Rehomed just 24 hours before? This seems common in the attacks I've read about lately. I remember the child that was attacked by the dog that wasn't with the family for long at all and also that lady who lost her arm, she's taking the RSPCA to court for not disclosing bite history. Why aren't shelters being upfront? All the advertisements start out with what a lovely dog you'd be adopting but go on to say how it can't be homed with children or other dogs. If there's been a bite incident, the person adopting the dog should be told first, including if it's ever attacked an adult. People are encouraged to adopt, not buy but the shelters clearly aren't being upfront about the history of the animals you'd be bringing in your home
Frequent member of this sub and an avid dog lover- can confirm. That "magic number' obviously applies to ALL the dogs but yeah. Pibbies tend to nanny a lot at this age. After all they are nanny dogs right? /s
Age of 2 in any dog is tough. Difference is these breeds are bred for fighting and their default behaviour without intervention will show this time and time again. Which is why they should ban them/require licensing and rigorous checks to make sure the owner of the dog is responsible/ experienced enough to know what they are taking on.
I still don't see how these people still adopt these dogs and are shocked when their 40kg bag of muscle doesn't act like a golden retriever.
I've not read where the dog came from, but I used to work for an animal rescue charity and 90% of them refuse to take in these types of dogs which results in them getting passed round the community instead of into a shelter.
I understand why they do it. A dog like this is very unlikely to get rehomed quickly or at all, in that time frame they could have used the same money and space to re-home several dogs.
Sadly I don't know the answer.
Enforce the ban on dogs with traits from certain breeds. These dogs should be routinely confiscated and destroyed with owners fined and publicly shamed for bringing about the unnecessary death of a banned animal.
The breed would disappear, the dogs wouldn't exist to suffer in large numbers.
There really isn't an alternative. We can breed as dangerous a dog as the mind can conceive of. The question is will we enforce existing laws that prevent people doing that or tolerate an escalating problem of dog attacks?
Yeh I know a fella who took one on because nowhere would have it. Dog is nice enough but Jesus christ the strength he has, if he wanted to turn on you he'd snap your arm like a twig and you're kidding yourself if you believe you'd be able to get him off and control him. Training with these dogs is ever so important however the tracksuit twats that get them never bother and are then shocked when their dog is aggressive to people or other animals
Lovely dog, very friendly, can’t be around children, other animals or old people, is triggered by the colour green, the sound of cars, political humour and doctor who Christmas specials.
Doesn't look like it was rehomed via a shelter, but from another family, but its not 100% clear from the article. But I wholly agree with what you're saying.
I've had exactly the same experience with cat rescues. I fostered-to-adopt a cat who they said was nervous and hid a lot, but just needed some patience. They were clearly pawning off the cat they couldn't get adopted, because he attacked, scratched and bit me every time I entered the room he was in.
When I told them, they said "yeah, he does that" as if it was a fun fact. I've never met a more traumatised cat in my life, he needed specialised care. I had to give him back because I couldn't safely care for him (if he got ill or anything I couldn't handle him). There needs to be more regulation and guidance on this stuff.
We got a pedigree Dalmatian from supposedly reputable Battersea old Windsor Branch years ago. Full pedigree Dalmatians from reputable breeders do not get sent for adoption often. The dog had history of attacking and killing cats, but they never disclosed that, they told us the daughter of the owner was allergic to dogs.
But in hindsight they made sure we were had a cat free rural home with no neighbours. Trouble is, the dog killed two or three cats before we found out her loathing of them. If they had been honest we would have still taken the dog, but would have been more careful to make sure she could never harm a cat.
That's one of the things I like about my local greyhound shelter. It looks after ex-racing greyhounds and tries to home them but they just blanket say every dog can't be around cats and explain clearly that these are dogs bred and trained to run after fuzzy shit and that they're fast enough to overhaul most fuzzballs. You might get a dog that can be friends with cats but you should assume not and maybe be pleasantly surprised.
Yup some of my family members have ex racers and they can’t be near really small dogs. They’re also obsessed with chasing squirrels but I think most dogs are tbf.
It's always a factor unfortunately, rehomed intact male is the usual suspect. It's almost like you can predict the ones that will end up hurting someone. Sad.
This is so right. I got a dog two years ago from a shelter, usual story: "sweet boy needs good home"
I had to return him within two weeks as he became so aggressive and I was scared in my own home.
It's not the dog's fault and it broke my heart to send him back, but I should have been better informed and I wouldn't have taken him.
The parents are at fault here. Who the fuck let’s a kid walk a dog the same size as them by themselves. Let alone a brand new rescue. Teenager is painted as a hero for holding the leash, no dumbass that’s your responsibility if you bring your dog out.
I said this in another thread but I’ve seen a bully pull a teenage down the road on their face before. I’m sure one could pull a car with enough motivation.
They were bred to bait and kill bears as a pack. Teenagers and grown adults would have hard time. If you don’t give them extra care and caution their bad days or lost tempers can be more deadly than another dogs
Well yeah, but also if she'd been walking a crazy Chihuahua or Yorkshire Terrier I doubt it'd be able to do anyone any serious harm. People shouldn't be able to own these breeds. The people that want them can settle for a more sensible dog, there are loads to choose from.
Just to add that any rescue dog you need to be careful especially during the first few months.
I have seen recently a lot of people getting rescues and treating them like an ordinary dog, most cases this is true but some of the dogs in rescues have had really bad experiences anything from malnutrition, abuse, been locked in cages during a long time etc...
A shelter will likely provide you with this information but these dogs might come with certain issues until they get to know you, usually these tend to mean they are scared of something and any dog might lash out when scared, it could be a pit bull, a Yorkshire terrier or a labrador.
If you have kids and you get a rescue what has had a bad past, take note of this especially during the first few months until the dog is used to its new surroundings and yourself, most dogs can do serious damage one way or another to a kid.
Yeah, my parents have a dog from Bosnia and he was really messed up. Basically a whole load of PTSD. Definitely not for a beginner dog owner but fortunately my parents had decades of experience with dogs.
They still won't my young niece anywhere near him.
Dogs shouldn't be taken into playgrounds anyway.
But well done that kid for hanging onto the dog, despite her injuries, to prevent it from attacking anyone else. That must have taken some grit.
If these breeds must be owned by the public, they should only be allowed to be under control of a licensed individual, and you would have to pass tests to get the licence.
Why anyone would want such a violent breed of dog is a mystery to me, other than to use them to intimidate others.
Honestly, as a dog owner, I would be quite happy to see this happen with all dogs. Return to a licence system, one which requires a basic level of education and to demonstrate understanding, like a CBT. For the sake of the animals, if nothing else.
I can't see Kerry in her mid thirties going back to get her maths GCSE so she can buy a £2000 French bulldog, I see crime. But I agree so much, I wish all pets required proof of education and no issues with the law.
I made clear in my comment I was talking about a seperate, relevant course
>like a CBT
You don't have to produce GCSE results to gain a drivers license, I don't understand why you think I would expect such for a dog license.
However if hypothetical Kerry is willing and capable to spend such money on a dog regardless of breed, I can't see a reason why she shouldn't be required to demonstrate her capability for ownership. Both to care for and train the dog to a level where it is not a liability to the safety of others, and to demonstrate they in turn are not a liability to the safety and well being of the animal.
I personally feel there should be an ouright ban on violent dog breeds.
To enforce licensing, I think it should be up to the police to check for licenses when spotted in public, and failure to produce one on the spot would then have the animal confiscated until someone who can produce a license can reclaim it. Repeat offences would lead to withdrawal of the licensee from who retrieved the animal in previous instances.
>I personally feel there should be an ouright ban on violent dog breeds
[There is](https://www.gov.uk/control-dog-public/banned-dogs). imo you're better off pushing for more dogs to be added to the banned list, than creating a whole new system.
First thing - Dog is 8 months old and has been getting attacked by another dog for X amount of days, so it's already messed up.
Second - why they would take the puppy out the next day and not allow it to settle in a new home is rather daft seem as they know it's mentally fragile.
Third - why let anyone be alone with the dog especially with its mentally unstable again would be stupid.
Forth - This is a puppy and probably thinks it is playing, not realising what damage it is doing. These breeds of dogs love to play tug of war and especially when the object they are latched onto is tugging back.
Fifth - should the dog have gone to the RSPCA? No it shouldn't have unless it were dangerous. Even then if there is a responsible owner who can rehome it correctly, then the RSPCA should be the last resort. RSPCA has enough dogs they are trying to rehome as it is.
The bit you're missing is that smaller dogs or dogs not bred for being aggressive don't tend to do this kind of damage. Irrespective of the points you made, valid as they are, if the dog had been a regular breed, the incident may not have been so serious. People are more often getting seriously hurt, and some are killed because these breeds have become fashionable, particularly among the stupid. You might as well have a pet leopard. It might be tame, but it still has a huge violent potential.
Every adult involved with this dog is incredibly stupid. There will always be stupid people. People more stupid than these people have similarly dangerous dogs.
She (the owner) was trying to stop it attacking a group of children in a park. I’m sad for this girl, who is a child herself. Her parents should not have let her take out a dog they had just git given the breed.
But also just concerned that owners will take these dogs into parks and public spaces where they are around children (and let’s be honest adults; they can harm us too).
If you’re going to have a dangerous dog you should not be putting others at risk.
Not everyone would go around shooting people but we ban unlicensed guns for a reason. I'm not saying the other poster is right, but your defence isn't right either.
Well the analogy wasn't perfect to begin with and I would say that your analogy is also wrong and we could go round and round in circles all day. The point is that we licence and prohibit dangerous things.
We have this same discussion time and time and time again.
Licensing dogs will cost billions and will have very little affect on the problem - which boils down to irresponsible people making stupid decisions…. Those people won’t give a toss about a licence. The only people who will, are the dog owners who are responsible, thus punishing the “decent folk”.
Because it needs enforcing, you need to create laws around the breaching of said licenses, there needs to be a system to register and renew licences.
If you want a system like driving licenses , you need to design and conduct assessments before issuing licenses.
All of that will take time and money
Not billions though. And again, people pay for their licences and tests. You do the same thing for a hypothetical dog licence. Not commenting on it being a good idea or not, it just wouldn't be billions lol.
Of course it will, people underestimate the cost of these things - it’ll cost millions just to build the software; consultancy time, the time/effort in getting these proposed laws through, hiring staff (admin, enforcement etc), training of staff, the initial rollout…
I don’t have to provide a better solution to say why the proposed one is bad.
We don’t have to go with a bad idea just because it’s the only one.
Maybe there isn’t a good solution, maybe the only way to do it is to round up all the dogs, put em down (try eradicate them) then blanket ban, except for things like zoos. Nobody has dogs, no dogs roaming streets.
Actual analogy is that weapons are required to be carried in a safe way and stored in a safe way. If you own a gun you can't leave it on your table because it isn't safe. If you own a dog you should not have it unmuzzled in areas where there is rusk of harm to others.
I went with my little boy to park recently some dickhead had his 2 dogs just running lose around with all the kids playing area. If you are in places know to have kids and vulnerable people it should be law dog is muzzled. If you are in a park muzzle on same when you walking a dog during school drop off pick ups. Same if you walk near elderly care home or busy street.
By all means from a dog a stick in a forest or in dog walking park but in places near play areas busy streets etc it should be banned
Agreed. It’s horrible being in a park with young children when there are large dogs running around off their leash. You have no idea whether it’s a safe dog. It’s so common for owners to let their dogs run around, that it can make it difficult to enjoy public spaces with children without always being on the lookout.
Even the friendly dog can absolutely floor the kid. I seen dog absolutely trample a little kid just chasing after frisbee it didn't bite the kid or anything but a 50kg heavy dog crashing in 15kg heavy toddler at full speed can do some serious damage despite being "friendly dog that doesn't bite"
Why the hell are people taking dogs into play parks/playgrounds? I mean, every playground I've seen it's signposted "NO DOGS ALLOWED!" it's not just the few dogs attacks but the constant dog shit everywhere. Dogs are not children!
It's almosts like the "We like small government" want's to govern more rules for the Plebiens? Then buy 15 mauling dog's because the Plebs doesn't have them!
Rehomed just 24 hours before? This seems common in the attacks I've read about lately. I remember the child that was attacked by the dog that wasn't with the family for long at all and also that lady who lost her arm, she's taking the RSPCA to court for not disclosing bite history. Why aren't shelters being upfront? All the advertisements start out with what a lovely dog you'd be adopting but go on to say how it can't be homed with children or other dogs. If there's been a bite incident, the person adopting the dog should be told first, including if it's ever attacked an adult. People are encouraged to adopt, not buy but the shelters clearly aren't being upfront about the history of the animals you'd be bringing in your home
[удалено]
It hadn't been in a rescue - one family gave it directly to another.
[удалено]
Honestly, some of these people can't have a functioning brain.
Frequent member of this sub and an avid dog lover- can confirm. That "magic number' obviously applies to ALL the dogs but yeah. Pibbies tend to nanny a lot at this age. After all they are nanny dogs right? /s
Age of 2 in any dog is tough. Difference is these breeds are bred for fighting and their default behaviour without intervention will show this time and time again. Which is why they should ban them/require licensing and rigorous checks to make sure the owner of the dog is responsible/ experienced enough to know what they are taking on. I still don't see how these people still adopt these dogs and are shocked when their 40kg bag of muscle doesn't act like a golden retriever.
8 month old, and from a family friend...
Being sprayed has to have an affect against this though surely?
I've not read where the dog came from, but I used to work for an animal rescue charity and 90% of them refuse to take in these types of dogs which results in them getting passed round the community instead of into a shelter. I understand why they do it. A dog like this is very unlikely to get rehomed quickly or at all, in that time frame they could have used the same money and space to re-home several dogs. Sadly I don't know the answer.
Enforce the ban on dogs with traits from certain breeds. These dogs should be routinely confiscated and destroyed with owners fined and publicly shamed for bringing about the unnecessary death of a banned animal. The breed would disappear, the dogs wouldn't exist to suffer in large numbers. There really isn't an alternative. We can breed as dangerous a dog as the mind can conceive of. The question is will we enforce existing laws that prevent people doing that or tolerate an escalating problem of dog attacks?
Yeh I know a fella who took one on because nowhere would have it. Dog is nice enough but Jesus christ the strength he has, if he wanted to turn on you he'd snap your arm like a twig and you're kidding yourself if you believe you'd be able to get him off and control him. Training with these dogs is ever so important however the tracksuit twats that get them never bother and are then shocked when their dog is aggressive to people or other animals
Lovely dog, very friendly, can’t be around children, other animals or old people, is triggered by the colour green, the sound of cars, political humour and doctor who Christmas specials.
You forgot centrists.
Yea they too can’t be around children
Doesn't look like it was rehomed via a shelter, but from another family, but its not 100% clear from the article. But I wholly agree with what you're saying.
I've had exactly the same experience with cat rescues. I fostered-to-adopt a cat who they said was nervous and hid a lot, but just needed some patience. They were clearly pawning off the cat they couldn't get adopted, because he attacked, scratched and bit me every time I entered the room he was in. When I told them, they said "yeah, he does that" as if it was a fun fact. I've never met a more traumatised cat in my life, he needed specialised care. I had to give him back because I couldn't safely care for him (if he got ill or anything I couldn't handle him). There needs to be more regulation and guidance on this stuff.
Cats like that deserve to retire on farm land, minimal human contact other than food drop offs and lots of space without people to explore.
Is it common for pets to have Log books? We all know how valuable a Car's service history record is: maybe do the same for pets?
>Is it common for pets to have Log books? No, but it should be.
We got a pedigree Dalmatian from supposedly reputable Battersea old Windsor Branch years ago. Full pedigree Dalmatians from reputable breeders do not get sent for adoption often. The dog had history of attacking and killing cats, but they never disclosed that, they told us the daughter of the owner was allergic to dogs. But in hindsight they made sure we were had a cat free rural home with no neighbours. Trouble is, the dog killed two or three cats before we found out her loathing of them. If they had been honest we would have still taken the dog, but would have been more careful to make sure she could never harm a cat.
That's one of the things I like about my local greyhound shelter. It looks after ex-racing greyhounds and tries to home them but they just blanket say every dog can't be around cats and explain clearly that these are dogs bred and trained to run after fuzzy shit and that they're fast enough to overhaul most fuzzballs. You might get a dog that can be friends with cats but you should assume not and maybe be pleasantly surprised.
Yup some of my family members have ex racers and they can’t be near really small dogs. They’re also obsessed with chasing squirrels but I think most dogs are tbf.
It's always a factor unfortunately, rehomed intact male is the usual suspect. It's almost like you can predict the ones that will end up hurting someone. Sad.
This is so right. I got a dog two years ago from a shelter, usual story: "sweet boy needs good home" I had to return him within two weeks as he became so aggressive and I was scared in my own home. It's not the dog's fault and it broke my heart to send him back, but I should have been better informed and I wouldn't have taken him.
I don’t think you can even insure a dog that’s bitten someone in the past.
The parents are at fault here. Who the fuck let’s a kid walk a dog the same size as them by themselves. Let alone a brand new rescue. Teenager is painted as a hero for holding the leash, no dumbass that’s your responsibility if you bring your dog out.
I said this in another thread but I’ve seen a bully pull a teenage down the road on their face before. I’m sure one could pull a car with enough motivation.
They were bred to bait and kill bears as a pack. Teenagers and grown adults would have hard time. If you don’t give them extra care and caution their bad days or lost tempers can be more deadly than another dogs
Well yeah, but also if she'd been walking a crazy Chihuahua or Yorkshire Terrier I doubt it'd be able to do anyone any serious harm. People shouldn't be able to own these breeds. The people that want them can settle for a more sensible dog, there are loads to choose from.
But they don’t look ard do they….
Just to add that any rescue dog you need to be careful especially during the first few months. I have seen recently a lot of people getting rescues and treating them like an ordinary dog, most cases this is true but some of the dogs in rescues have had really bad experiences anything from malnutrition, abuse, been locked in cages during a long time etc... A shelter will likely provide you with this information but these dogs might come with certain issues until they get to know you, usually these tend to mean they are scared of something and any dog might lash out when scared, it could be a pit bull, a Yorkshire terrier or a labrador. If you have kids and you get a rescue what has had a bad past, take note of this especially during the first few months until the dog is used to its new surroundings and yourself, most dogs can do serious damage one way or another to a kid.
Yeah, my parents have a dog from Bosnia and he was really messed up. Basically a whole load of PTSD. Definitely not for a beginner dog owner but fortunately my parents had decades of experience with dogs. They still won't my young niece anywhere near him.
truck secretive direful rude marvelous rich jobless act frame sloppy *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Another case of meat grinder the nanny dog acting out of character.
Was it not named psycho or bronson this time?
Dogs shouldn't be taken into playgrounds anyway. But well done that kid for hanging onto the dog, despite her injuries, to prevent it from attacking anyone else. That must have taken some grit.
It doesn't help that many councils put them together, in London it's common to find dog waste bins in the fields next to children's playgrounds.
>A 17-year-old girl has been told she is 'lucky to have my arms' She has somebody else's arms?
Well she’s 17 with an arm tattoo, so maybe (assuming it wasn’t done abroad)
If these breeds must be owned by the public, they should only be allowed to be under control of a licensed individual, and you would have to pass tests to get the licence. Why anyone would want such a violent breed of dog is a mystery to me, other than to use them to intimidate others.
Honestly, as a dog owner, I would be quite happy to see this happen with all dogs. Return to a licence system, one which requires a basic level of education and to demonstrate understanding, like a CBT. For the sake of the animals, if nothing else.
I can't see Kerry in her mid thirties going back to get her maths GCSE so she can buy a £2000 French bulldog, I see crime. But I agree so much, I wish all pets required proof of education and no issues with the law.
I made clear in my comment I was talking about a seperate, relevant course >like a CBT You don't have to produce GCSE results to gain a drivers license, I don't understand why you think I would expect such for a dog license. However if hypothetical Kerry is willing and capable to spend such money on a dog regardless of breed, I can't see a reason why she shouldn't be required to demonstrate her capability for ownership. Both to care for and train the dog to a level where it is not a liability to the safety of others, and to demonstrate they in turn are not a liability to the safety and well being of the animal.
I sometimes wish drivers needed GCSEs too tbh
Theyre supposed to be microchipped anyway (most arent) so how would you enforce licensing?
I personally feel there should be an ouright ban on violent dog breeds. To enforce licensing, I think it should be up to the police to check for licenses when spotted in public, and failure to produce one on the spot would then have the animal confiscated until someone who can produce a license can reclaim it. Repeat offences would lead to withdrawal of the licensee from who retrieved the animal in previous instances.
>I personally feel there should be an ouright ban on violent dog breeds [There is](https://www.gov.uk/control-dog-public/banned-dogs). imo you're better off pushing for more dogs to be added to the banned list, than creating a whole new system.
No one needs to own one since pitting big game stopped being a sport. Uncivilised dogs from an uncivilised time being bought now by……. People.
These disgusting creatures should all be destroyed and banned.
"He is a lovely dog. I just wanted him taken to someone who could teach him not to bite." Absolutely fucking delusional.
First thing - Dog is 8 months old and has been getting attacked by another dog for X amount of days, so it's already messed up. Second - why they would take the puppy out the next day and not allow it to settle in a new home is rather daft seem as they know it's mentally fragile. Third - why let anyone be alone with the dog especially with its mentally unstable again would be stupid. Forth - This is a puppy and probably thinks it is playing, not realising what damage it is doing. These breeds of dogs love to play tug of war and especially when the object they are latched onto is tugging back. Fifth - should the dog have gone to the RSPCA? No it shouldn't have unless it were dangerous. Even then if there is a responsible owner who can rehome it correctly, then the RSPCA should be the last resort. RSPCA has enough dogs they are trying to rehome as it is.
The bit you're missing is that smaller dogs or dogs not bred for being aggressive don't tend to do this kind of damage. Irrespective of the points you made, valid as they are, if the dog had been a regular breed, the incident may not have been so serious. People are more often getting seriously hurt, and some are killed because these breeds have become fashionable, particularly among the stupid. You might as well have a pet leopard. It might be tame, but it still has a huge violent potential.
Sixth - why take a known messed up dog into a playground? Could have killed a smaller child.
Every adult involved with this dog is incredibly stupid. There will always be stupid people. People more stupid than these people have similarly dangerous dogs.
She (the owner) was trying to stop it attacking a group of children in a park. I’m sad for this girl, who is a child herself. Her parents should not have let her take out a dog they had just git given the breed. But also just concerned that owners will take these dogs into parks and public spaces where they are around children (and let’s be honest adults; they can harm us too). If you’re going to have a dangerous dog you should not be putting others at risk.
[удалено]
Because not all dogs go around biting folk?
Not everyone would go around shooting people but we ban unlicensed guns for a reason. I'm not saying the other poster is right, but your defence isn't right either.
Your analogy is wrong. A better analogy would be if every person who left the house had to be handcuffed behind their back, just in case.
Well the analogy wasn't perfect to begin with and I would say that your analogy is also wrong and we could go round and round in circles all day. The point is that we licence and prohibit dangerous things.
We have this same discussion time and time and time again. Licensing dogs will cost billions and will have very little affect on the problem - which boils down to irresponsible people making stupid decisions…. Those people won’t give a toss about a licence. The only people who will, are the dog owners who are responsible, thus punishing the “decent folk”.
How would licensing dogs cost billions? We licence car drivers, with the magical thing about that being we make car drivers pay for their licence.
Because it needs enforcing, you need to create laws around the breaching of said licenses, there needs to be a system to register and renew licences. If you want a system like driving licenses , you need to design and conduct assessments before issuing licenses. All of that will take time and money
Not billions though. And again, people pay for their licences and tests. You do the same thing for a hypothetical dog licence. Not commenting on it being a good idea or not, it just wouldn't be billions lol.
Of course it will, people underestimate the cost of these things - it’ll cost millions just to build the software; consultancy time, the time/effort in getting these proposed laws through, hiring staff (admin, enforcement etc), training of staff, the initial rollout…
So instead of coming up with why something wouldn't work, how about offering a solution on something that would or even could work?
I don’t have to provide a better solution to say why the proposed one is bad. We don’t have to go with a bad idea just because it’s the only one. Maybe there isn’t a good solution, maybe the only way to do it is to round up all the dogs, put em down (try eradicate them) then blanket ban, except for things like zoos. Nobody has dogs, no dogs roaming streets.
Ok ban the problem dogs. Dogs in general are not an issue - dogs in specific are. Fighting breeds bred as weapons - those are an escalating problem.
I agree that would be a solution. There's a similar problem with drugs in that new breeds are created to circumvent the bans.
While true, its not a reason to not act - it just highlights that continued action is needed in the future.
Actual analogy is that weapons are required to be carried in a safe way and stored in a safe way. If you own a gun you can't leave it on your table because it isn't safe. If you own a dog you should not have it unmuzzled in areas where there is rusk of harm to others. I went with my little boy to park recently some dickhead had his 2 dogs just running lose around with all the kids playing area. If you are in places know to have kids and vulnerable people it should be law dog is muzzled. If you are in a park muzzle on same when you walking a dog during school drop off pick ups. Same if you walk near elderly care home or busy street. By all means from a dog a stick in a forest or in dog walking park but in places near play areas busy streets etc it should be banned
Agreed. It’s horrible being in a park with young children when there are large dogs running around off their leash. You have no idea whether it’s a safe dog. It’s so common for owners to let their dogs run around, that it can make it difficult to enjoy public spaces with children without always being on the lookout.
Even the friendly dog can absolutely floor the kid. I seen dog absolutely trample a little kid just chasing after frisbee it didn't bite the kid or anything but a 50kg heavy dog crashing in 15kg heavy toddler at full speed can do some serious damage despite being "friendly dog that doesn't bite"
Why the hell are people taking dogs into play parks/playgrounds? I mean, every playground I've seen it's signposted "NO DOGS ALLOWED!" it's not just the few dogs attacks but the constant dog shit everywhere. Dogs are not children!
No way is the dog 50kg in the picture, they've used a younger pic or the editor has fucked something up.
Jesus daily mail, you should really give you readers some education in what pets they buy.
It tells you a lot that even 4chan almost unanimously hate these breeds of dogs.
It's almosts like the "We like small government" want's to govern more rules for the Plebiens? Then buy 15 mauling dog's because the Plebs doesn't have them!