Whats happening at the station?

[Mikandnik]

Police cars, ambulances etc. Anyone know what's happening?

[ianr]

I've just passed by. Three officers were holding a dog pinned down on the pavement.

[thfc2001]

from twitter..

Avoid East Dulwich station. Just saw a mad staff maul a child + about 7 ambulances/ police vans turned up :(

[maxxi]

Is station closed? open again? anyone know?

[ianr]

It was happening outside the station.

[prickle]

How is the child - is he/she ok?

[Pam50]

Sorry, my keyboard isn't typing some letters...

I went by on the bs as it was happening. Some people who witnessed it, got on board. They were very affected by the incident and described how the dog had got agitated when its owner, who had a baby, tried to dash for a bs. It sank its teeth into the woman's foot/shoe and she screamed for help. One brave man came forward to help and pressed down?? on the dog's neck?? According to the others, he was a real hero and saved the woman from a really bad attak. The hero got off the bs in Camberwell. Don't know if anything else happened...emergency services were there. No one mentioned a child.

[Jeremy]

I don't understand why anyone would want one of these horrid creatures.

[nicoleduncan88]

It is not the dog's fault, it is the owner and the lack of training that they must have provided for it. Poor thing will be put down now because irresponsible people are too quick to buy dogs.

[Jeremy]

Maybe so. But why own a dog which is capable of such dangerous attacks - and in fact was specifically bred that way? Too many bull breed owners have them for image reasons. Crazy.

[Louisa]

I am torn on this subject.

My Labrador was savaged by a Staffordshire Bull Terrier type breed a few years back, totally unprovoked. I would never personally own a breed which has such a volatile personality, and as Jeremy rightly points out, was originally bred for fighting purposes (however cuddly and nice an individual dog may be). I think the owner and/or breeder of this type of dog should be made fully aware of the potential consequences of owning such a dog, and a licence should be issued for a breed which like any dog can become vicious and attack, but because of its build and jaw structure, could lead to appaling injuries.

Louisa.

[first mate]

Blame the backyard breeder. Staffs are generally totally solid with people and children (provided, of course, children are not allowed to do really stupid things to the dog) but may be unreliable with other dogs. This dog may have looked like a staff or a some other bull breed but is probably a cross. You get rogue dogs but aggression to humans is not a trait associated with Staffs as a breed. I see lots of people who have a penchant for kicking/punching bull breed type dogs and that may be another root of this dog's outburst.

[ralee]

Unfortunately these types of dog are often used as 'protection' for individuals/gangs of people. They also give street cred. I quite often see these dogs with cuts/scars and have heard of people fighting these dogs against each other, beating them up to 'toughen' them and on command can be used as a weapon. I am not saying this is for every Staff type dog. I have been around lovely Staffs who are sweet natured but I feel sorry for the ones that end up in the wrong hands.

I certainly feel the laws should be reassessed and a license brought in to own this type of breed.

[Jeremy]

first mate Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You get rogue dogs but aggression to humans

> is not a trait associated with Staffs as a breed.

Maybe so, but any dog can get spooked/scared/aggressive and turn on someone. And when it happens, bull breeds with their hugely powerful jaws have the ability to do much more damage than your average dog.

> I see lots of people who have a penchant for

> kicking/punching bull breed type dogs and that may

> be another root of this dog's outburst.

Quite possibly. As previously suggested, irresponsible owners are often attracted to these animals for very dubious reasons.

[first mate]

Jeremy,

I understand what you are saying and why, however, a 'sound' dog that is properly socialised and healthy is highly unlikely to turn and severely bite its owner because it has got a fright etc.. An extremely frightened dog may snap if it is cornered but they will exercise what is called 'bite inhibition'. It sounds as though this dog was biting hard, it either meant to hurt its owner because it was poorly trained and socialised or of unsound mind/bad breeding.

Even dogs with the most powerful jaws learn early on how to inhibit their bite, a puppy has to learn this in order to interact with other dogs, as well as with humans.

It is not clear how badly the woman was injured. If she suffered puncture wounds then that is an uninhibited bite, if she was grazed or bruised that would be an inhibited bite.

Just to add any displays of aggression to humans are generally different to those displayed by staffs etc.. to other dogs, cats etc.. That is prey drive and involves different parts of the brain from other types of aggression. Granted, some rogue dogs may treat children as prey but it would be unusual and children should never be left alone with any dog.

[cassidy]

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I don't understand why anyone would want one of

> these horrid creatures.

There are many breeds of dog who are all capable of behaving badly and biting and many do, however there are an equal amount of dogs who in the hands of responsible owners cause no trouble whatsoever it is foolish to condemn a breed just because there has been reports of a small amount of irresponsible owners who do not train or control their dogs properly and allow them to become out of control. There have been far worse incidents reported in the press over the years where the attacks or incidents have involved other breeds then staffs or even bull breeds but it seems like the bull breed have unfortunately been branded one of the worst breeds.

I do think the latest incident was unfortunate and i hope the lady in question was not hurt to badly however i do feel that no one really knows why the dog in question bit her and i feel it is totally unnecessary to turn this in to a witch hunt damning all bull breeds without knowing what really went on. It is also worth remembering that the dog in question may be in fact returned to the owner as has happened in the past as it was her dog that bit her she will probably be asked what she wants doing with it and it may very well be her own decision on that issue that determines whether it is destroyed or not.

[Louisa]

Whether you like it or not, Bull type breeds are the number one culprit involved in attacks on humans and other dogs, not just the high profile ones you see in the press from time to time, but as reported to the authorities. I believe this is because this breed type is often wrongly handled, and unlike other breeds has the potential to be more powerful with it's aggression because that is what they were originally bred to do! Of course it is often irresponsible owners who have allowed this to happen, and they are being allowed to own an animal which is extremely dangerous if not taken care of in the correct manner. Not all owners can be tarnished with this brush, but it seems that they are more often than not attracted to bull breeds because of their strength! Licence all powerful bull type breeds and we wont have any issues in future! it's simple.

Louisa.

[KidKruger]

I tend towards Jeremy's view on this, why anyone would want to own a pet which is capable of badly wounding a person, let alone killing someone, is beyond me. Also the fact that the law supports such ownership to me is illogical.

I'm not anti-dog but I am anti-dangerous pets - where the pet is being exposed to innocent people who are not choosing to be maimed or killed. Other dangerous pets are controlled or not allowed. Same should apply to dangerous dogs.

Don't go trying to say I'm wrong, it's my opinion and I fear that posturing over character this and personality that sort of gets away from the physical facts. Nobody wants to get eaten by a dog or any other animal.

[vicki08]

actually staffs are not on the dangerous dog act

[KidKruger]

So the definition of danger is an act of parliament ?

Not the place I generally look when trying to assess danger !

If I call an animal dangerous it's not because I think some advisor has listed that animal on an actof parliament.

[pommie]

i just wanted to say that i had a mongrel dog years ago, soppy as can be but he got spooked by a firework one bonfire night and actually bit me on the face so its not necessarily the breed. if a dog feels intimidated or scared it can turn

[first mate]

Louisa,

What is your source for that assertion? A pitbull is a very different proposition from a Staff, the first has a guard instinct the second does not. A bull type breed could mean any amount of crosses- it is a mongrel. The key is the soundness of dogs bred from and then the way they are brought up/ trained. I do agree, however, that powerful breeds whether badly bred or badly trained/abused are a loaded gun. As ever, the real problem/culprit tends to be the human that owns them.

[KidKruger]

So the owner was automatically at fault today at the station then ?

[first mate]

kidkruger,

I think you'd be surprised at just how dangerous a small dog like a rogue Jack Russell/ Cocker Spaniel or Beagle can be and how hard they can bite and how much damage they can do if they have the desire to hurt you. Any of these are more than capable of killing a child if they want to and doing very serious damage to you. Bottom line, just about any dog has the potential to be dangerous, it comes pre-equipped with some very impressive weapons.

[first mate]

Not automatically no. The dog might be unbalanced/mad, there is an equal probability that it has been poorly trained or abused. Finally, it might be ill or in severe pain and the owner did not know. All of these are reasonable explanations based on some knowledge of why dogs attack their owners.