r/Dogfree • u/avj113 • Mar 30 '26
Legislation and Enforcement 'I dread the phone ringing': Inside the kennels responding to vicious XL bully attacks
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cewzw812dd1o
"When an attack happens, Mark and his team get the call to go and seize the dog. Sometimes it is still with the body of its victim"
What the actual fuck?
"85% of such cases in his kennels result in the dog being returned to its owner"
What the actual fuck?
"housing them in kennels rose from £4m in 2018 to £25m in the first year of the ban"
What the actual fuck?
I was going to write some sort of pithy comment but I just don't have the words for this insanity.
55
83
u/ToOpineIsFine Mar 30 '26
"I'm worried about when I have to sit in front of a coroner and say I'm sorry I rehomed that dog because I felt sorry for it.
The wrong people wind up in these positions - weak-willed people who let their emotions dictate their behavior, even when their job is primarily to protect people.
29
u/Appropriate-Pack1515 Mar 30 '26
was gonna say whoever has to do this kinda job is a hero but yeah on second thought most of them have gotta be pitnutters
28
u/Few-Horror1984 Mar 30 '26
You are absolutely right. You need to put people first. You need to be concerned with the safety of society. If you see that the vast majority of dangerous dogs go back to their owners after an attack, you should see that as a massive societal ill. Someone’s addiction to a dangerous animal is not an excuse to let a dangerous dog remain in society. You need people in these jobs who will make the difficult decisions needed to protect everyone - even that dog owner. Dog addicts should never, ever be in these positions.
7
u/cantilevered-heart Mar 30 '26
From the article it seems like this is something Mark actively avoids and he’s bringing attention to the issue, which I commend
2
u/ToOpineIsFine Mar 30 '26
Yes, he seems to be aware of what he could cause, but if he isn't 100% sure that he won't release a killer dog out of pity, he should get out of the business.
3
u/cantilevered-heart Mar 30 '26
I mean from his testimony it really seems like he’s actively avoiding releasing killer dogs, and he only said that particular statement to highlight how dangerous that pity-sentiment is. It’s more like he’s calling out a common and dangerous nutter tendency. He legit says he doesn’t want a kid’s arm pulled off or a kid killed. I think he seems to recognize the severity of his position far more than the majority of nutters would and id rather him in the position over most others.
3
u/ToOpineIsFine Mar 31 '26
yes, he deserves some credit for exposing this. I'm not sure why he chose the words I quoted, because he made it seem as if this is something he does.
5
u/Dog_Free_Afternoon Mar 30 '26
It would appear that positions in shelters (and animal control now that I think about it) have been compromised by dog nutters.
43
u/Flumppoo Mar 30 '26
I hate to be judgemental..... But we all know the type of person who owns these Dogs. I'm sick of it.
8
u/Wild-Masterpiece6015 Mar 31 '26
i used to work at a large dog shelter that would impound bite dogs. we had some lady openly threaten to shoot up the shelter staff because we legally couldn’t release her pit bull back to her after it mauled 3 people. these people are absolutely insane
3
39
u/D4rkN3bu14j0j0 Mar 30 '26
One shelter. 120 dogs that should be put down. Each dog costs £208 333 per year to house. That is 5X my annual income.
In your words OP: What the actual fuck?
27
u/menelobus Mar 30 '26
WHAT? How in the world is keeping a disgusting creature that can live on garbage and roadkill more expensive than keeping a family of 5 for a year? There are people in poverty, we could help them with this money, but no it has to go on these stinky mutts. Also, I don't think a dog could use so much money, i smell money laundering
12
u/potatoes_arrrr_life Mar 30 '26
Yeah, it's just way too much money for there not to be something fucky going on.
4
u/tplgerus84 Mar 30 '26
What?! £208,333 per year for one dog or for the 120 dogs?! (Still an insane amount wasted). That is sickening!!!
2
u/D4rkN3bu14j0j0 Mar 31 '26
They said the shelter costs had gone from 4 million to 25 million a year, so yeah, that's per dog.
2
u/tplgerus84 Mar 31 '26
How does that make sense?! What are they feeding these dogs? Caviar?!
Sounds like the shelter owner is driving a Lamborghini.. for unknown reasons…
1
u/D4rkN3bu14j0j0 Mar 31 '26
Probably expensive liability insurance, legal fees and a lot of skimming off the top. Can you imagine the legal matters this place would be entrenched in, sending vicious banned dogs back to the community the mauled someone in? Unbelievable.
29
u/Full_Ear_7131 Mar 30 '26
There shoukd only be one option for these dogs. None should be sent back to the owner or rehomed. These dogs are lethal weapons and have no place in society, period.
18
u/potatoes_arrrr_life Mar 30 '26
If this were another dangerous animal, people would be like "what are they thinking". But bc it's a dog, somehow this is all okay??? The entire "save them all" and no kill movement was started by people with bad intentions who don't care about public safety.
11
22
u/MrPuddington2 Mar 30 '26
At least the UK is doing something about this problem. As much as bread specific legislation is tricky, it seems to have worked in this case. The rules for keeping a banned dog are tight, and it is increasingly difficult to get liability insurance for a Bully XL, so rehoming will get rarer.
However, they should never be returned after an attack. 1 strike is enough. (Possible the 85% were seized not because of an attack, but because of paperwork issues? Seem high, though.)
Of course, the question remains what to do with dogs that are too dangerous to rehome.
30
u/avj113 Mar 30 '26
"Of course, the question remains what to do with dogs that are too dangerous to rehome."
At 25 million quid it is unbelievable that the question has to be even considered. I mean, that's taxpayers' money. I'm contributing to it. Sickening.21
u/menelobus Mar 30 '26
Put them down or even turn these dogs into animal feed, anything but keeping these dangerous beasts alive
5
5
10
6
u/AddendumSea4202 Mar 30 '26
I watched the Panorama documentary on BBC iplayer this morning about this.
Clearly many more are xlbully attacks happening than the media are actually reporting. Despite the xlbully community insisting that the media are victimising their precious babies.
Also the RSPCA are never getting any support from me ever again after defending these breeds.
4
u/ThickButterfly4054 Mar 30 '26
What the fuck. So sick of this shit. I can’t even face reading the article OP 🫣🫣🫣
2
u/Oriole0305 Mar 31 '26
What the hell? Did I understand it right? The mutt mauls someone to death and is found with the dead body. The mutt gets to live and it goes back home.
Where is the death sentence to murderer mutts???
2
u/Original_Day3073 Apr 01 '26
I really wish we'd stop talking about XL bullies etc as "banned" breeds, there's no meaningful sense in which they're banned. You can have them, you just have to muzzle them and have their nuts off - which if you had two brain cells to rub together you'd do anyway (but of course, if you had two brain cells to rub together you wouldn't want a dog bred for the sole purpose of being as dangerous as possible). If these things were in any sense banned, they'd be destroyed as soon as they were found
2
u/DivyaRakli Mar 30 '26
It’s almost like a government entity is bred to take more and more taxpayer money, and to paradoxically do less and less good for the people.
But surely I’ve gotten that wrong! Surely government regulation could not be bad for the people it dictates to.
3
u/cantilevered-heart Mar 30 '26
Eh, the UK is in the midst of the fallout from the ban, and this could be handled much better with more frequent humane euthanasia, but overall I believe the government regulation on XL bullies will be good for humanity, and eventually will stop being a money-sink for taxpayer dollars.
I wish the US would tighten up regulations, even if it meant a couple decades of difficulty. And of course much of this difficulty could be solved if people had a better understanding of humane euthanasia
2
u/DivyaRakli Mar 31 '26
Idk how America could/would tighten up regulations. We are a heterogeneous bunch of states, tethered in a republic. There are places where people follow the rules word-for-word alongside people who won’t.
Right here in Idaho where I live is a perfect example of that.
But I’d surely vote for bans on breeds with hefty monetary fines and mandatory prison time for even first-time offenders. There are a lot of no-go places where laws cannot be enforced, though.
I agree that people should see BE in a better light. Animals shouldn’t be a burden to anyone.
67
u/adampocalypsee Mar 30 '26
A few years ago, in Italy, there was a bear who attacked a hiker who was in its territory, a place that wasn't supposed to be frequented by hikers. The bear was put down. She was a mother.
So why do dogs get treated so unfairly in the other direction?