[Closed] No it's not alright. (A dog owner rant)

😀

The top ten most aggressive breeds, apparantly:

"Aggressive" isn't exactly the same as "dangerous" though. You're unlikely to find a group of EDL members carrying attack daschunds for protection.

It does strike me that had a doberman really been running up to a group of kids snarling with teeth exposed the op would be currently at the hospital with the kids not moaning on the interweb.

You're unlikely to find a group of EDL members carrying attack daschunds for protection.

🙂

Ooooh, I dunno.
I'm sure many EDL members have a fondness for all things Teutonic.

"Aggressive" isn't exactly the same as "dangerous" though.

Has anyone got a link to the last dog thread, btw?

Rusty Spanner - Member
Dog attacks in Wales up 81% in 10 years.

Do the Welsh have dogs whose mouths open really wide? 😀

Do the Welsh have dogs whose mouths open really wide?

A combination of that, and their prey not being able to waddle out of harm's way.

You could trip over one very easily.......

That's a good point actually. You could probably do a good deal of damage with chihuahuas if you had a bag of angry ones and could throw them hard enough.

Has anyone got a link to the last dog thread, btw?

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/dangerous-dog-owners-proud

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/sarcastic-comments-from-dog-owners

And the infamous "A dog sniffed my wife's bag, I'm outraged" thread.

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/entitled-dog-owners

Just a few samples.

Ta Drac.
I thought this one went quite well, considering.

[img] ?1[/img]

I'm not particularly fussed how it's funded, tbh.
General taxation is fine by me.

We could add another 10% to concert ticket prices?

TBS, how would you suggest we deal with irresponsible dog owners?

I suggest we focus on application of the current laws but I guess that isnt knee jerk enough.

The current laws only take effect once the dog has been dangerously out of control.
Which is obviously too late for the dog and those affected.

Given the rise in the number of hospital admissions and reported incidents, how do you suggest we minimize the risk of these situations occurring?

We could add another 10% to concert ticket prices?

Its pointless though dogs, like children, can do no wrong in the eyes of their owners and the problems are always caused by other peoples not theirs

The problem with the dog licence idea is that the people most likely to want to own a dangerous dog are the same people who are likely to think "screw that" when faced with the prospect of getting a licence. Ie, it'll make it easier to remove said dogs from their owners but IMHO is unlikely to make a fig of difference to them owning one in the first place.

What do you mean by "dangerous dog"?

Any dog with the wrong person can be a danger to others, it's owner & itself.

It's not dog licensing we need, though I think it has it's place, it's better education of how to be a responsible dog owner & a better understanding of how dogs see us & the world around them. That would end half the negative dog/human interactions in a thrice!

mrlebowski - Member it's better education of how to be a responsible dog owner

I agree.
How do you suggest we go about this?

& a better understanding of how dogs see us & the world around them.

I also agree.
As long as this does not shift responsibility for the dog's actions from owner to victim.

What do you mean by "dangerous dog"?

A dog which is dangerous. In honesty I don't know I can expand on that, I thought it was relatively self-descriptive as phrases go.

I was talking about people who actively want a dog which is actually dangerous, rather than someone just wanting a breed of dog which happens to be on a list of ones which have the capacity to be dangerous in the wrong hands.

I don't disagree with your post, it's the people who need to change. Though it's not always an education issue, people may be doing it deliberately.

And the infamous "A dog sniffed my wife's bag, I'm outraged" thread.

Junkyard - lazarus
Its pointless though dogs, like children, can do no wrong in the eyes of their owners and the problems are always caused by other peoples not theirs

Just acknowledging that the increase in irresponsible ownership is an issue would be a start Junky.

Bah, checked the OP on that thread. All about dogs and bags; not a hint of euphemism. Don't waste you time following drac's link

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/entitled-dog-owners/page/5#post-6148822

 current laws only take effect once the dog has been dangerously out of control.
Which is obviously too late for the dog and those affected.

So are you suggesting pre emptive measures to eliminate any do that sniffs a bag kr scares someone who is scared of dogs and if so what should they be? Wonder how a license would help in eliminating these problems too.

What is this dogs vs kids discussion? Nowt against dog owners in general but if my kids were free to run around frightening other kids and shitting on the pavement I expect the other parents would have a word or two with me. You don't need licences to govern that on either side, just simple common sense.

You don't need licences to govern that on either side, just simple common sense.

Amen to that

anagallis_arvensis - Member
So are you suggesting pre emptive measures

Yes.

to eliminate any do that sniffs a bag kr scares someone who is scared of dogs

and if so what should they be?

I've told you what I think should be done.

I asked you how do you think we can minimize the risk of these situations occurring.
I'd be interested to hear your answer.

I'm not sure you can minimise idiots owning dogs or pant wetting stwers getting upset when a dog looks at them funny.

I am still intrigued by the license idea is, how it would help and how it would do anything that current laws dont

anagallis_arvensis - Member

I'm not sure you can minimise idiots owning dogs

I am still intrigued by the license idea is, how it would help and how it would do anything that current laws dont

No problem, could you return they favour by explain how the dog license would help. I've skim read the thread and cant see how you suggest it would help other than employing more dog wardens(with what new powers?) and rehome and destroy unlicensed dogs. I fail to see how this would help can you spell it out to me?

It's a deterrent, at least.
Punish repeat offenders.
Employ plenty of wardens.
It would also mean that less children are injured, and less unwanted dogs bred.

In the long term, make owning an unlicensed dog socially unacceptable.
Yep, it'll take a long time, but it will be worth it.

The total suffering to the innocent victims in all this - the dogs and those they attack will decrease.
People will feel safer.
The sum total of human and canine happiness increases.

I'd suggest a sliding scale of dog license charges based on the size of the dog - a tax on emissions, if you like.

Repeat offenders of what?
What would the wardens do?
What powers would they have?
How would it reduce attacks and breeding?
Why should larger dogs cost more?

I'd suggest a sliding scale of dog license charges based on the size of the dog - a tax on emissions, if you like.

Only the rich would be able to afford big dogs. As the more money you have means you are more responsible obviously.

Promoting threads like " has anyone had their golden retriever stolen as I saw one being walked down so and so high street by some scroute"

After reading this thread title several times now, I can resist no longer.

anagallis_arvensis - Member

Repeat offenders of what?

What would the wardens do?

What powers would they have?

How would it reduce attacks and breeding?

Bugger how do I link to a pdf?

Why should larger dogs cost more?

Because they consume more, excrete more and have the potential to cause more damage.

Like horses?

I like horses.

U like horses 2?

What about a big dog with a small mouth.

Or if he has had lost some teeth could I get a reduction.

Or how about a gastric band.

Well thats as clear as mud thanks. In summary you just want licenses to work but have no idea how they would.

Oh and why would the amount a dogs wees be an issue?

How about taxing joy, you could qualify for a rebate.

chip - Member

What about a big dog with a small mouth.

It's not only the front end I'm bothered about.

Or if he has had lost some teeth could I get a reduction.

Or how about a gastric band.

I'm just big bored.

anagallis_arvensis - Member

Well thats as clear as mud thanks. In summary you just want licenses to work but have no idea how they would.

I agree with the RSPCA's recommendations.
Have a read of it and tell me which bits you disagree with.

chip - Member

How about taxing joy, you could qualify for a rebate.

Touchy lot, dog owners.

I have a massive dog (Newfoundland, Berneise cross) and can't think how she has potential to do more harm than a smaller, working breed such as a German Shepherd or Boxer. Lower energy, slower moving and couldn't run if her life depended on it. A lot of giant breeds are similar. Therefore blah to a size tax!

edit: intervening post!

no, not really, but all you're doing is illustrating your lack of understanding of dogs.
it's ok though, you don't get dogs, i understand, and that's fine.
😉
it's quite interesting to observe sometimes, the number of parents who think it's ok to introduce even very small children to my dog ( even toddlers ), without speaking to me first, or even in some cases acknowledging my presence. they have no experience of my dog, but they're prepared to put their children at risk of injury, and my dog at risk of extermination, because they think it will be good experience for their child.
now, i have no reason to think my dog will hurt a child, she's never done so before, after all, but i have no idea what that child will do to my dog, either, and it's my dog that pays the price, by which i mean the ultimate price, if something goes wrong, right?
if we can take anything away from this, i think it's that some people shouldn't own dogs, and some people shouldn't have children.
unsurprisingly, charlie's law - don't be a dick, applies.

Rusty Spanner - Member

In every single dog thread I've contributed to, I've emphasized the fact that I love dogs but hate irresponsible dog owners.

I find quite sad that this has to be repeated every time anyone dares to suggest that steps be taken to reduce the amount of dog attacks.

Y'know, on balance, Junkyard was right.

Short of making all dogs display licence plates at all times that can be read at 30 yards I don't see a dog licence scheme making any difference.

In life their will always be irresponsible tools you can not legislate against them until after they have committed a criminal act.
Because you have drink drivers you can't ban drinking or driving or boy racers, you can't ban boys or ten year old hot hatches, or even boys in ten year old hot hatches unless you catch them driving like a count.

There is only one answer to this problem and all problems on STW... we must create a STW Utopia any scientists on here who can come up with a clever way of eliminating all irresponsible, antisocial types? Could we impregrate copies of the Sun with some deadly virus or a self destruct message into Big brother? Hmmm this has given me an idea for a book/film..