The Very Meh Humza Yousaf Thread.

[AyrExile]

32 minutes ago, Crazy Days said:

England now has legislation in place regarding XL Bully dogs but unsurprisingly the SNP will not follow/have to be different to Westminster and are not adopting the same guidelines.  Good to see they are putting their principles before public safety.  Pity help them if someone gets badly injured or worse up here.

It's not a bad thing though keeping your core vote happy particularly when popularity is waning   

[vikingTON]

57 minutes ago, Crazy Days said:

England now has legislation in place regarding XL Bully dogs but unsurprisingly the SNP will not follow/have to be different to Westminster and are not adopting the same guidelines.  Good to see they are putting their principles before public safety.  Pity help them if someone gets badly injured or worse up here.

What evidence is there that England's legislation will have a demonstrable impact on public safety? 

[DeeTillEhDeh]

3 hours ago, Crazy Days said:

England now has legislation in place regarding XL Bully dogs but unsurprisingly the SNP will not follow/have to be different to Westminster and are not adopting the same guidelines.  Good to see they are putting their principles before public safety.  Pity help them if someone gets badly injured or worse up here.

The legislation was always in place - there was no need to bring in new legislation.

It's populist pish of the first degree as was the original Dangerous Dogs Act 1991.

[lichtgilphead]

3 hours ago, Crazy Days said:

England now has legislation in place regarding XL Bully dogs but unsurprisingly the SNP will not follow/have to be different to Westminster and are not adopting the same guidelines.  Good to see they are putting their principles before public safety.  Pity help them if someone gets badly injured or worse up here.

I would rather believe the RSPCA than Sunak's populist pish

https://www.rspca.org.uk/whatwedo/endcruelty/changingthelaw/bsl/xlbullies

The UK Government has now confirmed that XL Bully dogs will be added to a list of dogs which are banned in England and Wales - and we understand this is hugely concerning and upsetting for owners, as well as animal welfare organisations like ourselves.

The RSPCA is opposed to this ban, which we don’t believe is effective in protecting the public. We do not agree with the broad legal definition of an XL Bully dog announced by the UK Government but we must comply with the law and we are committed to supporting dog owners as we await more information.  

Edited December 31, 2023 by lichtgilphead

[Todd_is_God]

I'll caveat this by saying I don't particularly like dogs at all, but I really don't understand the uproar about this ban.

If we were talking about anything other than an animal that had the same capability to kill or maim indiscriminately it would be banned in a heartbeat.

There is no need for animals with the strength and destructive power of these dogs to exist in the UK.

That they currently do is not reason enough for that to be allowed to continue.

[vikingTON]

2 hours ago, Todd_is_God said:

I'll caveat this by saying I don't particularly like dogs at all, but I really don't understand the uproar about this ban.

If we were talking about anything other than an animal that had the same capability to kill or maim indiscriminately it would be banned in a heartbeat.

All dogs have the capability to kill or maim indiscriminately. Where are you drawing an objective line and on what evidence-based grounds? 

[Todd_is_God]

16 minutes ago, virginton said:

All dogs have the capability to kill or maim indiscriminately. Where are you drawing an objective line and on what evidence-based grounds? 

I'd happily ban them all tbh, but you make a fair point.

Whenever a clear trend begins to emerge then it's a irresponsible to ignore it.

There's simply no need for them.

Make a case for continuing to allow a clearly above average dangerous breed...

Edited December 31, 2023 by Todd_is_God

[vikingTON]

27 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

I'd happily ban them all tbh, but you make a fair point.

Whenever a clear trend begins to emerge then it's a irresponsible to ignore it.

There's simply no need for them.

Make a case for continuing to allow a clearly above average dangerous breed...

What evidence exists for a 'clear trend'? 

If we're banning things on the arbitrary basis of there being 'no need' then we'll have quite a list to work through. 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Who had vT down as a devil dug owner?

[vikingTON]

16 minutes ago, Miguel Sanchez said:

Who had vT down as a devil dug owner?

I don't even own a pet. But the idea of government by a combination of Helen Lovejoy outrage and tabloid hysteria to pass back of a fag packet laws hasn't exactly been a roaring success over the past 40-odd years. 

The real surprise here is that the SG haven't followed suit, given their penchant for passing laws and restrictions for spurious reasons. 

[Todd_is_God]

27 minutes ago, virginton said:

What evidence exists for a 'clear trend'? 

There are quite regular reports popping up on the "dog kills man" thread here. They are pretty much all involving "XL Bully" type dogs.

Unless you are suggesting the media are deliberately not reporting attacks by any other breed i'm not sure what else you want.

[vikingTON]

34 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

There are quite regular reports popping up on the "dog kills man" thread here. They are pretty much all involving "XL Bully" type dogs.

Unless you are suggesting the media are deliberately not reporting attacks by any other breed i'm not sure what else you want.

I'd want a statistically significant and reliable measurement of number of attacks, the type of breeds involved, and change over time. Newspaper stories are not by themselves evidence of anything at all. There is confirmation and availability bias swirling around each case. Why do you think that devil Doberman stories are no longer prominent in public discussion? 

It's bizarre to see someone who quite rightly scrutinised tabloid single news items and other dogshit 'sources of 'evidence' during the pandemic suddenly abandon the same approach when it comes to a different topic. 

[scottsdad]

I reckon it all comes down to the naming of the dogs. 

You never hear of dogs called Trixie or Penny mauling kids. But when they are named stuff like Rambo or Psycho, then they act to type.

[carpetmonster]

6 minutes ago, scottsdad said:

I reckon it all comes down to the naming of the dogs. 

You never hear of dogs called Trixie or Penny mauling kids. But when they are named stuff like Rambo or Psycho, then they act to type.

I mean, if you’re calling the breed ‘XL Bully’ you’re basically calling all of them fat c***s who nobody likes; it can’t be a surprise they want to bite people. 

[welshbairn]

2 hours ago, virginton said:

It's bizarre to see someone who quite rightly scrutinised tabloid single news items and other dogshit 'sources of 'evidence' during the pandemic suddenly abandon the same approach when it comes to a different topic

He never in my knowledge criticised Boris Johnson's decisions over Covid, only Nicola Sturgeon's, even when there was a cigarette paper between them if at all, once memorably congratulating Boris for following the Swedish Model on the same day he suggested street commissars to enforce lockdown. If Scotland had banned XL bullies and England not, he'd be pleading for their liberty.

Edited December 31, 2023 by welshbairn

[sophia]

14 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

He never in my knowledge criticised Boris Johnson's decisions over Covid, only Nicola Sturgeon's, especially when there was a cigarette paper between them, once memorably congratulating Boris for following the Swedish Model on the same day he suggested street commissars to enforce lockdown. If Scotland had banned XL bullies and England not, he'd be pleading for their liberty.

I'm not at all sure how this can be philosophically squared. Maybe some statistical analysis. Also graphs. 

[Stag Nation]

9 hours ago, lichtgilphead said:

The RSPCA is opposed to this ban, which we don’t believe is effective in protecting the public. We do not agree with the broad legal definition of an XL Bully dog announced by the UK Government but we must comply with the law and we are committed to supporting dog owners as we await more information.  

Isn’t the RSPCA’s sole purpose to support dogs, not their owners?

[lichtgilphead]

9 minutes ago, Stag Nation said:

Isn’t the RSPCA’s sole purpose to support dogs, not their owners?

Agreed, but how does this affect their view that this is bad legislation?

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Breed specific legislation to deal with dangerous dogs is ultimately flawed - breed is not a reliable predictor of aggressive behaviour in dogs. Any dog has the potential to bite.

Between 1989 and 2017 48 people died in dog-related incidents. Of the 62 dogs involved, 53 were dog breeds not on the prohibited list. Between 2017 and 2021 there was a huge jump in deaths - another 21 in that 4 year period. A further 10 people died in 2022.

The biggest explanation of the rise in dog-related death incidents is not an increase in the number of XL Bullies (or any other dog type for that matter). The dog population has increased, but not enough to account for that huge jump - which means dogs are biting humans more than they used to. It's adults in particular where the change is seen. The shared common feature of dog-related deaths is that they are in areas with high levels of social deprivation - statistically the NW and NE of England have much higher rates of dog-related attacks and deaths than London and the SE.

Lockdown almost certainly changed the relationship between dogs and their owner. With people at home more - even after lockdown ended - a dog might have lost the safe space it retreated to when stressed, potentially leading to more frustration and anxiety. Opportunities for socialising dogs were also lost.

The focus should be more effective legislation and enforcement to tackle dog-related issues regardless of breed or type and based on their behaviour; Interventions including education that focus on safe behaviour around dogs; and an overall better understanding of why dogs bite.

The issue isn't bad dog breeds, it's bad dog owners.

Edited January 1 by DeeTillEhDeh

[effeffsee_the2nd]

Sorry but in almost all circumstances its as simple as this;

arsehole neds have arsehole dugs

people who have dugs as pets who care for and train them generally have well behaved dugs. You get things like seperation anxiety and so on but they tend to present as more nuisance thinga like persistant barking, chewing things and pishing in the house. They dont normally go round biting folk