A Breed Misunderstood
August 1991 saw the introduction of the Dangerous Dogs Act, which focused on targeting four main breeds:
· The Pit Bull Terrier or Type
· The Japanese Tosa
· The Fila Brasileiro
· The Dogo Argentino
Although the act has specified the above four breeds, there is a common misconception that, only the above dogs are covered under the act. The act actually cover's any dog that may be a danger to society, even a poodle. But, the Act has been enforced so that the above breeds will eventually die out of the U.K.
But why is it the Pit Bull Terrier/type as well as the above named dogs have generated such a public hatred and monster like image, for example as well as the U.K, various states in America, Canada and Europe have also started banning the Pit Bull.
There is no doubt the above named dogs are strong sturdy dogs and in the hands of the rotten, obtuse people out there that use them as status symbols, weapons or money making tools, they can most definitely be dangerous. But a puppy is born vulnerable at the hands of his owner, if anyones to blame its the owner that has turned the once innocent puppy into an aggressive dog. So shouldnt we be putting the owner down?? (My opinion)
Ellie Lawrenson
This is evident in the very tragic events that took place on 1st January 2007, in Merseyside when the beautiful 5-year-old Ellie Lawrenson was attacked by their pet “Pit Bull type” dog “Reuben” causing fatal injuries to her head and neck. Reuben had come to Police notice twice before and the owners had been warned. The first instance was when Reuben attacked another dog and then just weeks before the attack on Ellie had attacked another family member causing injuries to her leg. So it is arguable that the dog should have been taken away as soon as it was brought to the attention of the Police, because potential of attack was already apparent. There is no justification, excuse or argument surrounding Ellie’s attack it simply should not have happened, but I would question the root of the whole situation, for example, how was Reuben raised and in what surroundings?
· The owner Kiel Simpson, had previously been arrested with 20kgs of Cannabis witn intent to supply.
· Ellie’s Grandmother on the night of the attack had drank 2 bottles of wine and smoked 10 Cannabis joints, while caring for Ellie.
· The dog had been conditioned to be an athlete, Constable Peter Tallack, a specialist dog handler with the Metropolitan police, who examined Reuben, said it was "fantastically well conditioned" and didn't have any fat on its body. "It was an athlete; it was in prime condition. It was of immeasurable power and strength," he said.
This is not to say a fit athletic dog cant’t be friendly or safe, but the dog had been trained with strict regulation and most likely with very little human affection. I have met many dogs in my life that are athletic, strong and fit, but have received the correct human socialising to be great family pets too.
Socialising
Any responsible dog owner will know that when a puppy is brought home it will need training, exercise and socialising and the neglect in these actions can result in a badly behaved, disobedient and sometimes aggressive dog.
I know that in my life I have met Pit Bulls and breeds alike that have been friendlier than the average German Shepard, Japanese Akita or Rottweiller. This is not to say the madness behind banning dogs should spread to other breeds. But as an 11-year-old schoolgirl I remember being snapped at by an Alsatian walking past our school with its owner. Maybe, I’m comfortable with Pit Bulls because of what I have grown up around, good dogs and good dog owners.
My point is every dog has the ability to attack, the same way every dog has the potential of getting into the wrong hands. These breeds suffer at the hands of the pathetic irresponsible owners, where their strength and their devotion to their owners is exploited, by the low-lifes that choose to fight them, turn them into aggressive guard dogs, keep them for status or to protect them and their drugs..........but now, even governments are choosing to turn on them, instead of stopping the cruelty they endure, governments are taking them away from the real lovers of the breed who truely understand the amazing qualities these breeds posess. People who truely understand that these breeds can show phenomenal amounts of love and affection if shown the same in the first instance, the fact that they can be gentle with both adults and children and will lay their life on the line just for their owners well-being if raised and socialised well.
Maybe the government should re-introduce dog licences, every litter born should be registered with a single government body, if this is not done then the breeder and the owner should be given a hefty fine, dog owners should be vetted by the breeders before the puppy is given to them. Every owner should have to be asessed before even being considered for a puppy.
Whatever the answer may be, I think we are barking up the wrong tree (pardon the pun). We should be striving for responsible ownership and not encouraging the killing and banishing of particular breeds. We are targeting a breed that is simply obeying it's owners command, so shouldn't we be punishing the irresponsible owners without dragging in and punishing the responsible ones? We need to stop killing a breed misunderstood.
At Raging Storm Kennels we do not anticipate to encourage any illegal activities or behaviour, however we have an opinion and believe there must be a resolution to the targeting of specific breeds.
