should be held accountable should anything happen and be responcible.

stevobath wrote:
Im an owner of a English Bull X Staffie Terrier.He stays on the lead at ALL TIMES.This way I cant get blamed for having an unruly/dangerous dog.Its interesting to note though that more people get bitten by Black Labs & Border Collies than any other breeds. All dogs should be chipped but this wont stop dogs biting or attacking.It would however put some people off who buy dogs on a whim.Im also for compulsary jabs every year.This too would put off certain irresponsible people.All dogs on a lead in public unless in designated 'Dog Area' is good idea.

I very much doubt that Labs bite more than Staffies, just Google dog attacks and the Staffie is the dangerous dog of choice having descended from dog-fighting ancestors. Besides that, if and a very big if a Lab bites you can do something about it, not with a Staffie or the like. Why not introduce muzzles for aggressive dangerous dogs.

Kossoff wrote:
I used to be afraid of dogs, based on my numerous experiences of aggressive behaviour by them, in public places. All too often, the owners come out with the pathetic, "He / she won't hurt you" line, instead of admonishing the dog and apologising. However, having watched many episodes of The Dog Whisperer, I now understand dog behaviour much better, and how much of it is down to the lack of leadership shown by the owners. But that said, there are some breeds that are just time-bombs waiting to go off. If a Yorkshire terrier decides to nip you, it isn't a problem. If a Staffie, German shepherd, Rottie, etc, decides to do it, you have a dangerous situation on your hands.

Spot on.

I actually had to register so that I could reply to this thread, something I almost never do, because people are so incredibly misinformed. "I think that all of these sort of dogs are potentially dangerous, ugly and have no place in a modern society.
Why people feel the need to own such monsters is beyond belief." What an absolutely irresponsible and ignorant thing to say. I would be embarrassed and ashamed to post such a statement based on biased opinion instead of fact or knowledge. Dog behaviour is solely the responsibility of the human and its behaviour is a direct reflection of this. As for this particular breed being 'ugly', that is entirely irrelevant to the discussion, as is labelling it a 'monster'. It makes me very sad that some people can place all of the blame on the animal we bred and brought into our 'modern society' in the first place, taking it away from its instinct and watering it down with silly human rituals and behaviours that they simply don't understand. They speak and understand an entirely different language, yet we expect them to be responsible for our own mistakes. It's disgusting. The way to solve the problem would be education, as it always is. An aggressive dog is an unstable dog that most times has no rules, boundaries or leadership. Small dogs often have similar aggressive, guarding behaviours, however they seem to 'get away with it' because of their size. If people would open their minds and educate themselves and actually make use of their intelligence as the dominant species on this planet we'd be a lot closer to solving this problem. But, unfortunately, ignorant people seem to be everywhere.

JoyRego says...Small dogs often have similar aggressive, guarding behaviours, however they seem to 'get away with it' because of their size.

That's the point entirely! All dogs can bite however well trained or however well educated their owners are BUT the average dog can't do as much damage as these large status type dogs can do otherwise we'd be reading headlines like "Labrador ripped my pet spaniel in half" or "toddler killed by dachshund".

I think that the vet that handled this, has the right approach to this very big problem!! The vet must see this problem every day! I certainly did work for an animal rescue centre. All the sensible comments left make perfect sense. Apart from a couple, (goatty). The article in the echo to resolve this problem should be put into action before its too late!!

mysticalshoelace wrote:
The simple answer is to enforce the section of the dangerous dogs act of 1991 which covers banned breeds including pit bull type dogs, American bull dogs and Irish Staffies and anything that resembles a pit bull. The police don't bother enforcing the act any more. Added to that list should be all large bull breed type dogs or large dogs that were originally bred to fight/kill/be aggressive. Why anyone would want to own something big enough to kill them is beyond me. I'm not saying that existing dogs should be destroyed or anything but if breeding from them was stopped now then in a few years time they wouldn't be available for morons to buy.

I dont remember seeing the American Bulldog mentioned in the Dangerous Dog Act. The laws on dangerous dog are sufficiant, it is the enforcing that lets it all down. As a dog owner my dog is insured and microchipped. I would like to see more encouragement for better dog owners. My American Bulldog is never off a lead in a public place because I respect people dont know if your dog is friendly and some people find seeing a large dog coming towards them intimidating (which is covered in the DDA). Banning breeds is not the answer in will force it undergound.

sar72 wrote:
Here we go again, the anti dog squad going over the top as usual...some of you need muzzeling and putting on a lead!

Well said. Why can't people see that if dogs are on the lead all the time there are going to be even more problems due to them being bored out of their minds through not being able to run and exhibit natural behaviour. And why should we all muzzle our dogs just become some people are so narrow minded that they think that every dog is just going to attack them. And don't even get me started on all this about not being able to play with kids etc because of dogs. It would be nice not to have kids just come over and assume that they can touch peoples dogs without asking, and having to endure the awful behaviour that is all too common now. How about some of you parents take responsibility for your children and teach them how to behave around dogs and not expect everyone else to endure their temper tantrum whilst you ignore them rather than rant at us dog owners for what our dogs are supposedly all doing. And before you say I am tarring you all with the same brush, I'm not doing anything different to the anti dog squad.

funkychicken_83 wrote:

sar72 wrote: Here we go again, the anti dog squad going over the top as usual...some of you need muzzeling and putting on a lead!

Well said. Why can't people see that if dogs are on the lead all the time there are going to be even more problems due to them being bored out of their minds through not being able to run and exhibit natural behaviour. And why should we all muzzle our dogs just become some people are so narrow minded that they think that every dog is just going to attack them. And don't even get me started on all this about not being able to play with kids etc because of dogs. It would be nice not to have kids just come over and assume that they can touch peoples dogs without asking, and having to endure the awful behaviour that is all too common now. How about some of you parents take responsibility for your children and teach them how to behave around dogs and not expect everyone else to endure their temper tantrum whilst you ignore them rather than rant at us dog owners for what our dogs are supposedly all doing. And before you say I am tarring you all with the same brush, I'm not doing anything different to the anti dog squad.

Mate, I am tarring nobody or no dog with any brush. I am simply stating the facts that when walking along a public footpath, I have been confronted by aggressive dogs four times recently - a retriever, some small thing which nipped my ankles, some blonde Alsation-type, and (most frightening of all), a big hariy German shepherd that was rearing up on its hind legs to attack me. Thank God it was on a leash. Do I not have the right to walk across my local park without this happening? I can't any more.

elite50 wrote:

Dazzan wrote:

elite50 wrote: Member of the anti-dog society here. Why the hell dont these irresponsible dog owners wake up? Those things inside their dogs mouths are called teeth! You cant walk anywhere on any open space around Bournemouth without "Fido" being in your space. "Fido" may be some squirt that needs to be stepped on or some gargantuan monster that should have been destroyed at birth! What gives these "Fido" owners the right to invade the space of REAL people? If I own a car I have to make sure that it does not invade any-one elses space. If I have kids, I am responsible for them. What is it about dog owners? Divine intervention? Selfishness? "Up yours Jack"? Or all of the above? Wake up dog owners, we are not all sucked in by a wagging tail!

@elite50 - I myself am a "responsible" dog owner that you seem to have inadvertently tarred with the same brush as the "irresponsible" ones, you start off making the all important distinction between the two, but it gets lost later in your comment. You mention the invasions into your personal space, I myself also suffer with personal space invasions on a daily basis, mine come from the charity collectors that chase you through the town centre, the double glazing sales men who call at the door, the cold calls on the phone etc. but I would never dream of adopting your stance and suggesting that the shorter ones need "to be stepped on" or the bigger ones "destroyed at birth!". At the end of the day we are ALL part of a wider society, the dog owners have the same rights to walk (in the designated areas) that you do. There are a number of "dog free zones" in Bournemouth, you could try walking there instead.

Do you realise what you have just said?
Do you realise just how FEW dog free zones there are?
O.K. I will drive my car on any footpath that strikes my fancy as long as it doesn't say "car free zone".
You see, the "dog people" seem to have a different grasp on reality than every-one else!

Has it missed your comprehension that a footpath is, by definition, a car free zone?

Yet you question others "grasp on reality"?

Tommo. wrote:

stevobath wrote:
Im an owner of a English Bull X Staffie Terrier.He stays on the lead at ALL TIMES.This way I cant get blamed for having an unruly/dangerous dog.Its interesting to note though that more people get bitten by Black Labs & Border Collies than any other breeds. All dogs should be chipped but this wont stop dogs biting or attacking.It would however put some people off who buy dogs on a whim.Im also for compulsary jabs every year.This too would put off certain irresponsible people.All dogs on a lead in public unless in designated 'Dog Area' is good idea.

I very much doubt that Labs bite more than Staffies, just Google dog attacks and the Staffie is the dangerous dog of choice having descended from dog-fighting ancestors. Besides that, if and a very big if a Lab bites you can do something about it, not with a Staffie or the like. Why not introduce muzzles for aggressive dangerous dogs.

Google staffies and you will find far more sites describing them as the "nanny" dog because of their excellent temprement with children.

Likewise if you actually googled the statistics on dog bites you will see that you are wrong in your ill founded assumption that they are top of the list.

Before you assume anything else I have never owned a staffie and never would, they're not my kind of dog. I just don't like to see inflationary, misinformed statements go unchallenged. It hardly helps resolve the problem and only ends up with badly thought through, knee jerk legislation that doesn't actually sort out the key issue. As evidence you don't need to look any further than the Dangerous Dogs Act. If it hadn't been rushed through as a result of media driven hysteria we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

Frogsporn wrote:

Tommo. wrote:

stevobath wrote:
Im an owner of a English Bull X Staffie Terrier.He stays on the lead at ALL TIMES.This way I cant get blamed for having an unruly/dangerous dog.Its interesting to note though that more people get bitten by Black Labs & Border Collies than any other breeds. All dogs should be chipped but this wont stop dogs biting or attacking.It would however put some people off who buy dogs on a whim.Im also for compulsary jabs every year.This too would put off certain irresponsible people.All dogs on a lead in public unless in designated 'Dog Area' is good idea.

I very much doubt that Labs bite more than Staffies, just Google dog attacks and the Staffie is the dangerous dog of choice having descended from dog-fighting ancestors. Besides that, if and a very big if a Lab bites you can do something about it, not with a Staffie or the like. Why not introduce muzzles for aggressive dangerous dogs.

Google staffies and you will find far more sites describing them as the "nanny" dog because of their excellent temprement with children.

Likewise if you actually googled the statistics on dog bites you will see that you are wrong in your ill founded assumption that they are top of the list.

Before you assume anything else I have never owned a staffie and never would, they're not my kind of dog. I just don't like to see inflationary, misinformed statements go unchallenged. It hardly helps resolve the problem and only ends up with badly thought through, knee jerk legislation that doesn't actually sort out the key issue. As evidence you don't need to look any further than the Dangerous Dogs Act. If it hadn't been rushed through as a result of media driven hysteria we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

Frogsporn spot on with your comments i have been walking dogs in my area for about 5 years my previous dog was shown agression about 5 times in his life not by Staff type dogs and my more recent dog where i take him sometimes you can see about 8 or 9 staff types never been a problem gets on well with them really lovable dogs.Its getting the perspective right i feel there is more chance of me getting confronted by some untrained human than any trouble from a dog

I my self am a trainee veterinary nurse, I have a sbt. She is lovely I see them come into work all the time!! The sbt is cross with the pitbull that is where it all starts to go wrong! Staffies are not on the dangerous dogs list that is for a reason. Any one how thinks staffies are on the dangerous dogs list needs to do their research, and learn a little more about the legslations!

Kossoff wrote:

funkychicken_83 wrote:

sar72 wrote: Here we go again, the anti dog squad going over the top as usual...some of you need muzzeling and putting on a lead!

Well said. Why can't people see that if dogs are on the lead all the time there are going to be even more problems due to them being bored out of their minds through not being able to run and exhibit natural behaviour. And why should we all muzzle our dogs just become some people are so narrow minded that they think that every dog is just going to attack them. And don't even get me started on all this about not being able to play with kids etc because of dogs. It would be nice not to have kids just come over and assume that they can touch peoples dogs without asking, and having to endure the awful behaviour that is all too common now. How about some of you parents take responsibility for your children and teach them how to behave around dogs and not expect everyone else to endure their temper tantrum whilst you ignore them rather than rant at us dog owners for what our dogs are supposedly all doing. And before you say I am tarring you all with the same brush, I'm not doing anything different to the anti dog squad.

Mate, I am tarring nobody or no dog with any brush. I am simply stating the facts that when walking along a public footpath, I have been confronted by aggressive dogs four times recently - a retriever, some small thing which nipped my ankles, some blonde Alsation-type, and (most frightening of all), a big hariy German shepherd that was rearing up on its hind legs to attack me. Thank God it was on a leash. Do I not have the right to walk across my local park without this happening? I can't any more.

Maybe you need to get the dog warden to come to this park then as this is definetly not the norm anywhere I have ever walked. I know several dog wardens from my work and they want to catch people that are irresponsible dog owners. If you can given them an idea of where there are problems they will go out with their own dogs so that they blend in and can catch them out. And I am not saying that the dogs you encountered were not aggressive, I was not there to say otherwise, but people often misinterpret dogs and say they were being aggressive when the opposite is true. I have seen parents freak out because my dog happened to glance at their child when he was walking on the lead (and would never go near a child, he had been trained to leave other people and dogs alone unless he was told he could go and play), or people assume that his head collar to stop him pulling on the lead was a muzzle (which it would be completely ineffecive as as it was only a strap over his nose like a horses bridle). Although I believe dogs should be trained not to do it, jumping up often isn't actually aggression, a lot of dogs do it for attention. I'm not saying that its ok and can see that for someone that doesnt like or understand dogs it could see threatening, but also feel that a lack of understanding leads to dogs being labelled as aggressive that actually aren't or just lack manners.

funkychicken_83 wrote:

Kossoff wrote:

funkychicken_83 wrote:

sar72 wrote: Here we go again, the anti dog squad going over the top as usual...some of you need muzzeling and putting on a lead!

Well said. Why can't people see that if dogs are on the lead all the time there are going to be even more problems due to them being bored out of their minds through not being able to run and exhibit natural behaviour. And why should we all muzzle our dogs just become some people are so narrow minded that they think that every dog is just going to attack them. And don't even get me started on all this about not being able to play with kids etc because of dogs. It would be nice not to have kids just come over and assume that they can touch peoples dogs without asking, and having to endure the awful behaviour that is all too common now. How about some of you parents take responsibility for your children and teach them how to behave around dogs and not expect everyone else to endure their temper tantrum whilst you ignore them rather than rant at us dog owners for what our dogs are supposedly all doing. And before you say I am tarring you all with the same brush, I'm not doing anything different to the anti dog squad.

Mate, I am tarring nobody or no dog with any brush. I am simply stating the facts that when walking along a public footpath, I have been confronted by aggressive dogs four times recently - a retriever, some small thing which nipped my ankles, some blonde Alsation-type, and (most frightening of all), a big hariy German shepherd that was rearing up on its hind legs to attack me. Thank God it was on a leash. Do I not have the right to walk across my local park without this happening? I can't any more.

Maybe you need to get the dog warden to come to this park then as this is definetly not the norm anywhere I have ever walked. I know several dog wardens from my work and they want to catch people that are irresponsible dog owners. If you can given them an idea of where there are problems they will go out with their own dogs so that they blend in and can catch them out. And I am not saying that the dogs you encountered were not aggressive, I was not there to say otherwise, but people often misinterpret dogs and say they were being aggressive when the opposite is true. I have seen parents freak out because my dog happened to glance at their child when he was walking on the lead (and would never go near a child, he had been trained to leave other people and dogs alone unless he was told he could go and play), or people assume that his head collar to stop him pulling on the lead was a muzzle (which it would be completely ineffecive as as it was only a strap over his nose like a horses bridle). Although I believe dogs should be trained not to do it, jumping up often isn't actually aggression, a lot of dogs do it for attention. I'm not saying that its ok and can see that for someone that doesnt like or understand dogs it could see threatening, but also feel that a lack of understanding leads to dogs being labelled as aggressive that actually aren't or just lack manners.

Hmm... so I'm walking along a path and confronted by a barking dog, which won't let me pass... or a dog which approaches from the side to confront me... or a dog straining on the leash on its hind legs, trying to confront me... and it's ME that should contact a dog warden? No, sorry - dog owners need to take responsibility. I'm done with this discussion - same old same old - it's never the dog or owner's fault, is it?

Kossoff wrote:

funkychicken_83 wrote:

Kossoff wrote:

funkychicken_83 wrote:

sar72 wrote: Here we go again, the anti dog squad going over the top as usual...some of you need muzzeling and putting on a lead!

Well said. Why can't people see that if dogs are on the lead all the time there are going to be even more problems due to them being bored out of their minds through not being able to run and exhibit natural behaviour. And why should we all muzzle our dogs just become some people are so narrow minded that they think that every dog is just going to attack them. And don't even get me started on all this about not being able to play with kids etc because of dogs. It would be nice not to have kids just come over and assume that they can touch peoples dogs without asking, and having to endure the awful behaviour that is all too common now. How about some of you parents take responsibility for your children and teach them how to behave around dogs and not expect everyone else to endure their temper tantrum whilst you ignore them rather than rant at us dog owners for what our dogs are supposedly all doing. And before you say I am tarring you all with the same brush, I'm not doing anything different to the anti dog squad.

Mate, I am tarring nobody or no dog with any brush. I am simply stating the facts that when walking along a public footpath, I have been confronted by aggressive dogs four times recently - a retriever, some small thing which nipped my ankles, some blonde Alsation-type, and (most frightening of all), a big hariy German shepherd that was rearing up on its hind legs to attack me. Thank God it was on a leash. Do I not have the right to walk across my local park without this happening? I can't any more.

Maybe you need to get the dog warden to come to this park then as this is definetly not the norm anywhere I have ever walked. I know several dog wardens from my work and they want to catch people that are irresponsible dog owners. If you can given them an idea of where there are problems they will go out with their own dogs so that they blend in and can catch them out. And I am not saying that the dogs you encountered were not aggressive, I was not there to say otherwise, but people often misinterpret dogs and say they were being aggressive when the opposite is true. I have seen parents freak out because my dog happened to glance at their child when he was walking on the lead (and would never go near a child, he had been trained to leave other people and dogs alone unless he was told he could go and play), or people assume that his head collar to stop him pulling on the lead was a muzzle (which it would be completely ineffecive as as it was only a strap over his nose like a horses bridle). Although I believe dogs should be trained not to do it, jumping up often isn't actually aggression, a lot of dogs do it for attention. I'm not saying that its ok and can see that for someone that doesnt like or understand dogs it could see threatening, but also feel that a lack of understanding leads to dogs being labelled as aggressive that actually aren't or just lack manners.

Hmm... so I'm walking along a path and confronted by a barking dog, which won't let me pass... or a dog which approaches from the side to confront me... or a dog straining on the leash on its hind legs, trying to confront me... and it's ME that should contact a dog warden? No, sorry - dog owners need to take responsibility. I'm done with this discussion - same old same old - it's never the dog or owner's fault, is it?

Well lets face it, the owners of the dogs you have a problem aren't going to go and report themselves are they? Those are the ones that are irresponsible, so don't make out that the rest of us are the problem. And yes, it is the same old same old rubbish coming from people with no idea about dogs and just have a problem with them simply because they exist. Dogs are a part of society, have been for a long time and thats not about the change any time soon, so you will have to learn to live with it.

As the owner of benji i would like to thank everyone for your above comments but I would just like to add that at the time my puppy was attacked and killed by the other dog,Benji was on a lead, and the other dogs jaws had to be prised apart to release Benji who was already dead by one bite.
I am aware that many dog owners are responsible people and have control over their animals when out walking their dogs but unfortunately dogs can be unpredictable,
I therefore I wanted this story to highlight what can sadly happen. I would further like to add that the owner of the dog that killed Benji has to date not contacted us to offer their apologies