TeaFan Posted October 20, 2011 Share Posted October 20, 2011 Oh dear, another staffy owner with his head in the sand. If Staffys are such gentle child-friendly dogs that would never harm a fly, why are they the dog of choice for chav thugs and why do we read so many reports of staffys attacking children? Round our way Staffies are not the dog of choice for knobheads at all. Their choice of dog is mainly mastiffs and probable pitbull crosses. I breathe a sigh of relief when I see a Staffy coming... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 You did in effect. Of course it's evidence. Any suggestion otherwise calls into question the truth of the story. People died at the teeth of these nanny dogs. How the hell is that hype? nope and its only evidence that occasionally dogs attack. no-one is disputing that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peewee84 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Oh great..another staffy bashing discussion... http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=862184&highlight=staffy http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=856746&highlight=staffy http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=769564&highlight=staffy http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=734491&highlight=staffy Just a few of many... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Oh great..another staffy bashing discussion... http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=862184&highlight=staffy http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=856746&highlight=staffy http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=769564&highlight=staffy http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=734491&highlight=staffy Just a few of many... Never judge a book by its cover is wasted on many! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 When I was a little lad, the ‘weapon dog’ of choice for the UK’s least savoury inhabitants was the GSD, or Alsatian as people used to wrongly label it. Terrible vicious things they were (funny, mine isn’t). Later, fashion moved on a as result of a few Hollywood films, and every lowlife scrote who wanted to keep his image up to date just have to have a Doberman to look the part, and from Dobermans the trend went on to Rotties. Society’s brainless thugs really found just what they wanted when the concept of dogs specifically bred to be vicious and fight were available, and the pitbull filled a market niche in the same households as one might expect to find drug weighing scales and a machete by the door. Poor Staffies were the next-best choice when pit breeds were outlawed. None of the breeds (with the possible exception of some strains of pit breed) are vicious as a breed. I’ve lived with dogs all my life, and known many hundreds. Any breed can be as soft, gentle and loving as you make it. Or it can be vicious if you make it that way. The trouble isn’t any particular breed of dog, it’s the breed of human that is allowed to keep them, raise them badly and encourage bad behaviour. Banning breeds just results in another breed being adopted by the low-lives, what we should do instead is look to the reintroduction of dog licenses, compulsory chipping of all dogs and on-the-spot seizure of dogs which are not registered and chipped. No lawful caring dog owner should object to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy Jnr Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 When I was a little lad, the ‘weapon dog’ of choice for the UK’s least savoury inhabitants was the GSD, or Alsatian as people used to wrongly label it. Terrible vicious things they were (funny, mine isn’t). Later, fashion moved on a as result of a few Hollywood films, and every lowlife scrote who wanted to keep his image up to date just have to have a Doberman to look the part, and from Dobermans the trend went on to Rotties. Society’s brainless thugs really found just what they wanted when the concept of dogs specifically bred to be vicious and fight were available, and the pitbull filled a market niche in the same households as one might expect to find drug weighing scales and a machete by the door. Poor Staffies were the next-best choice when pit breeds were outlawed. None of the breeds (with the possible exception of some strains of pit breed) are vicious as a breed. I’ve lived with dogs all my life, and known many hundreds. Any breed can be as soft, gentle and loving as you make it. Or it can be vicious if you make it that way. The trouble isn’t any particular breed of dog, it’s the breed of human that is allowed to keep them, raise them badly and encourage bad behaviour. Banning breeds just results in another breed being adopted by the low-lives, what we should do instead is look to the reintroduction of dog licenses, compulsory chipping of all dogs and on-the-spot seizure of dogs which are not registered and chipped. No lawful caring dog owner should object to that. What they should do is modernise dog ownership in its entirety whether that comes in the form of means testing i don't know but it's way too easy to get one and get rid of one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 What they should do is modernise dog ownership in its entirety whether that comes in the form of means testing i don't know but it's way too easy to get one and get rid of one. Means testing? Behave! No need. I agree with Conrod - all that's needed is compulsory licensing and chipping and for any dog found out and about unlicensed and unchipped to be sent to the big kennel in the sky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy Jnr Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Means testing? Behave! No need. I agree with Conrod - all that's needed is compulsory licensing and chipping and for any dog found out and about unlicensed and unchipped to be sent to the big kennel in the sky. So the fact that a licence is required will prevent people from having them illegally like cars and guns you mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 So the fact that a licence is required will prevent people from having them illegally like cars and guns you mean. No, but it'll mean if they're not licensed they can be destroyed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murphy Jnr Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 No, but it'll mean if they're not licensed they can be destroyed. That's one hell of a policing operation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.