Syldon @ Syldon @feddit.uk

Posts

46

Comments

685

Joined

2 yr. ago

Not really a surprise when you consider just how bad the cost of living crisis is to some people.

Brave people, Respect!

You seriously used the Daily Mail as a source?

Which is why I said above a certain weight.

There is never going to be conclusive evidence that it is down to the breed. No one would be so inhumane as to do a study where you mistreat a lot of dogs to see the effects. It is reasonable imo that mistreatment is a major cause of an aggressive dog. You can make a rat aggressive if you condition it that way.

My personal opinion of the dog breeding market in the UK is very low.

https://www.joe.co.uk/news/dachshunds-seized-after-woman-mauled-to-death-in-horrific-surrey-dog-attack-374122

It was just the first google link google returned.

In a word "Corbyn".

Without a doubt it is a dead cat issue (no pun intended). Sunak doesn't give a rat's anus about the people of the UK. There is plenty of evidence that his interests are purely financial and self motivated. But that doesn't deflect that there is an issue, and yet again they are making pointless legislation to deal with it.

The breed is only a small part of the issue. I have already shown studies that state this in another reply.

It is just as difficult and ineffective in the UK. They just breed in new types of dogs. The XL breed is a cross breed with a pit bull terrier which is already on a banned breed list.

I would be for banning breeds with health issues. I would also ban all dog shows that promote dog breed types into the bargain. You will never stop idiots who follow celebrities, but dog shows are an easy fix, and a major reason people buy pedigrees in the first place.

Did I mention them at all ?

This report gives the opinions of expert behaviourists and consultants on the reasons why some dogs may be aggressive towards people. Of the 215 experts who responded, some 74% argued that breed was either not at all important or only slightly important, whilst an overwhelming 86% believed it was due to the way that the dog was brought up by its owner.

https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/90096/html/

The law on dangerous dogs refers to specific breeds of dog as ‘dangerous’. However, we believe that breed-specific legislation ignores the most important factors that contribute to biting incidents – primarily anti-social behaviour by irresponsible dog owners who train their dogs to be aggressive or do not train their dogs adequately.

https://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/about-us/campaigns/dangerous-dogs-deed-not-breed/

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/sep/11/banning-some-dog-breeds-in-the-uk-wont-stop-attacks-on-humans - study in comments

There is a ton of research on the issue.

My point was that all dogs are dangerous. Selecting breeds shows total lack of understanding. It is how the dog is reared that causes the issues. Since you cannot evaluate that by looking at a dog then it makes more sense to add a safety device for all dogs.

A total waste of time. Banning breeds has proven to be totally ineffective in the past. The common sense approach would be to make it mandatory to muzzle dogs over a certain size.

Are you suggesting that politicians create issues to hide other more heinous issues? That would just be dead catting.

one is infinitely more evil than the other though.

A honest politician is usually the more open one. You would think that getting threats would be an indicator she is doing something upsets people, and she wants to double down on the crazy.

I can understand restrictions on upcoming events, but there is nothing wrong with releasing them after they have been used. It is not like someone is going to go back in time to commit an offence.

Part of the official secret's act should be that you cannot work for in a foreign country without UK consent after leaving service for a 5-10 year period.