“all i really want is to be able to go to my local park without someone trying to attack my dog! there is a diiference between not trusting and just attacking! you think that is too much to much to ask?”

Of course not. Where did you get the impression that this is what I was saying? You have experienced being unfairly judged because of the type of dog you have. That’s not nice for you I appreciate that and whoever attacked your dog is clearly a cruel idiot.

Felicity said:

“you didn’t anwsere my question! is it because the so-called ’status’ dogs are accuatly acting angressively or it’s you asumen they are?
which is it!”

It’s because I read a tabloid article about demon pitbulls and I assume all muscular dogs are aggressive and will eat my child at any given minute.
(is this what you would like me to say?)

Felicity said:
“so saying all muscular are status dogs is vague. if someone gets a dog, trains it to be aggressive to delibarate intimade others, that is what i consider a status dog!”

You are right – it would be a vague thing to say but I never said it. Look. Around where I live a lot of people – mostly young men – own bull terrier type breeds, for protection and street image/presence. It is how it is around here.

It might be different around your way but that is the fact here.
You can assume I am imagining it if you like.

There are a group of men who exercise their dogs by setting them on small trees in the park, another guy gets his dog to tear up the rubber swing in the playground. Then there is the 10 year old lad who is dragged along the path by an agitated staffie nearly half his size. (I could go on and on and on). All these dogs are bull terriers or rottweilers.

These are all owner issues not breed issues. I understand this, I am not a moron. But if they were misbehaving with Scottie dogs I would not be concerned. The fact is these particular very powerful breeds have the capacity to cause enormous damage.

If an irresponsible person buys a hamster there is no problem, if he gets a crocodile we all start to worry.

Of course not. Where did you get the impression that this is what I was saying? You have experienced being unfairly judged because of the type of dog you have. That’s not nice for you I appreciate that and whoever attacked your dog is clearly a cruel idiot.

It’s because I read a tabloid article about demon pitbulls and I assume all muscular dogs are aggressive and will eat my child at any given minute.
(is this what you would like me to say?)

It would be a vague thing to say but read my post I never said it. Look. Around where I live a lot of people – mostly young men – own bull terrier type breeds, for protection and street image/presence. It is how it is around here.

It might be different around your way but that is the fact here.
You can assume I am imagining it if you like.

There are a group of men who exercise their dogs by setting them on small trees in the park, another guy gets his dog to tear up the rubber swing in the playground. Then there is the 10 year old lad who is dragged along the path by an agitated staffie nearly half his size. (I could go on and on and on). All these dogs are bull terriers or rottweilers.

These are all owner issues not breed issues. I understand this, I am not a moron. But if they were misbehaving with Scottie dogs I would not be concerned. The fact is these particular very powerful breeds have the capacity to cause enormous damage.

If an irresponsible person buys a hamster there is no problem, if he gets a crocodile we all start to worry.

not every person that has a muscular dog has it because they want a status dog. yes there is an increase in the amount of ‘tough looking’ dogs around, but then again dog breeds popularity is always changing. not so long ago the average family would have had a mutt as the family dog. now most people have pure breeds, society is always changing. why anyone selects their breed of dog, as long as they train and care for it well, is entirerly up to them.

many breeds are muscular, greyhounds are quite muscluar, maulumants are muscular but their covered with thick pushy hair, st.barnards and newfowlands are the same. so saying all muscular are status dogs is vague. if someone gets a dog, trains it to be aggressive to delibarate intimade others, that is what i consider a status dog!

i’m not sure if you had my first post proberly or if you think that someone coming over and trying to kick my dog and being abusive towards me is acceptable, but i’ll refrase. my dog was no were near them. he didn’t go towards them or even look at them! THEY CAME UP TO HIM! now i can understand someone being afaird of a large dog coming up to them, and them deffending themselfs from it! but like i said, they went out of their way to come up to him. thats not self-deffence, thats just attacking for the sake of attacking!

sorry but if anyone feels they have the right to attack a dog that wasn’t intefearing with them or anyone else, somthing is wrong! now i dont accept people to trust him, to be petting him or hugging him, i wouldn’t accept anyone to do this with any dog they didn’t know, regardless of what breed of dog it is. but like Brianna said i want people to respect my right to be in public with my dog! we’ve not hurting anyone, nor are we tring to or tring to scare anyone. this image of every single muscular dog is a status and the owner only having them to train it to be a visous attack dog, is rubbish!

infact, i’ve never met a dog & its owner that are like this. i know that there out there some where, but this image has nothing to do with me and my dog! i met aggressive dogs from ‘friendly pet’ breeds, the worest being an aggressive black lab amd their are two aggressive dogs in my local park. every single time i see these dogs they are off lead, causing problems with every one else’s dogs! the owners of course denining that the dogs are a problem because ‘my babie’s not aggressive’ and thats it! its the owners causing the probelms, and not just the owners of ’status’ dogs!

personly i agree there is a problem with dogs that are off lead that shouldn’t be! yes, your right that is doesn’t matter if it was an accident or not if you or your kid gets put in hosptiacl by a some else dog. some owners let their dog off lead, regardless of the fact that is aggressive or hyper and slamming into everyone. for this reason, i think that dogs should have to pass a behavoiral test or kennel club good citizen test before they can be let off lead in public. i don’t think banning any breed will stop the problem with bad and irresponisble owners!

yes, this article is bais. it’s suppost to be! its an arguement after all. the goverment minipulate stats for their agenda, the for breed ban arguement. so minipulating stats to prove the opposite is the normal counter arguement! both sides are bais, their ment to be even some of the goverments arguements are speculation. which arguement you support is up to you, this article is just to inform everyone that not every thing they read is accurate.

pesonally i don’t care if people cross the road! i only state that to prove people are ingorant! i don’t like people getting in my face about which dog i own or why, when they don’t even know me! i want to be left alone! no i don’t think not having having my dog kick and abuse screamed at me is too much to ask!

you didn’t anwsere my question! is it because the so-called ’status’ dogs are accuatly acting angressively or it’s you asumen they are?
which is it!

Ownership of these dogs has rocketed here in the last 5 years. You would have to be blind not to notice it – they are now part of the urban street culture. Some are well-controlled, some are running wild. Have local injuries gone up? I don’t know.

BUT you don’t need to be a statistician to see the obvious flaw and bias in the original piece – the writer is speculating (without evidence) that the increase in hospital admissions caused by dog injuries is down to ’strikes’ rather than bites and that this somehow makes things better or reveals a conspiracy by the authorities to get at dog owners. Even presuming the writer is correct, how the dog injures someone (or whether it was deliberate) is completely irrelevant.

To the Ridgeback owner – you have a big powerful dog, which you obviously love and care well for. Good for you, I think they are superb dogs. But don’t you think you are asking too much for strangers to immediately trust both your dog and your ability to control it?

Every single dog owner I know is 100% sure of the same thing – “Don’t worry it won’t hurt you”. They are not all right.

The blindness of love. We are all guilty of it.

i can’t go to my local park because people try to kick him, even though he did go anywhere near them, he just likes to mind his own and sniff the grass. they run put to him, yelling and trying to kick him, all he did was run and hid behind me! people scream abuse at me.

i don’t like people who have a dog to feel hard. and no, i didn’t choose the breed because their big and muscular. we bought him because the breeder was going to put him down because he way born without a ridge!

you say you can’t take a child or a small dog to the park, is that beacuse the dogs are showing aggression or is it that you are intimidated by the fact that they are muscular breeds? my ridgeback lives happily with cats and a small jack russel cross. they steal out of his bowl and even push him off despite the fact that their only 1/10 of his size!

the goverment should be focusing on prevent the wrong people from ownings dogs, giving more power to the police to place leash and muzzeling orders on dogs before they inhjure someone. and promoting responisble ownership, spay and neuter campaigns and prevent people breeding unsuitable dogs and breeding for the wrong reasons! not on breed bans, which by the way prove ineffective every where they’re in place! why do you think italy and the neverlands lifted their breed bans?

Looking beyond your own interests. I think most parents would react in exactly the same way to having their child hospitalised by a dog whether it was by biting, striking, being sat on – whatever…!

There has been an astronomic rise in ownership of ’status’ dogs in urban areas over the last couple of years. Ask anyone who lives in central Manchester for instance – I mean anyone at all.

It has made some of the parks in central Manchester very difficult places to take a child or, for that matter, a smaller dog. It is a serious problem, and imagining the government invented it to get at dog owners will not make it go away.

Manipulation of the true facts is done to persuade gullible people that the government’s anti-dog agenda is justified.

It has succeeded admirably in your case.