Dangerous dog

Eight Ball

Hi all. Would like some advice from the dog owners on the site. A neighbour of ours on our estate has just bought a Japanese tosa cross staff bull terrier pup. Now I wouldn't have a problem with this if the guy was the responsible sort only for the fact the owner is a complete numpty who can't even look after his own kids and well lets say isn't the type of guy you would trust to raise any type of dog. One of our neighbours has already approached him and his girlfriend about the animal regarding type of breed and confirmed the dog is indeed as above.

I have reviewed the rules handed down by Dublin city council and notice the tosa/staff breed is on the banned list, is this accurate? The pup is young and is not in need of a muzzle yet but will owner be required to have dog muzzled and leased at all times in public areas? Should I approach the council about said animal?

I'm not a busy body but have a genuine concern because of the owner NOT the animal and would hate to see it raised in the wrong way and go on to be put down due to careless ownership.

andreac

Sorry but what has this dog done to be deemed dangerous??

cocker5

Eight Ball wrote: »

Hi all. Would like some advice from the dog owners on the site. A neighbour of ours on our estate has just bought a Japanese tosa cross staff bull terrier pup. Now I wouldn't have a problem with this if the guy was the responsible sort only for the fact the owner is a complete numpty who can't even look after his own kids and well lets say isn't the type of guy you would trust to raise any type of dog. One of our neighbours has already approached him and his girlfriend about the animal regarding type of breed and confirmed the dog is indeed as above.

I have reviewed the rules handed down by Dublin city council and notice the tosa/staff breed is on the banned list, is this accurate? The pup is young and is not in need of a muzzle yet but will owner be required to have dog muzzled and leased at all times in public areas? Should I approach the council about said animal?

I'm not a busy body but have a genuine concern because of the owner NOT the animal and would hate to see it raised in the wrong way and go on to be put down due to careless ownership.

+1 with AndreaC....

The dog is a pup... why do you assume its dangerous?
What behaviour has it displayed that it is infact dangerous?

If we were all to assume dogs on the restricted list and cross breeds of these dogs should all be banned?

:rolleyes:

lrushe

Firstly the name off you thread is misleading as the dog has done nothing to warrant being called dangerous.
Secondly there are no breeds banned in Ireland.
Thirdly a RESTRICTED breed as described above is required to wear a muzzle (even as a pup) when in public & on a strong 2 foot long (max) lead.

I would be surprised if the dog was part Japanese Tosa as they are so rare in Ireland, more likely the guy was fed that line to make him think he had some exotic breed to flaunt on the end of a lead.

Astala

Eight Ball wrote: »

Hi all. Would like some advice from the dog owners on the site. A neighbour of ours on our estate has just bought a Japanese tosa cross staff bull terrier pup. Now I wouldn't have a problem with this if the guy was the responsible sort only for the fact the owner is a complete numpty who can't even look after his own kids and well lets say isn't the type of guy you would trust to raise any type of dog. One of our neighbours has already approached him and his girlfriend about the animal regarding type of breed and confirmed the dog is indeed as above.

I have reviewed the rules handed down by Dublin city council and notice the tosa/staff breed is on the banned list, is this accurate? The pup is young and is not in need of a muzzle yet but will owner be required to have dog muzzled and leased at all times in public areas? Should I approach the council about said animal?



I'm not a busy body but have a genuine concern because of the owner NOT the animal and would hate to see it raised in the wrong way and go on to be put down due to careless ownership.

This dog is a dangerous breed. Like you said, it is restricted by the city council. If he refuses to put a muzzle on him as the dog grows larger, contact the city council directly.

This breed of dog wouldn't be restricted if it wasn't dangerous.

disco1

With the owner you describe and this dog it has indeed the capacity to be a problem. My dogs were attacked by a loose pit bull luckilly I knew it was a problem and as such I have to carry an iron bar when out with my dogs.
The pit bull latched onto my husky s neck and unfortunatly I had to strike the bull on the head with the bar which sorted that out...
I did not know where it lived to report to police.

anniehoo

lrushe wrote: »

Secondly there are no breeds banned in Ireland..

Dublin City Council has it's own rules and unfortunately they have a list of actual banned breeds not allowed on their properties. See here

Now this is back to 1997, but even up until 2007 this was still the case. Would welcome any current info if this has been changed subsequently.

Actual banned dogs by Dublin City Council include: American Pit Bull Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, English Pit Bull Terrier, Bull Mastiff, Doberman Pinscher, German Shepherd, Rhodesian Ridgeback, Rottweiler, Japanese Akita, Japanese Tosa and cross-breeds

Astala wrote: »

This breed of dog wouldn't be restricted if it wasn't dangerous.

You couldn't be further from the truth with this comment if you tried. The Restricted Breed list is the most illinformed, outdated rule ever made. We could be here all day arguing the point, but let's not go there.

tk123

Eight Ball wrote: »

I'm not a busy body but have a genuine concern because of the owner NOT the animal and would hate to see it raised in the wrong way and go on to be put down due to careless ownership.

Sorry but you kind of are being a busy body? If you were concerned about the dog why would you even mention it's breed or name the thread "Dangerous dog". Have you complained to social services about the guy's lack of parenting skills since you mention he can't look after his kids?

"Give a dog a bad name" :mad:

lrushe

anniehoo wrote: »

Dublin City Council has it's own rules and unfortunately they have a list of actual banned breeds not allowed on their properties. See here

Now this is back to 1997, but even up until 2007 this was still the case. Would welcome any current info if this has been changed subsequently..

Doesn't that only apply to the tenants of a DCC property as opposed to a countrywide ban.
Even at that I've never seen it being enforced as I'd say it's too hard to prove if a cross breed is in fact a strain of a certain breed.

Gael23

I have to agree here, you must give the dog a chance.
A dog will behave how it is raised to behave. Just because it is branded as a dangerous breed in no way suggests this particular dog to be dangerous

OldNotWIse

Are you sure its not just restricted as opposed to banned? Why would you approach an owner over what breed it is? I'd be seriously p1ssed if someone did that to me. Then again, I am aware of the "type" that you describe and have seen plenty of them prancing around (usually with one hand down their tracksuit bottoms) playing the big guy with a staffie (more commonly now an akita) - sad really (for the dogs).

OldNotWIse

lrushe wrote: »

Doesn't that only apply to the tenants of a DCC property as opposed to a countrywide ban.
Even at that I've never seen it being enforced as I'd say it's too hard to prove if a cross breed is in fact a strain of a certain breed.

But isnt' that what happened to Lennox? He looked like a certain breed? I'm open to correction on that.

borderlinemeath

OldNotWIse wrote: »

But isnt' that what happened to Lennox? He looked like a certain breed? I'm open to correction on that.

That was in a different juristiction, with different laws regarding restricted breeds or banned dogs. You can't make the comparison with DCC. Put it this way if a pit bull type was found to be living in DCC housing, they could just rehome the dog to somebody who doesn't live in DCC accommodation and he would just be governed by the restricted breed list.

lrushe

OldNotWIse wrote: »

But isnt' that what happened to Lennox? He looked like a certain breed? I'm open to correction on that.

Wasn't that in NI though, Rep of Ire has always been alot more laxed with regards to enforcing laws like this.
I've lived on the same DCC estate for 30 years & every second dog would be an RB & never have the council objected, just my experience.

anniehoo

lrushe wrote: »

Doesn't that only apply to the tenants of a DCC property as opposed to a countrywide ban.
Even at that I've never seen it being enforced as I'd say it's too hard to prove if a cross breed is in fact a strain of a certain breed.

No it's not countrywide, just DCCs rules but like you said, I'm not sure how or if it's imposed.

OldNotWIse

borderlinemeath wrote: »

That was in a different juristiction, with different laws regarding restricted breeds or banned dogs. You can't make the comparison with DCC. Put it this way if a pit bull type was found to be living in DCC housing, they could just rehome the dog to somebody who doesn't live in DCC accommodation and he would just be governed by the restricted breed list.

I appreciate it was a different jurisdiction, but I was referring to the fact that he had the misfortune of actually looking like a restricted breed, but the family claimed he wasn't.

Agree with posters re the list though. My little one is a tenth the size of most of the listed....but I'd put her on it!

fatmammycat

Astala wrote: »

This dog is a dangerous breed. Like you said, it is restricted by the city council. If he refuses to put a muzzle on him as the dog grows larger, contact the city council directly.

This breed of dog wouldn't be restricted if it wasn't dangerous.

This is utter nonsesne, lots of perfectly social non-dangerous dogs are on the RB list, and lots of actual dangerous dogs are not on it at all. None of us know it this puppy will grow up to be a dangerous dog or not.

fatmammycat

OldNotWIse wrote: »

I appreciate it was a different jurisdiction, but I was referring to the fact that he had the misfortune of actually looking like a restricted breed, but the family claimed he wasn't.

Agree with posters re the list though. My little one is a tenth the size of most of the listed....but I'd put her on it!

The family claimed a lot of thing in that case, a lot of which was garbage. Poor Lennox was as much a victim to poor socialisation and poor handling as he was to his breed and the council.

andreac

Astala wrote: »

This dog is a dangerous breed. Like you said, it is restricted by the city council. If he refuses to put a muzzle on him as the dog grows larger, contact the city council directly.

This breed of dog wouldn't be restricted if it wasn't dangerous.

No its not a dangerous breed!! :mad:

Seriously, you obviously do not have a clue when it comes to breeds of dogs or the law. Please stop posting such crap. Its people like you with ignorant and misinformed information that gives dogs a bad name!!

OldNotWIse

fatmammycat wrote: »

The family claimed a lot of thing in that case, a lot of which was garbage. Poor Lennox was as much a victim to poor socialisation and poor handling as he was to his breed and the council.

Really? I hadn't heard anything to that effect.

borderlinemeath

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Really? I hadn't heard anything to that effect.

I heard plenty as well.

Claims the dog was an assistance dog, when it clearly spent his entire life in solitary confinement in the back garden

Intimidation and death threats against the Dog Warden who seized Lennox and the rescue in the south that offered to take him in to save his life.

Paypal accounts set up to fund raise, but nothing was ever done and the funds seemed to disappear.

There were lots more, but plenty of keyboard warriors got vocal and rabble roused and made a lot more noise than the people and organisations that were actually involved who knew the ins and outs of the case.

Anyhow, OP, the dog isn't 'dangerous', if it's a cross of a restricted breed then it has to comply with the restricted breed legislation. If you live in DCC housing and the dog lives in DCC housing, then you have the right to report it to them under their own bye-laws. I understand that you see the owner as a bit of a loose cannon, but the dog hasn't done anything to be tainted as dangerous, other than your perception of the owner. If he doesn't muzzle the dog and keep it on a metre long, strong lead then you have grounds to report him to the dog warden.

Eight Ball

Thanks for the replys folks but someone else must have contacted the council as I've just found out dog was removed from owner yesterday due to Dublin city council tenant rules. Problem solved.

andreac

What problem?? There wasnt actually a problem.

Poor dog, actually puppy, does absolutely nothing wrong apart from being a dog, and it gets taken away, pathetic really. But nothing surprises me anymore to be honest.

DBB

Am I right in thinking that DCC don't rehome restricted breeds and their crosses? Which means this is a one-way trip to the pound vet for this pup.
Ignorant guy who ignored the rules of his tenancy has cost this pup his life.

borderlinemeath

DBB wrote: »

Am I right in thinking that DCC don't rehome restricted breeds and their crosses? Which means this is a one-way trip to the pound vet for this pup.
Ignorant guy who ignored the rules of his tenancy has cost this pup his life.

They won't rehome to the public from the pound, but they do work with certain rescues, although I don't know if that is just with strays, rather than surrenders or seized dogs.

OldNotWIse

borderlinemeath wrote: »

I heard plenty as well.

Claims the dog was an assistance dog, when it clearly spent his entire life in solitary confinement in the back garden

Intimidation and death threats against the Dog Warden who seized Lennox and the rescue in the south that offered to take him in to save his life.

Paypal accounts set up to fund raise, but nothing was ever done and the funds seemed to disappear.

There were lots more, but plenty of keyboard warriors got vocal and rabble roused and made a lot more noise than the people and organisations that were actually involved who knew the ins and outs of the case.

Anyhow, OP, the dog isn't 'dangerous', if it's a cross of a restricted breed then it has to comply with the restricted breed legislation. If you live in DCC housing and the dog lives in DCC housing, then you have the right to report it to them under their own bye-laws. I understand that you see the owner as a bit of a loose cannon, but the dog hasn't done anything to be tainted as dangerous, other than your perception of the owner. If he doesn't muzzle the dog and keep it on a metre long, strong lead then you have grounds to report him to the dog warden.

:eek: Poor dog. I honestly never knew any of that. if it was mine, they'd have to come through me first.

OldNotWIse

Eight Ball wrote: »

Thanks for the replys folks but someone else must have contacted the council as I've just found out dog was removed from owner yesterday due to Dublin city council tenant rules. Problem solved.

Any idea where it went?

anniehoo

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Any idea where it went?

Ashton Pound more than likely.

DBB wrote: »

Am I right in thinking that DCC don't rehome restricted breeds and their crosses? Which means this is a one-way trip to the pound vet for this pup.
Ignorant guy who ignored the rules of his tenancy has cost this pup his life.

Yep they won't rehome RBs or their crosses directly to the public. Depending on whether there's rescue space it may or may not make it out of there. The few rescues that are working with them are jammers, and as it's technically a "seized" dog, it won't stand a chance.

OldNotWIse

anniehoo wrote: »

Ashton Pound more than likely.


Yep they won't rehome RBs or their crosses directly to the public. Depending on whether there's rescue space it may or may not make it out of there. The few rescues that are working with them are jammers, and as it's technically a "seized" dog, it won't stand a chance.

How sad. Poor dog.

lrushe

Eight Ball wrote: »

Thanks for the replys folks but someone else must have contacted the council as I've just found out dog was removed from owner yesterday due to Dublin city council tenant rules. Problem solved.

I sincerely hope you & your lynch mob are happy, you've effectively killed an innocent puppy, a baby for the way it looks.
What are you going to do when the owner gets another dog cos people like that won't mourn the loss of their dog for too long they'll just move on to the next one.
What if the next one isn't a restricted breed but just as capable of biting, what then???
No OP you haven't solved your problem you've just kicked the can down the road.

OldNotWIse

lrushe wrote: »

I sincerely hope you & your lynch mob are happy, you've effectively killed an innocent puppy, a baby for the way it looks.
What are you going to do when the owner gets another dog cos people like that won't mourn the loss of their dog for too long they'll just move on to the next one.
What if the next one isn't a restricted breed but just as capable of biting, what then???
No OP you haven't solved your problem you've just kicked the can down the road.

Agree. Hate busybodies myself. IMO if the dog hasn't done anything to you, put the pitchforks down and find something else to be hysterical about. Poor dog I have a dog who is not a restricted breed but I tell you one thing, I wouldnt let her off a lead around children (she's a terrier). She's never done anything but I dont trust her off lead when they are around. She was abused as a pup and doesn't fully trust others. The ones who reported this puppy are probably the same eejits who let their children run up to my dog in the park (thinking she's small so she must be docile right?) and shout things like, "look at the bow wow, pet the bow wow" without even asking my permission :mad: and then get annoyed when I ask them to call their child off. ffs.

DBB

Steady on folks.
Whilst the OP's attitude may not suit some, the bottom line is that it is the pup's owner who is completely at fault here.
It is the pup's owner who disregarded the rules, and got a puppy that he's not allowed have under his tenancy agreement. He's the one to blame for this puppy's fate.
The attitude of the OP, and presumably at least one other neighbour, is a side issue in this story.
Do not turn this thread into a witch hunt against the OP. By all means, politely correct any misinformation or misguided thoughts, but quit the witch hunt.
Thanks,
DBB

Eight Ball

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Any idea where it went?

Some dog pound or so he told the neighbour. Feel sorry for the dog but them are the rules. In fairness to the council they tend to move quick on these matters.

Eight Ball

DBB wrote: »

Steady on folks.
Whilst the OP's attitude may not suit some, the bottom line is that it is the pup's owner who is completely at fault here.
It is the pup's owner who disregarded the rules, and got a puppy that he's not allowed have under his tenancy agreement. He's the one to blame for this puppy's fate.
The attitude of the OP, and presumably at least one other neighbour, is a side issue in this story.
Do not turn this thread into a witch hunt against the OP. By all means, politely correct any misinformation or misguided thoughts, but quit the witch hunt.
Thanks,
DBB

Nah that's fine I accept all views on the subject. Like I said I feel sorry for the animal but the owner must have either disregarded the tenents agreement or failed to read it. I don't make the rules.

andreac

Eight Ball wrote: »

Nah that's fine I accept all views on the subject. Like I said I feel sorry for the animal but the owner must have either disregarded the tenents agreement or failed to read it. I don't make the rules.

You dont feel sorry for the animal at all. Sure you would have gone and complained about the innocent pup if someone else hadnt.

Thats not feeling sorry for it. The dog did nothing wrong and you very unfair to title this "Dangerous dog" when its no such thing.

Its pathetic really that people have nothing better to do than nose in business when its nothing to do with them, and when nothing had actually happened.

Makes my blood boil :mad:

DBB

I have asked that this doesn't turn into a witch-hunt, but still it continues.
It is so much more effective to argue points calmly and rationally folks. Nobody learns anything if you berate them or screech at them. It completely defeats the purpose to rant at people as I've seen in this thread a few times now.
As this thread has run its course, and is just getting ridiculous, I'm closing it now.
Thanks,
DBB