Santo66

They did take V8's and turbocharged cars off P plate drivers in some states........same thing as taking powerful dog breeds off potentially irresponsible owners?

I wonder if he wanted 3 big, muscled status symbols. I see it publicly stated, oh hide your dogs by calling them something else. Genius. It's why councils like COGG are going around to all the dog registered and checking visually - no pedigree papers, call it a purple people eater for all they care you're in trouble. What I hate though is the crying about seizure. Plenty of legal avenues to own a bull breed, the fact they flout the law and put the DOG in that horrible predicament - what can I say. Idiots at their best. I am wondering in the Bulldog attack if they had undergone some backyard bite work training as all 3 targeted the joggers arms, the old wind them up in defence drive and give them a bite routine could easily result in such an attack??...........3 Johnson's I can't see purchased for a reason that didn't include protection of some sort?? I have seen the other side of the tough dog syndrome too often unfortunately with the people who want out of control aggression from dogs and seek out dogs who genetically display it along with people who breed for it and sadly when the well trainable breeds in deterrent and protection are not tough enough in these people's eyes they go one better with Pitbull, Bulldog, Mastiff type breedings which don't lend themselves easily to safe protective training that can be achieved with a GSD or Malinois in comparison........I can't train these strong and aggressive Bull breed concoctions to gain control of them easily as I can with established guardian breeds and the owners of them have got no chance with control of a dog that's either all or nothing.........quite scary in fact I feel for these people who's "nice" dogs are seized as supposed restricted breeds, but they are at risk of seizure and have been for many years, my view is strong in the decision to get a Bull breed, get a proper one......there are plenty of well bred beautiful Bull breeds out there with papers to avoid the BSL trap, it's not that hard with a little forethought.

Follow your argument to its logical end, & all dogs that have size & muscle strength would be banned. And only small dogs who've had their teeth extracted would remain. As organizations like both the American & Australian Veterinary Associations point out BSL does not address the factors which actually are implicated in risk factors for dog attacks/bites. Both groups have published evidence-based recommendations for how those factors can be addressed. In fact, putting resources into BSL just takes attention away from dealing with those real risk factors that aren't breed specific. The one's banned by BSL are breeds with fighting background, it's nothing to do with size per se People are aware of the consequence of murder, but there are still murders taking place........so ramping up the punishment for irresponsible dog owners will do what exactly? In law nothing is done until the deed happens.......someone is a recipient of the deed an innocent person who need not suffer such an ordeal? Pitbulls have been a restricted breed since 1992......I would say more that people who have them or dogs resembling them are irresponsible purchases........same goes for people registering Pitbulls as Amstaffs and crossbreeds to avoid the council restrictions is hardly responsible ownership is it? I wonder if the bloke who owned the 3 Johnson Bulldogs who attacked the jogger just wanted some furry children?

Where do I start? Aggression is NOT a drive. It is the EXPRESSION of a drive .. dominance, prey, food, pack, sexual etc etc If you think you can't make prey drive out of a couch potato, you clearly have had very little to do with sighthounds :laugh: Similarly, if you think you can't "make" a dog aggressive, check out the seedier side of the security dog training industry. I have never said that breed doesn't matter - but it's not everything either. There are two reasons for that: 1. The levels of drive within a breed will vary. Not all Border Collies will herd. Not all sighthounds will course. And, most importantly for this thread, not all bull breeds are dog or human aggressive. Do you watch the rescue shows on Animal Planet? Quite a few times they've used an APBT as the "Friendly test dog" for character assessments at the ASPCA. 2. How quickly a dog will trigger into a particular drive can be modified - by socialisation, by training (no police dog does its work simply due to "drive"). That expression can also be controlled. We have created breeds with various levels of particular drive but anyone with good breed knowledge will tell you that doesn't make them a universal attribute. Furthermore, any trainer will tell you we can modify our dogs behaviour. THIS is what is wrong with BSL. It assumes that all behaviour can be simply attributed to breed and that there is no way some dogs of a particular breed can be safe (or dangerous for that matter). And there is no research in the world that supports that assumption. Not anywhere. We know with responsible ownership that any breed is a safe breed, no BSL required on that front at all. However, irresponsible ownership of breeds where high level aggression and extreme fighting ability is found in lines of those breeds is what BSL attempts to eradicate. The question that needs to be answered is this: Do you want irresponsible people breeding concoctions of powerful breeds to result in the potential ownership of dogs dangerous in the community, because that's simply what no BSL represents? It's not all about the seizure of a Staffy X who the ranger thinks is a Pitbull, it's about Bozo the drug dealer importing a Fila to cross it with an over sharp fear biting Rotty to protect his dope patch and selling the surplus pups off to his dopey mates who are less responsible than he is. You can't breed power, aggression and fight out of dogs that don't have the genetics to support that, it's total naïve BS if anyone thinks they can.........certain breeds are used for a reason what ever the role required of the dog is intended to be.

Can't see any bite stats from restricted breeds other than Pitbulls, so a bit hard to say that bite stats wouldn't be higher again with no BSL when your irresponsible owner has Fila or Dogo as they please. All breeds can present danger I agree, but some breeds don't have the genetic make up to present the level of danger that other breeds have, that is, try and train a Labrador in front line civil defence then try a GSD or Belgian Malinois and tell me there is no difference in a dog's fighting capabilities from genetic (breed) foundation? Try and rehabilitate a Bull breed with serious dog aggression, a dog that has poor handler focus, and a high pain threshold, then try the same with a Rottweiler of similar dog aggression level and tell me the training result will be the same? Tell a Greyhound racer to switch breeds to Cocker Spaniels as breed doesn't matter, train em right they can still win.........need we go on?? Of course with responsible ownership a tiger in the backyard is safe no question on that, but when the tiger or aggressive dog gets out is when the problem begins and the breed having genetic predisposition to aggression and fight in the individual dog is a great factor in the outcome. Probably because the other restricted breeds have virtually no representation in this country. Your argument above suggests that I should look to the breeds you name with "fighting capabililities" to be at the top of the bite stats and yet... shock, horror .. they aren't there!! And then you've made the rather ridiculous suggestion that a small gundog can win a race against a large sighthound.. OF COURSE breed matters in terms of conformation and drives - but it's not as simple as "some breeds are safe and some are dangerous" which is the basis of BSL. I'm sorry, but you are making absolutely no sense at all. You're rattling on about serious dog aggression in bull breeds when anyone can tell you that it is rare to find both serious DA and HA in the same dog. What's your point other than you dislike bull breeds and want them eradicated?? I don't own a bull breed and I have no desire to. But I'm not going to let my breed preferences condemn to death a great many dogs that never hurt anyone. No half way sensible dog lover would. Aggression is a drive either defensive or active. We can all agree that a working Border Collie will have prey drive, yet we ignore that another breed has driven aggression. You can't make prey drive out of a couch potato likewise you can't make aggression drive out of a dog or breed that doesn't have any in their genetic structure. Aggression is no more man made than prey drive, scent drive or any other drive that dog or breed may be genetically wired to include in it's make up. Aggression is used in dogs for working roles on a daily basis worldwide and the people who use such a dog don't use just any old dog or breed and there is a reason for that which is simply, they are not all made equal. The faster the anti BSL crusaders acknowledge the fact instead of arguing that aggression stems from environment and any other factor that can take the heat off breed and genetics which is all BS, the faster they may be able to overturn BSL perhaps?.

Can't see any bite stats from restricted breeds other than Pitbulls, so a bit hard to say that bite stats wouldn't be higher again with no BSL when your irresponsible owner has Fila or Dogo as they please. All breeds can present danger I agree, but some breeds don't have the genetic make up to present the level of danger that other breeds have, that is, try and train a Labrador in front line civil defence then try a GSD or Belgian Malinois and tell me there is no difference in a dog's fighting capabilities from genetic (breed) foundation? Try and rehabilitate a Bull breed with serious dog aggression, a dog that has poor handler focus, and a high pain threshold, then try the same with a Rottweiler of similar dog aggression level and tell me the training result will be the same? Tell a Greyhound racer to switch breeds to Cocker Spaniels as breed doesn't matter, train em right they can still win.........need we go on?? Of course with responsible ownership a tiger in the backyard is safe no question on that, but when the tiger or aggressive dog gets out is when the problem begins and the breed having genetic predisposition to aggression and fight in the individual dog is a great factor in the outcome.

Whilst it's true that probably few dogs involved in attacks labelled as Pitbulls are actually Pitbulls or have Pitbull ancestry, but they are in that breed type.......that is, they are not reporting attacks from GSD's or Standard Poodles claimimg they are Pitbulls........the point I am making is people getting up in arms over a dog labelled a Pitbull which is an Amstaff X or an American Bulldog, the media hype is targeting a certain type of dog which I haven't seen a misrepresentation in that regard whether they are Pitbulls or not, they are of Bull breed origin being the more relative point. Personally I think the Bull breed supporters have bought a lot of the problems on themselves with too much defence of "that's not a Pitbull"......who cares if they think it's a Pitbull, they are a restricted breed anyway, it's not going to change anything by highlighting that an attacking dog is X breed as all that did was provide the foundation for Victoria to target and seize crossbreeds too. In hindsight it would have been a better scenario to agree that these attacking dogs are Pitbulls and the nice dogs the Bull breed supporters own are not Pitbulls and everyone is happy. This continual defence of Pitbulls which are done and dusted with a likelihood of BSL release at zero is IMHO what is bringing the crossbreeds and anything else Bull breed related into the spotlight??

The American Johnson Bulldog was bred as a working dog in opposition to the GSD, Rottweiler and Malinois in protection roles........very few came close in working character and trainability fading out a bit in that role over recent years, but seem to be taken on board of late by the tough guy crowd.......probably a good candidate for the BSL list being un recognised by the ANKC and falling in the wrong hands?

Maybe why he had attacking Pitbull's as an aid to his own safety?

Once the owner learns some skills they may wish to stop using a halti - at present they appear to find it useful , and are more confident using it . This should be a good thing :) I am not really a head halter fan , but they do have their uses . I don't see any place for halti's in formal training........IMHO it's better to get them off and teach a proper training foundation from the beginning so the dog and owner actually learn something. They have their place managing an untrained dog I agree, but that's what formal training is for......teaching people how to "train" their dog and the halti has no benefits from either end of the method spectrum IME?

I meant as in "do as you are told" referred to the collar used not the training method, sorry I could have worded that better

Why not attend a training club and do as you are told instead of dictation what collar should be worn A halti from a training perspective is useless both for positive methods which can be done off leash with no collar at all and useless for aversive methods as the collar has no off switch and remains an aversion whilst on the dog's head.......a halti is a management tool for people who don't want to train their dogs properly so not too many trainers worth their salt will be recommending haltis in formal training.

At great lengths I talked my niece out of buying an unpapered Amstaff for the fear of her potentially loosing it to BSL, so she bought a Staffy X Lab instead and guess what that looks like now at 9 months old We were even going to do a bit of a collection and buy her a papered Amstaff, but she wanted a puppy NOW and took to Gumtree for a BYB.......she was well educated on the matter and didn't listen

It's sickening to imagine the ordeal that poor man went through I am wondering if the dogs had some form of backyard protection training as they had so much arm focus, all three bit the man's arms which is unusual for an untrained attack to bite just arms unless they had been worked on arms/sleeves and learned what to target?

The litter could be bred on someone elses prefix.......perhaps the bitch is co-owned by her breeder and the person you are dealing with is the owner/carer of the bitch who raised the litter assumed as the actual registered breeder when they technically are not the breeder for registration purposes........that happens often. They could be waiting for the co-owner/registered breeder to submit the paperwork.....some are not too fast at doing that?. Fake papers can come in many forms from completely falsified which the ANKC would have no record of, or legitimate papers with the wrong sire and dam entered as the parents of the litter etc etc so it depends really??

Owning a DA dog myself, I don't take him to off leash areas where other dogs are present mainly because there is a good chance that the owners of the off leash dogs can't control them off leash and they think an off leash area is a free for all where the dogs can all play together and they assume everyone is there for the same reasons. I think it's pretty stupid for an owner of a DA dog to risk the obvious in that environment when things can easily turn badly very quickly. It's hard enough exercising a DA dog avoiding off leash dogs at large on the street let alone seeking out off leash areas IMHO. Technically right, but a stupid concept if you want to keep your dog safe where some breed knowledge and common sense needs to prevail. Not all breeds are equal in their genetic abilities to defend and fight and you don't know the genetics of the individual dog or what training and control the owners have over powerful dogs of especially guardian or fighting breeds. That's the problem with the "deed not breed" concept, when the deed is done, it's too late to take an informed precaution?

No need for a flame suit.......it's exactly what I thought too.......dog drags owner into the victims front garden, owner couldn't control the dog......well I am not surprised on a bloody harness

There is only ONE line IMHO and that's to know your dog's character and keep him/her out of trouble by taking proactive management with effective control and the appropriate training. Only the owner can shape the dogs destiny. One of my working dogs has massive animal aggression and will fight other dogs, cats, etc etc......he's a great dog otherwise, but that's his character fault I know that and he's 6 years old now and I have never let him hurt another animal. A lot of valuable training time has been put into this animal aggression which is a pointless trait and a nuisance behaviour but it can be controlled and to be honest, having a dog that it is potentially dangerous towards other animals like this bloke I am talking about, has made me a much more responsible owner, trainer and handler as a proactive management approach over time becomes second nature tending to handle my other two dogs who are not animal aggressive the same way.

When a dog doesn't respond to known commands in distractions is because the dog finds more value in the distraction than he/she does in the handler......it's better fun to chase another dog than return to the handler and behave which can be trained out with motivation and reward that is, from foundation training with handler providing reward of something highly desirable to the dog for the right behaviour, or aversion which is fear of non compliance or a combination of both......having said that though, maintain good handler focus through distractions depends on a dog's genetic drive, the higher the drive, the easier a dog is to train in obedience through distractions. Food is no good for prey drive satisfaction......chasing balls and retrieves and playing tug is the best way to motivate driven dogs to train handler value and focus :D A Rotty is a guardian breed, not meaning he is looking for trouble, but he may finish some trouble like putting another dog in it's place for getting snippy.......perhaps not politically correct but breed correct not to take crap from a strange animal or person is part of a good working dog character and isn't a bad thing quite the opposite, but with guardian breeds we need to be mindful of defence drives especially with small dogs which doesn't take much of a doggy correction from a big dog to hurt a small dog........I wouldn't let him run off leash with small dogs is asking for trouble I think given what you are describing, keep the little dogs safe and your lovely boy out of trouble :)

The proposed law appears more about banning dog ownership of convicted irresponsible owners than a tightening of circumstances in which a dog may bite. Provocation is a statutory defence which depends on circumstances for example what has been tested at law several times is an off leash dog attacking a leashed dog in a public place, leashed dog injures or kills the attacking dog is an act of provocation as it's reasonable for the leashed dog to defend it's self from attack........the off leash dog's owner caused the incident to occur from not having effective control, breaching leash laws in a public place etc etc. In these circumstances, the leashed dog's owners are not held responsible for the injury or death of the attacking dog under defence of provocation. Then there are negligence issues, like walking a dog on leash on a crowded footpath someone steps on dog's foot accidently, dog lunges and bites that person...........something like that can be blurry......did the dog owner need to be in such close proximity to other people with their dog??........common sense prevails as a dog owner to avoid that, don't place your dog within leash range of other people, a bit of responsible forethought and you easily avoid these situations which in time become second nature when handling dogs. Socialisation isn't bullet proof either which can mask a dog's genetic instincts.......dog tolerates people due to socialisation but is not genetically stable and owners become negligent thinking their dog is great with people when in fact it's not.......something happens, dog reverts to genetic response and bites someone.........again reading the dog and knowing your dog can avoid these situations.

Would he be on death row if the owners were responsible enough to contain him in a secure back yard.......he was served up on a plate due to irresponsible ownership is my point, he was wandering at large in someone else's yard when extra precautions needed to be taken to keep an unregistered dog of Pitbull appearance safe in which his owners failed him. The sad bit is that the owners of these types of dogs are just letting the legislation take it's course.........the outs are in the legislation and they need to start using it??

That damn BSL is the problem?? So Kerser breaks through a fence ends up in a neighbours property and is unregistered with council. Whether he's a Pitbull or not, he's in the zone appearance wise so if he had a responsible owner he would probably still be flying under the radar and no one is any the wiser. I think Kerser's problem is irresponsible ownership more than a BSL issue.

keeping in mind that we are talking about 30 or more years ago when I was a youngster (which gives more away about my age than I am usually comfortable sharing online!) - I remember some fairly extreme aggression against both dogs and in some cases humans, in one case a dog attacked the bitch he was supposed to be paired with (please excuse me if my terminology is wrong, I am used to dealing with another species so far as breeding goes) and the bitch ultimately died, I also remember when visiting these breeders there were certain dogs that had to be locked away because they were unpredictable with visitors, even those had been on the premises before. Why do you ask? I was around 30 years ago too....the cats out the bag now :laugh: I am 31 (I wish), but I have a very good memory of the dogs around in the first year of my life I think in some situations the GSD's especially, were more correct in temperament back then but the owners lacked the skills to adequately train and control them, in fact these days it's hard to find a GSD unless you know the lines and breeders who produce them to find one capable of training in a protection/guarding role with enough aggression on tap to be channelled into that working discipline. I remember when every second car yard had one of "them bloody Alsations" in the yard overnight with gnashing teeth at the fence stimulated from anyone walking by in later years and popularity in the pet market the civil protection drives of both the Dobe and GSD were watered down to better accommodate placement of the breeds in pet homes over what they were intended for in a working capacity. Thanks for your response......aside from the attack on the bitch which sounds a bit unbalanced in drives, back in the day many having strong protection stranger aggression type characters is my memory also :)

I am interested if you can elaborate in what circumstances these Dobes and GSD's showed "truly awful aggressive temperaments"

We are pretty much the same with 2 working line GSD's and a Malinois/Dutch Shepherd X.......our 3 are entire males no problems at all with good leadership and management. We don't walk them together only for the fact if something goes wrong it's hard to restrain 80 odd kilos of working dog in full drive for one handler, so they are walked exercised and trained separately between myself and other half.....we swap them over, take out different dogs. I enjoy exercising each dog, take one out for an intense 30 minutes, take him back home, get the next one and so on, it's fun