XL bully and dog breeds…

Some relatively recent research found that Labrador types dogs represented the highest number of bite complaints. Might it have something to do with Labradors being one of the most common and therefore numerous breeds?

One Australian research showed that GSD’s had the highest number of recorded bites yet when the data was analysed it showed that when the number of recorded bites was compared to their representation in terms of numbers in the population they came towards the lower end of the scale. (Reference not to hand).

Research has continually shown that much dog bite data is highly unreliable.

Having said this data on fatalities as a result of dog bite are far more reliable and reported by DEFRA, interesting but hardly surprising is that American Bully breeds feature very heavily.

 
Banning XL bullies isn’t going to change anything, the tossers that use them (mainly effete drug dealers) will just use something else. They might well go to Mallys which would be a nightmare as the things can damn near scale walls, they are utterly hyperactive as well and need a lot of looking after which clearly they won’t get so I’d expect them escaping gardens and causing mayhem. XL bullies are just big lumps that are pretty lazy and certainly not escape artists like a mally. To be clear I’m no fan of XLs, a couple of my colleagues have been bitten by them and, predictably, it was awful.

As to the effectiveness of a dog on a person, I have seen first hand big, capable men attempt to fight back against light framed GSD and be reduced to tears in seconds. They thought they’d have something to say against one….they didn’t 🤣!
 
I looked after a Jack Russel for a couple when they were on holiday for two weeks, apparently it would only eat freshly cooked chicken breast and rice, at 6 pm ? They left a freezer with all the meals measured out, I thought why did I volunteer for this crap, well when they returned the dog was fit and well, apart from a mark on its nose, where it decided ratting was great fun with my dogs, frozen chicken was still in there freezer.
 
A women was killed while hanging out her washing in nz ( not far from us ) a couple of weeks ago, luckily a neighbour shot both. Dogs apparently were family pets (well known gang town ), pit crosses, which are very common here.
I remember in the uk going to a well known hound / dog breeder in the southwest, who had a pit , chained to his kitchen table, don,t look at it he said, of course we all did and it went crazy, he said he was having trouble with the local anti,s,
 
I've just been made aware of the physical characteristics that owners and police need to check to see if a dog is an XL Bully....This list is so broad that it could cover allsorts or dogs.

"We are taking your XL Bully away"

- "But it's a Mastiff"

"Doesnt matter, it fits our ridiculously broad list of XL Bully physical characteristics"


 

General impression​

Large dog with a muscular body and blocky head, suggesting great strength and power for its size. Powerfully built individual.

Height​

  • Adult male from 20in (51 cm) at the withers
  • Adult female from 19in (48cm) at the withers

Head​

  • Heavy, large and broad
  • The length from the tip of the nose to a well-defined stop (indentation between muzzle and the head) is equal to around a 1/3 of the length from the stop to the back of the head
  • Muzzle blocky or slightly squared to fall away below the eyes
  • Topline of muzzle straight
  • Prominent cheek muscles with strong, well-defined jaws and lips semi-close
  • Often having prominent wrinkles on face
  • Nose is large with well opened nostrils

Teeth​

Level or scissor bite.

Neck​

  • Heavy, muscular, slightly arched, tapering from the shoulders to the base of the skull
  • Medium in length

Forequarters​

  • Shoulder blades are long, well-muscled and well laid back
  • Upper arm length is about equal to the length of the shoulder blades and joined at a 35 to 45 angle to the ground
  • Front legs straight, strong and very muscular with dog standing high on the pasterns (area between feet and ankles)
  • Elbows set close to the body
  • Distance from the withers to elbows about the same as the distance from the elbow to the bottom of the feet

Body​

  • Heavily-muscled
  • Large, blocky body giving impression of great power for size
  • Broad, deep chest with well sprung ribs
  • Chest may be wider than deep
  • Topline level and straight
  • Loin short and firm
  • Generally appears square shaped from point of the shoulder to the point of the buttocks compared with the withers (tallest point on the dogs body excluding head and shoulders) to the ground

Hindquarters​

  • Strong, muscular and broad
  • Thighs well developed with thick musculature
  • From behind, both pasterns are typically straight and parallel to each other
  • Muscular development, angulation and width in balance with forequarters

Feet​

  • Rounded, medium in size and in proportion to body
  • Compact and well arched

Tail​

  • Medium length and low set
  • Tapers to a point to end at about the level of the hocks
  • Generally assumes a straight or pump handle shape when dog relaxed

Coat​

Glossy, smooth, close, single
 
The test should be simplified as follows:

"Look the dog in the eye and give it a long, hard stare.

If after that you are still able to sign the report, it isn't a banned breed.

If your colleague has to sign the report for you, it is...."

Simple.
 
Last edited:
Oh course the better long term solution for all the rest of us would not be to neuter and muzzle in public the dogs but to neuter and muzzle in public the chavs and chavettes owners.

Indeed I don't doubt that Suella and her policy advisor wonks having just that conversation the other day....
 
I've just been made aware of the physical characteristics that owners and police need to check to see if a dog is an XL Bully....This list is so broad that it could cover allsorts or dogs.

"We are taking your XL Bully away"

- "But it's a Mastiff"

"Doesnt matter, it fits our ridiculously broad list of XL Bully physical characteristics"



What will be interesting is if all criteria needs to be met or just some, like they did with "pitbull type dogs" where by you didn't need all the criteria which meant literally any dog could fall under the classification.
 
What will be interesting is if all criteria needs to be met or just some, like they did with "pitbull type dogs" where by you didn't need all the criteria which meant literally any dog could fall under the classification.

I would expect just some.
 
I fully understand the difficulty in correctly identifying the dog's breed, but given that we all agree (I think/hope) that the current situation cannot continue, I am interested to know what people think would be the best way forward?
 
I fully understand the difficulty in correctly identifying the dog's breed, but given that we all agree (I think/hope) that the current situation cannot continue, I am interested to know what people think would be the best way forward?

Similar to knife control and stabbings. More laws to prevent people carrying knives in public and yet stabbings are continually rising.

It's too hard to address the cause of the problem (a lack of common sense when choosing a breed and more importantly choosing a breeder) so easier to make a song and dance about a new law and keep the population quiet and happy for a while until it comes round again.
 
It’s just the same as gun or knife laws, but now we adding weapon dogs that probably have more intelligence than their owners / handlers.

Using a dog as a method of intimidation or as an offensive weapon should be treated just like any other form of violence / intimidation etc.

Size and breed of dog is immaterial. It is how it is handled and trained (or not) that counts. Adding laws banning certain breeds will have little effect - pretty much like banning certain types of knives or guns.
 
Size and breed of dog is immaterial. It is how it is handled and trained (or not) that counts. Adding laws banning certain breeds will have little effect - pretty much like banning certain types of knives or guns.

Agreed, but up to a point - any type of firearm is safe in the hands of a responsible shooter, but it still makes sense to ban GPMGs and .50 cal Browning etc on the grounds that no one really needs them and in the wrong hands they can cause more damage than a 0.303 or a 0.308 rifle.

You could equally ask why would anyone need to own a dog breed that is known for its temper AND can inflict serious bodily harm?
 
Agreed, but up to a point - any type of firearm is safe in the hands of a responsible shooter, but it still makes sense to ban GPMGs and .50 cal Browning etc on the grounds that no one really needs them and in the wrong hands they can cause more damage than a 0.303 or a 0.308 rifle.

You could equally ask why would anyone need to own a dog breed that is known for its temper AND can inflict serious bodily harm?
Quite
 
Agreed, but up to a point - any type of firearm is safe in the hands of a responsible shooter, but it still makes sense to ban GPMGs and .50 cal Browning etc on the grounds that no one really needs them and in the wrong hands they can cause more damage than a 0.303 or a 0.308 rifle.

You could equally ask why would anyone need to own a dog breed that is known for its temper AND can inflict serious bodily harm?

There is a distinction between XL Bullys that are registered with the AKC and cost upwards of £5k in the UK and are bred to have a very gentle temperament and the owners are very sensible and responsible Vs a dog breed in a flat on some dodgy housing estate from unknown parents or parents specifically chosen for aggressive tendancies.

Much in the same way all Labradors aren't all bred with bad hips and elbows. The responsible breeders make sure they're only breeding from healthy well adjusted dogs.

Talking about what guns and calibres people need is a dangerous topic as that just leads to everyone only being allowed the smallest and safest firearms. A 243 is legal for all deer in the UK so no one needs more than that for hunting deer. By the same rationale no one who isn't going beating needs a spaniel or Lab and unless you're stalking you shouldn't have a GSP/GWP.
 
Talking about what guns and calibres people need is a dangerous topic as that just leads to everyone only being allowed the smallest and safest firearms. A 243 is legal for all deer in the UK so no one needs more than that for hunting deer. By the same rationale no one who isn't going beating needs a spaniel or Lab and unless you're stalking you shouldn't have a GSP/GWP.

There's a whole world outside of deer stalking... :D Sport shooting, for example: any calibre for which there are competitions set up by accredited clubs is IMO justified, etc.
 
There's a whole world outside of deer stalking... :D Sport shooting, for example: any calibre for which there are competitions set up by accredited clubs is IMO justified, etc.
Exactly. One person's need is another's unnecessary and responsible law abiding people shouldn't always be held to the lowest common denominator.
 
I fully understand the difficulty in correctly identifying the dog's breed, but given that we all agree (I think/hope) that the current situation cannot continue, I am interested to know what people think would be the best way forward?
Every dog could be muzzled in public for starters, regardless of breed. Followed by any dog that bites someone is destroyed, with no exceptions (Police dogs exempt), a zero-tolerance policy.
 
Unsure how you can ban a breed you cannot identify through dna.

Another bull**** law pandering to the simpering masses that read the tabloids


As an aside , dogs should be licensed.
 
Back
Top