Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 104

Thread: I officially now support BSL

  1. #71

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hyacinth View Post
    big aggressive dogs are more dangerous than small ones. Just because it takes more strength to stop a big dog than a little one. Big dogs can smash bones much more easily than little ones - so when they start attacking someone or another dog - they are much more able to kill or inflict serious injury than a little dog.
    everyone already knows this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hyacinth View Post
    So dog owners and the public generally might be more accepting of an owners licence for a big dog, rather than a licence for all dog owners.
    I don't really think so. Are you saying that based on the reactions of the people on this forum or.... what?

    Why not license everyone?

  2. #72

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by goggles View Post
    You are walking your dog down a quiet suburban street, as you would everyday, and behind you is a jogger listening to music on her headphones. You are not aware of the jogger and as she tries to pass you she runs a little bit too close to your dog and startles it. Your dog lunges forward and snaps his mouth around her arm.
    Quote Originally Posted by 99bottles View Post
    Goggles if that's how my dog responded to that sort of stimulus I would consider him dangerous and I wouldn't walk him in highly populated areas. I would not think it at all acceptable for my dog to charge someone just because he didn't know they were there. I have rehomed one dog to a rural property because he had very thin nerves and was too reactive for living in high density areas, he was easily overwhelmed and it was very stressful for him. If you know you have a dog that is that reactive and likely to bite first and then ask questions, well that's something you need to take into consideration in their care... Anyway, I can't defend myself. You've never seen Sammy, probably never will and all I can do is say that he has never displayed any signs of any of those behaviours, but that's nothing more than words on paper.
    Dog's get startled and they react. It happens very quickly and it is instinctive. No amount of training gets rid of it completely. I'm sure you know that (99bottles)?

    http://legal.pblnn.com/pro-bsl-exper...ontrol-records

    Was the dog in this story a 'dangerous dog' and was the owner an irresponsible one? Would an owner like this one have been issued a license according to you?
    Last edited by goggles; 04-12-2014 at 06:41 AM.

  3. #73

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hyacinth View Post
    Well they've nearly done that in QLD and NSW. But it still doesn't stop a registered breeder selling a dog to an idiot.

    An idiot can make an angry mess out of a perfectly well bred dog with a friendly temperament.
    True, but that's where the law would need to specify requirements to become a breeder, i.e prove that they have the knowledge to pick out people who might struggle with their breed and either educate them first or refuse to sell - all dogs will be easily tracked back to the breeder so any issues with particular breeders can be easily identified and action of some sort can be taken. It's would be much easier to police the breeders than the millions of dog owners.

    Of course there would need to be more to it, such as mandatory desexing unless selling to another registered breeder - I would hope they would allow for at least 6 months of age rather than neutering an infant.

    I don't really support this idea, I just think it would be much more effective than singling out "big dog owners" as the problem, when clearly they are nowhere near the whole problem.

  4. #74
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    4,290

    Default

    I agree that irresponsible breeding is part of the problem because it makes it way too easy to get a dog without consideration.

    And someone mentioned Europe. One big difference with here is not only that in most countries you can take your dog way more places than here indeed, and people do, but there are barely any backyard ornament dogs there. In Belgium, where I grew up, no one I knew would ever lock their dog out in the backyard for more time than it took for them to do a wee, if they had a yard. I found there were more dogs there that seemed well trained because they simply had to be because of the lifestyle. But still heaps of dogs are killed in the pounds there of course because idiots are everywhere. It has been illegal to sell dogs in pet stores there for decades though. Not sure if they have laws about backyard breeding. I never owned a dog there myself.

    We really need a cultural shift in that regard to make a difference. If you leave your dog out in the yard without attention and only take them for occasional walks when you feel like it, on lead or at the fenced dog park, there's no compelling motivation to train them. And lots of owners seemingly not understanding the triggers that could make their powerful breed/mix cause serious damage is part of that, I think.
    Last edited by Beloz; 04-12-2014 at 07:03 AM.

  5. #75
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Western Sydney
    Posts
    809

    Default

    So nearly everyone in this thread says get a licence to own a large dog...especially for large powerful breeds like Dobermanns...Rotties and GSDs because look what happened to that poor woman jogger who was attacked by those two Dobermanns...but wait hold the phone...they weren't Dobermanns after all....they were Greyhounds and don't you need a licence for them...so much for that idea.

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/new...-1226871097618

    Had the woman been attacked by two Dobes...one would expect more serious injuries. In the Media it was once claimed that an old lady fought off two large Rotties with a broom stick...yeah right.
    Last edited by Dogman; 04-12-2014 at 04:07 PM.
    Chloe & Zorro
    Rottweilers and German Shepherds are Family

  6. #76

    Default

    Well - I have read through this entire thread – some posts were easier to read than others – more spaces in the text would be helpful – please !

    Some I sort of agreed with – but that was very few and only parts of !

    It doesn’t matter how BSL is dressed up as – I will never agree nor support it ! BSL will never work – because putting things very simply - it concentrates on the wrong end of the lead.

    Yes, we can probably argue until we are blue in the face about the poor breeding of dogs – but really – management of dogs by breeders/owners is a worse problem.

    I class owning a dog as a privilege – not a right ! So if I want to own a dog and keep it on my property – then my local council says it must be registered with them. I have absolutely no problem with this !

    There has been heaps of discussion regarding having to have a license to own a dog in this thread.

    Have a guess what ! The requirement of registering a dog with your local council is a license to own a dog and keep it on your property. It has all the required essentials there for a license/contract such as – offer with conditions, acceptance, and consideration.

    So - why do we need yet another type of license ? Fix what is broken – not do ‘knee jerk add-ons !

    As a suggestion – why look at putting band-aides on something that is not working now? Why should legal/responsible owners be slugged even more ? For one, I am really getting tired of it all !

    Why not start at the beginning and find out why people will not register their dogs with their local council ? Until you can solve that one – everything else is moot !

    So to the OP – the reason you had the problem with that particular dog – was very simply – the owner did not have control of his dog - which if you do your homework - that is one of the conditions of owning and registering a dog with your local council.

    My question to you is – why did you not report this to your local council ?

  7. #77

    Default

    Goggles, I am not licensing breeds, I am licensing handlers so in answer to one of your questions, I am not so much differentiating between breeds as I am between handlers. As I said, in the right hands there is no such thing as a bad dog so the problem obviously lies with the other end of the lead. I don't really care whether you have a license to own a cocker spaniel or not, if everyone else wanted one then obviously that's what people want but personally I have never felt anything other than annoyed/frustrated with a small dog. If you want to own a dog that has the power to kill other dogs or humans, I believe you should have a license to show that you understand what you're getting yourself into and you know how to manage this sort of dog.

    I didn't report it to the council because firstly, I was unable to obtain any distinctive details about the dog or handler (mainly because the guy didn't seem to have proper control over a very powerful dog that still seemed hell bent on attacking mine and so I left very quickly), but also because what would they have done with that information? Make more of the park on-lead only? Put in restrictions so that people with powerful dogs can't have their dogs off-lead or even in the park at all? There's a lot of families in there after all and since the general public can't seem to understand the difference between dog and human aggression, the next thing you know they'd be saying, what if it had been a child? Best case scenario perhaps, they search the park for a white staffy type dog and derelict looking owner? I have seen plenty of those types, staffies appear to be one of the favourite breeds of people who are in that state because they think they need a tough dog. Everyone with a staffy (and being one of the most popular breeds in Australia they're everywhere) gets stopped and questioned? He didn't have to give me any details, if he'd asked me for my details there's no way I would have given them to him. And the time when a purebred show Amstaff attacked Sammy as a puppy and nearly removed his eye? Well the guy ran off whilst I was assessing the damage on my dog. I watched a woman once get circled by 2 GSD's who were growling and barking menacingly at her, it then jumped up on her before the owner finally arrived. The owner grabbed the dogs, mumbled something about being sorry and then very quickly disappeared. Again, the only information I had was that they were GSD's with a female owner and when you know that they have powerful dogs that are human aggressive, I'm not sure that following the person and making them nervous is a great idea...

    I don't have any faith in the current system whatsoever. If I could have said to the Council that there were dogs in Centennial Park without collars that identified them as being owned by unlicensed handlers, that would have been different. That would have shifted the focus to the owners who were breaking the law, rather than the dog being dangerous. Then they could have gone and checked for collars on dogs which would have been easier to see and which I'm sure they would policing anyway. That is what I want.

    I also believe that the situation in Australia will improve once people see that dogs with good handlers don't need to be feared so much. I mean accidents will always happen, but the majority of incidents occur as a result of dogs that the owners know can cause problems and they just have no idea really how to manage them.

    You register a dog after you've brought it home. No-one asks you, well do you know anything about that sort of dog, do you understand that they tend to be dog aggressive? Have you ever trained a dog before? I am looking for a preventative strategy here rather than more effective clean up.

    I agree that dogs will react to stimulus but the examples you gave were ones where I would consider an aggressive responsive to be completely unacceptable. Let me assure you, Sammy and I go for a walk/run every night and many a time someone appears suddenly behind us. There is construction work everywhere and so they have to pass very close, often even touching us. If your dog bites every time it is startled by people suddenly appearing and this can't be rectified with training and socialisation/exposure well honestly, I personally wouldn't keep that dog in the city - it's not fair. ETA - reading that article about Bull the pitbull, I still don't feel that I have all the facts but honestly it doesn't seem right to me. Firstly, a dog can usually hear a jogger approaching but secondly, whilst I wouldn't have that dog put down I would still think he needed to be handled very carefully. He's a dog who reacted by biting. I have had very similar sorts of things happen to me with Sammy and I mean even when they bump into you and you didn't seem them coming, he doesn't bite people.

    Greyhounds are still large, my point was always that the larger the dog, the more damage it could cause in the wrong hands. I would probably recommend a higher level of license for any breed that has ever been bred for defence/used in wars etc but my idea was graded licensing and at the very least, any dog over 15kg would require a license to own. You would need this license before the breeder would sell to you, starting from now. Anyone who currently owned a large dog that fell into these categories would have the option of obtaining a license and there should be incentives to do so, but I do not agree with removing dogs from families unless they are causing serious problems for others and so I would never agree to any licensing applied retroactively.
    Last edited by 99bottles; 04-14-2014 at 10:14 AM.

  8. #78
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    12,581

    Default

    I don't really think so. Are you saying that based on the reactions of the people on this forum or.... what?
    Mostly based on the people I meet out walking my dog - at our local park, the beach, around the neighbourhood. They don't want any more nanny state stuff. We have enough rules but council don't actually enforce any of them. If they did - there would not be so many dog attacks - but there aren't many where I live anyway. It's almost self policing. We yell abuse at the irresponsible people and generally make it no fun for them to be there - and they don't come back.

    We help the owners who are learning - find good dog schools or just help them with the basics where we can... and give them clues to look up on the net.

    Dogman

    The bloke who rang in "anonymously" probably lied about everything. You can see the lady's face in the photos. Those dogs were not "just trying to say hello". She didn't just get her nose broken, she was chomped. And she says they were Dobermans. So I'm betting they probably were Dobermans and that bloke is just trying to lay a false trail.

  9. #79
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Western Sydney
    Posts
    809

    Default

    Yes some guy rang to say his Greyhounds were responsible and the woman attacked said they were Dobermanns or similar...which could be any breed or cross breed. The woman is the victim and the owner is responsible for his dogs and I hope he's caught soon...however another big problem is most people can't tell one breed from another.

    Some years ago I walked into the pet barn with my Rottie and someone asked "Is that a Dobermann" to which I replied why do you think she's a Dobe and the answer "he's black" the person couldn't even tell the sex of the dog either.

    Many years before that I was sitting at the vets with my Dobe...a family came in and I asked them would you like to pat my dog....the kids and the father were patting her when I said " Do you realize your patting a Dobermann" they all pulled their hands away and the father said "But she's brown" I rest my case.
    Chloe & Zorro
    Rottweilers and German Shepherds are Family

  10. #80
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Rural Western Australia
    Posts
    2,634

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mymatejack View Post
    How about make it illegal to sell/rehome a dog unless you're a registered breeder providing pedigree papers???? Then focus of the breeders to make sure they are doing the right thing ... much smaller pool of people to police and probably more effective.
    That isnt going to work for working dogs. Working dogs around here are bred by farmers for their herding ability and very few have papers. Mine have working sheepdog papers simply because they or their parents have been assessed for their herding traits and I need the papers for 3 sheep trialing, one has WKC registration by birth. Unfortunately working bred dogs form quite a large pool for non working homes quite often with not such good consequences.

    Better education is required for ownership of dogs. It would be nice to see better local council support for dog clubs as a lot of people and dogs pass through them looking for training help.

    As to dogs reacting to stimulii, yes of course this happens but if the way my dog reacted to an unexpected situation was to bite I personally dont think that is normal or acceptable. I have only once owned a dog whose temperament was uncertain in these types of situations and I made sure that she was managed accordingly. I left nothing to chance.

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
  •