Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 104

Thread: I officially now support BSL

  1. #41

    Default

    Not in favour of BSL in any form.

    A more practical solution would be a purpose based registry with a charter to inclusively educate communities in dog behaviour , training and husbandry with the goal of encouraging RESPONSIBLE, SUSTAINABLE, dog ownership into the future.

    This would encourage communities and individiduals to think of traits when selecting a family dog or embarking on a breeding. Provide unbiased and inclusive advise and assistance to communities and hopefuly reduce dog attacks as well welfare issues.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    SA
    Posts
    945

    Default

    I'd like a few lessons in school about animal psychology incl. training, handling, appropriate greeting etc. Just like kids need to learn how to behave in traffic they should also learn how to deal with (strange) dogs.

  3. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mymatejack View Post
    wow, I'm yet to see a dog running around with pedigree papers hanging around their neck, how do you know they were purebred?

    As far as cause "that's what they were bred to do" goes, well my dog, a Staffordshire bull terrier was also bred for dog fighting, in fact it was the breed used to create the amstaff, however somehow my dog runs around at the beach with other dogs every day of the week and has yet to start a fight, the worst he's done is been a little too rough for some dogs(more so the owners than the dogs, but that's another story). We also get plenty of amstaff's and even what I would consider the more pitbull type of "amstaff" and yet I hardly ever see these dogs causing a problem.

    I just can't understand why my fighting breed dog isn't running around attacking other dogs. Can you explain it?
    I'd prefer that you actually read my post because this is a question I have already addressed. But, for reference purposes, what I said was that in the right hands, there is no such thing as a bad breed. You have a great owner, you're almost guaranteed to have a great dog, regardless of size, breed etc. Mine is a Doberman cross Rottweiler, bred to be a man stopper but in his 4 years he's killed a total of 0 people. Not all dogs of a breed cause problems, but certain breeds in the wrong hands are much much more able to cause serious problems.

    My point is let's consider the alternative. What happens when a bad owner goes out and buys a beagle? Or a maltese? A cockapoo or whatever they call them... Well it can be damn annoying. I watched a guy last night trying to train his amazing border collies last night and he had this daschund hounding him and his dogs just barking constantly for well over 5 minutes. The owner was sitting on a bench nearby and they seemed to think it was perfectly acceptable for people to have to put up with her dog barking in their faces. The trainer guy finally had enough, and turned around firmly told the dog off. He had to do it a few times, and the owner stood up and asked him not to punish her dog (he was only using words, telling it no, go away etc). He retorted that he'd had enough and it wasn't fair that he and his dogs had to deal with it running around them in circles barking constantly. She had nothing to say to this and after chasing her dog, she managed to catch it and left. Now obviously this was a very poor owner, she had no control over her dog and no respect for others. But let's imagine for a moment that this poor owner instead of a small dog, owned a large, powerful dog. If you are being circled by a large powerful dog that is barking at you, you're not annoyed, you're terrified.

    In the hands of a good owner, all dogs and breeds can make wonderful, safe members of the community as I'm sure your dog is. But in the wrong hands, more can go wrong if your dog weighs 20+kg vs 5kg. And so I now firmly believe that to own a dog that has the capability of causing serious harm or potentially death to people or other dogs, you should have to pass a test that proves firstly you know something about the type of dog you want to own - ie you know that bully types have a propensity towards being aggressive to other dogs and secondly, that you are capable of managing that should your dog exhibit those traits. I would argue it also included mandatory training that you could undertake anywhere, but that you had to show that you could achieve basic obedience with your dog. GSD's and other large powerful breeds lunging at the end of their leads, nearly dragging their owners across roads to other dogs or people that they want to attack should become a thing of the past, it's just not acceptable and it's creating a bad impression in society for the rest of us.

    Does anyone here honestly think that if as of tomorrow, you could only buy dogs either confirmed or suspected of being powerful breeds (basically anything over 15-20kg) if you held a license, that it would be a bad thing? Like if you imagine that you see a huge GSD walking towards you off-lead at the park and then you see that it has a special pink collar or whatever and that confirms the owner is responsible and so wouldn't have the dog off-lead in a park if it was dangerous? Every time I've had an issue with another dog the owner has confessed it's not the first time and yet they don't seem to have any hesitations in recreating the incident, save for introducing new victims.

    And in regards to knowing they were Amstaffs (which can not be distinguished genetically from pitbulls), the owners told me. I didn't see any papers, you're right but the owners were proud of owning an Amstaff and that's what they had set out to obtain. Maybe they'd been unsuccessful and had an Amstaff cross instead, point is it looked like one and with the licensing I want introduced whether it's pure or not, they would have required one to own those dogs.

  4. #44

    Default

    What about the little fluffy yap yaps who terrorise my dog? If my dog reacts(which so far he seems to just ignore them like they're not worth the effort) it will almost certainly result in my dog being in trouble. Of course bigger dogs can do more damage, but little yappy dogs can create the situation where a bigger dog reacts. Why not licence everybody rather than discriminating against larger dogs? Also there are plenty of cases of small dogs doing significant damage and even causing death of young children and bad bites on adults ... it needs a universal approach

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    melbourne australia
    Posts
    3,082

    Default

    my dogs too MMJ, they are harrassed by small yappy aggressives. They have the patience of a saint sometimes. But do pretty much ignore them. Having a JRT yap yap all day, every day. Is an excellent training environment to desensitize a dog to small aggressive types. As through the fence, JRT feels like a Dane im sure.

    This worry, has forced me to work hard with my dogs. I feel we have to be good ambassadors of the dogs, any breed, we are fortunate enough to walk along side in life.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    12,581

    Default

    Does anyone here honestly think that if as of tomorrow, you could only buy dogs either confirmed or suspected of being powerful breeds (basically anything over 15-20kg) if you held a license, that it would be a bad thing?
    So not really breed specific but size specific. I'd be in. As long as I could play football with annoying yappy dogs. Then again - Frosty did a good job of shutting two of these up tonight. One was yap yappying after a doggy friend of hers (another cattle dog) and she ran between and growled and shoo'd off yappy yapp yap. Who shut up and went back to the owner who had been saying "shut up" at them but not actually doing anything. Second lap around yap yap starts up again - looks at Frosty - engages brain - and shuts up by itself. Hooray.

  7. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 99bottles View Post
    Does anyone here honestly think that if as of tomorrow, you could only buy dogs either confirmed or suspected of being powerful breeds (basically anything over 15-20kg) if you held a license, that it would be a bad thing?
    Absolutely I do. Small dog owners already seem to consider their dogs immune from normal dog behavious laws(as a general rule).

    I don't dislike Jack Russels, but they have the speed, agility and gameness to take down dogs much bigger than themselves, and also have the ability to take down and kill small children. Why shouldn't that be taken into account?
    Last edited by mymatejack; 04-10-2014 at 12:50 AM.

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    4,291

    Default

    I have read most of this conversation and I think 99bottles is very brave for putting this forward as they knew it would be controversial and they'd cop a lot of flack over it. It's very honest.

    And I do understand where they're coming from.

    I think the responses of "but small dogs can be little shits too" are kind of off topic. Supporting a licensing system for all dogs to try improve the number of responsible owners is something I'm all for. But if you cannot admit that big dogs owned by irresponsible owners are more of a risk to people and other dogs than little dogs, I'm sorry, but that's just a bit delusional. Yes, little dogs can rile up big dogs and provoke an attack. I am all for the laws taking into account this kind of provocation when assessing a dog that might have injured or killed another. But in most cases, if your big dog is well trained, they will be able to control themselves just because the offending dog is little. Most dogs have that instinct to not attack dogs much smaller than them. I've had my big dog get nipped by little foxies and such and their teeth were too small to even break skin and all my dog did was back off. I've looked after dogs that size and I can even kind of understand their 'attack is the best defense' impulse. I've had big dogs aggressively harass little dogs in my care like they were prey and it is way more distressing and dangerous than the other way round.

    I think the "I object to having to get a license for owning my big dog if small dog owners don't have to" is just a bit "not in my backyard". This is not about what others might not have to do. Why would you object to getting a license to show that you are capable of managing a big dog at all? I wouldn't... Even though I wouldn't really classify my dog as big, but she does weigh over 20kilos because she is just very stocky. I would actually welcome getting a license for owning my dog, regardless of who else needs to get one and who not.

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    4,291

    Default

    It's really a bit like push bikes/pedestrians and cars. If we would let anyone get behind the wheel without the need to go through a licensing process first, we would be very worried for our kids, anyone in the family cycling, old people who are slow crossing roads, etc. This has nothing to do with whether the other road users are licensed or not or whether they stick to the rules all the time, but all to do with how dangerous (and big and heavy) a car is.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    shitney
    Posts
    1,188

    Default

    Jonah weighs in at 19.5 kg at the moment.... does that mean if he puts on 500g I get a license? what happens if his weight fluctuates day to day? licence him Monday and Thursday when he weighs 20kg but not the other days?

    who would police this system? council already does sweet FA in regards to regos dogs etc.

    are the owners who do the right thing the ones you are trying to target here?

    either all owners should be lisenced or none should be......
    Quote Originally Posted by Sean View Post
    I love 2 things in this world. Spandex and reyzor... not necessarily in that order.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •