Today we learn from a national newspaper that there has been an astonishing rise in the number of dogs seized under the Dangerous Dogs Act. The slant is – as usual – focused on so-called ‘yob dogs’ or more to the point yobs with dogs, or yobs with yob dogs, whichever way you want to look at it. But we’re barking up the wrong tree AGAIN! It is NOT yobs with dogs or even yob dogs who are killing people. It’s time to get real.

From today’s Sun newspaper:

DOG attacks have soared to record levels after criminal gangs began using fighting breeds to scare off rivals.

Hospital consultants treated 4,699 people mauled by dogs last year, up 50 per cent since 1999.

The rise comes despite the introduction of the Dangerous Dogs Act, which bans breeds including pit bulls and Japanese tosas.

Police in London seized 608 dogs last year, up from just 40 in 2006.

Experts believe part of the rise in the figures is due to gangs using fighting dogs as “weapons”.
Full story.

Right, so 40 seizures in 2006 to 608 in 08. Are we seriously expected to believe that this is due to a sudden and dramatic rise in the number of dangerous dogs in Britain? Did all the evil puppies suddenly reach maturity in 2008? Did the yob generation suddenly decide around 2007/2008 that NOW was the time to invest in a hooligan dog?

Such a rise is staggering. Not a 3-fold increase, not even a 10-fold increase, from 40 seizures to 608 – and yet, even with such a massive crackdown in full effect, the police weren’t able to prevent ANOTHER death by dog attack in February of THIS year. Why not?

Are we really expected to believe that since 06 up until now we have seen a dramatic rise in dog problems or is it more likely the police have been given instructions, following the high profile deaths by dog attack of Cadey-Lee Deacon, Archie-Lee Hirst and Ellie Lawrenson, to ‘make the seizure figures go up’ by way of a dangerous dog ‘crackdown’?. And yet despite these massive rises in seizures, Jaden Mack was killed by a family dog in February of this year.

Let’s take a look at some cold, hard, tragic facts:

Ellie Lawrenson: Killed at her grandmother’s home while under the supervision of someone who was not the dog’s owner.

Cadey-Lee Deacon: Killed at her grandparent’s home while under the supervision of someone who was not the dog’s owner.

Archie-Lee Hirst: Killed at his grandparent’s home while under the supervision of someone who was not the dog’s owner.

Jaden Mack: Killed at his grandparent’s home while left to sleep on a table by a grandmother who fell asleep.

4 human deaths by dog attack, THE most serious type of dog attack, where is the ‘yob’ element please? How are the increased seizures going to affect this trend – and my word, it IS a trend?

No matter how easy it may be to point to the yobs or point to the so-called yob dogs, it is NOT these dogs who are killing people. It is FAMILY dogs under the care of people who simply haven’t factored in the risks and dangers that dogs can present.

The UK has singularly failed to make ANY inroads in reducing dog attacks or death by dogs. Since Lord Baker’s pathetically misjudged 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act was introduced, dog attacks have risen and – as we’ve seen – deaths by dog attack have not been stemmed. So now we move on to a new system of profiling, ignoring as usual the actual reality of which ‘type’ of dog owner is presenting the biggest risk. We can profile the hoodies, the ‘yobs’, the ‘yob-dogs’ until the cows come home but it won’t work. It won’t have an effect. We ought to be able to learn our lessons but we steadfastly refuse to do so and as a result, mark my words on this, more people will die as a result of attack by dogs, most likely family dogs.

How and why are people just letting this happen?

Your police and your government is failing you. Not only that, it’s doing it repeatedly. It hasn’t understood yet where the problems lie with regard to dog attacks. It’s not with certain breeds, it’s not even with certain people, it’s with DOG OWNERS of ALL profiles. So whilst it may be uncomfortable to look at Grandma or Grandpa and suggest that THEY pose a greater risk of being the owner of a dog which might kill, the facts tend to suggest that this is indeed the case.

We don’t need a ‘crackdown’. Since when did that ever have an effect? Think about it, if you confiscate my dog today because I’m a ‘yob’ with a ‘yob-dog’ then I’ll have another dog in my hands by this evening – and what happens to my original dog? Someone, somewhere will be responsible for killing it. If I’m behaving in a threatening manner, then prosecute me by all means – but don’t for a single second assume you are protecting the public from dog attack with this juvenile level of mindless profiling, because the weight of history says that you are not.

If we truly want a change, we need to make a change – NOT carry on doing the same things over and over again and expecting results to be different.

A national level of compulsory dog owner education. A system of regulating the supply of dogs. A system which IMPLORES EVERY dog owner to a minimum level of understanding about their responsibilities to their dog and to society. That proposal does exist – www.dogownershiptest.co.uk -

Highly Recommended: What dog owner wouldn’t want a piece of THIS action? – Get FREE dog food!

Related posts:

1. Fatal Dog Attacks: What Can We Learn?
2. Police: ‘We Don’t Need New Dangerous Dogs Laws’
3. MPs Line Up to Call For Dangerous Dogs Act Review
4. Charting the Rise and Rise of the ‘Designer Dog’
5. Merseyside Police Spend Nearly £1m of Tax Payer’s Money on ‘Dangerous Dog’ Campaign