Friday, October 27, 2006

Statistical data does not support a ban against pit bulls

In the Ancaster News view points are still trying to get across to the public why the breed ban lacks accurate and statistical data. I don't think it's so much the people that need to be convinced. The government wasn't looking for accurate data. There was one goal for Michael Bryant and the Liberal party and that was to get rid of Pit bulls period.

As for other breeds mistaken for Pit bulls, they are sure to be on the banned list next along with other dogs that the government decides should be on the 'Dangerous List'.

If we allow one breed to be banned, there will be so many other breeds that will follow. That's why it's so important to support the Legal Fight and stop this senceless ban and give us back our rights as citizens. It's wrong of the government to dictate as to what kind of breed we own.

Statistical data does not support a ban against pit bulls
(Oct 27, 2006)

As an animal lover I am shocked and appalled by the pit bull ban. Pit bull is not even a specific breed but a term that includes many breeds of dogs, and many people could not even tell you which dogs are pit bulls and which are not. There are at least 20 breeds of dogs that are mistaken for pit bulls everyday.

After doing research, I was shocked to discover that pit bulls do not even have locking jaws as I have always heard. This is just a legend. Pit bulls are very misunderstood and this is mostly due to lack of education. There is no scientific proof, and statistical data is inaccurate to prove anything against pit bulls. Neither Canada nor Ontario keeps statistics on dog bites. Any breed can become mean through lack of training, abuse, neglect, and irresponsible ownership and breeding.

The law is too vague and broad and applies to many other breeds. The Ontario ban even covers breeds that look like a pit bull and that are not actually a part of the breed. Banning an entire breed does not solve the problem of responsible ownership. There is no scientific basis to say that pit bulls are any more dangerous than any other dog. In the hands of a caring, responsible owner pit bulls can be wonderful pets just like any other. The decision to legislate this breed has been done without proper research or public input.

Roni Pollington
Dundas

Wednesday, October 25, 2006

Shasta's new modeling career

Well what can I say? My Shasta holds many hidden talents and surprises me everyday.
When you buy your t-shirts at http://www.allforpaws.ca/ take a look at who's modeling the black t-shirt.

Tuesday, October 24, 2006

Happy Birthday Shasta!

Birthday girl, Shasta, 4 years old
October 20th
Her first full day Birthday Party Outting, muzzleless and leashless on private property.

Shasta and Lucy exploring logs. Lucy's a pro at it while Shasta is strill trying to figure out what this freedom's about.


Are we in with the leaves or are we trash???

HAPPY BIRTHDAY SHASTA

My Birthday wish to you is much more freedom to come soon as we WIN.

Love Mommy xoxoxo

Tuesday, October 17, 2006

Shasta's EARLY Birthday Present

I had previously written about Louise from http://www.allforpaws.ca/ and that she has kindly created a doggy t-shirt for the DLCC and $5.00 from each shirt will be going to the legal challenge fund! We've since become friends and I can tell you her fight against the BSL and the ban is as firm as mine and finding out a lot of great advice for me.



Well, I couldn't help but join the bandwagon and order one for Shasta too. I have to say, they look and feel terrific and Shasta LOVES hers.

It was suppose to be a birthday present for her this Friday, but once I opened the package, you can imagine the excitement that I had to put it right on her. Well, there goes the 'surprise', but I don't think she much cares if I rewrap it just so she can open it again. LOL

The guality of the t-shirts are excellent. I've washed Shasta's a couple of times now and they always look picture perfect when I put it back on her. I love that they have the longer sleeve which will really benefit come the snow. Shasta loses heat very quickly and NEEDS to be dressed for winter. The saying always make people laugh and who can be afraid of a bullie you're giggling at even with the muzzle on in public.

If I wasn't absolutely delighted with the t-shirt, I wouldn't be writing to recommend for all you dog owners to order some for your dogs too. Shasta loves it. I love it and at the same time you are helping out the Defence Fund which is badly in need of our funds.





HAPPY 'EARLY' 4th BIRTHDAY my precious one!!!

Monday, October 16, 2006

Some interesting pet info

We're probably all biting our nails waiting for the final verdict to arrive, so to break the tension (mine if not yours), I thought I'd add some interesting pet info.

Better behaved pets through chemistry?
Pheromone products may ease anxiety, but they’re not a panacea
By Kim Campbell Thornton
MSNBC contributor

Linus doesn’t like strangers. The 4-year-old mixed breed had a lot to cope with, then, when his owner, Alberta Hanko of Smithtown, N.Y., had eight guests that Linus had never met. But Linus had a security blanket in the form of a plug-in that was emitting DAP, or dog appeasing pheromone, which is said to have a calming effect.

“I used the plug-in along with a lot of positive reinforcement,” says Hanko, who had confined Linus to the kitchen using a baby gate. “At first, he was extremely nervous, barking whenever people moved, but we had only had the DAP plugged in for half an hour. After an hour or so, he settled in and I was able to remove sheets that I had hung over the gate so he was able to see people. He actually acted calm and got used to them coming and going."

Not surprisingly, people with anxious pets eagerly seek out anything that might help reduce the barking, howling, chewing, house soiling and urine marking associated with their pets’ problem. Like Hanko, many try the recently introduced products containing pheromones, which are biological or chemical substances that influence sexual and other behaviors in animals. The sprays and plug-ins — Feliway for cats and DAP for dogs — are aimed at calming anxious pets.

Various forms of anxiety, from separation angst to extreme shyness to fear of thunderstorms or fireworks, are common behavior problems in dogs and cats, so much so that it was the subject of no fewer than six seminars at last month’s Western Veterinary Conference in Las Vegas.

“Separation anxiety is supposed to affect 15 percent of the nation’s 73.9 million dogs,” says Nicholas Dodman, a board-certified veterinary behaviorist and professor of animal behavior at Tufts School of Veterinary Medicine in North Grafton, Mass. Separation anxiety also affects cats, Dodman says, although it’s usually not as noticeable because cats tend to be less noisy and destructive in expressing their anxiety.

At Westwood Animal Hospital in Westwood, Kan., veterinarian Wayne Hunthausen, who is board-certified in animal behavior, says he sees a lot of dogs with separation anxiety and fireworks and thunderstorm phobias. Anxiety is an underlying issue in a significant portion of aggression problems as well, he says. “Anxiety problems are also fairly common in cats,” Hunthausen says. “Usually, fear of people is at the top of the list.”

How well do the products work?Just how much pheromone-based products help is debatable. While some dog trainers use them in classes to help keep canine students at ease, veterinary experts have mixed reactions. Dodman doesn’t believe they are very effective, although he concedes that Feliway may have a minor effect. Hunthausen says he sees some benefits when they’re used in conjunction with behavior modification.

How your behavior impacts your pet's

For mild anxiety, pheromones may work, but most cases will require more effort. Behavior modification and counter-conditioning methods vary depending on the problem, but some techniques are universal. The following tips may help, but the guidance of a qualified behaviorist is the most effective way to solve anxiety problems.

— Keep a diary of the behavior so you can figure out whether it occurs at a certain place or time or in response to a particular stimulus. Make note of any changes that may have caused the behavior, even if they seem so unremarkable as someone in the household getting a haircut.
— Provide a predictable daily routine so your pet always knows when to expect meals, walks or playtime.
— Ignore undesirable behavior instead of punishing it.
— Reward behavior you like, such as sitting, lying down or being calm or quiet, even if it’s not something you told the animal to do.
— Enrich your pet’s environment with more play, toys, training or other social interaction.“It really depends on the problem. My experience is that they’re less successful for thunderstorm phobias than they are for firework phobias, for some reason. Anxiety around people is where I probably have the best results,” Hunthausen says.

He especially likes them for use with older pets when there’s a concern about the liver’s ability to process drugs such as Xanax or Valium, and with cats, whose resistance to taking pills may limit what can be done therapeutically.

Board-certified veterinary behaviorist Gary Landsberg of Doncaster Animal Clinic in Thornhill, Ontario, Canada, says: “If I choose cases where I expect them to work, they’re usually fairly effective, and in cases where I am uncertain they’re going to work, then it’s more variable. If a dog has specific fears and anxieties, I use the pheromones in combination with a major behavior program. I seldom just dispense it and say, ‘See if this works.’ ”
Landsberg uses Feliway most successfully with cats that spray urine to mark their territory, as well as with cats that are anxious about changes in the home, such as a move, new people in the family or strangers coming over.

“I find that Feliway as a diffuser can help calm most cats sometimes, along with behavior therapy,” he says.
A disadvantage of the pheromone products is their cost. "It’s a little more expensive than medication in most cases," Hunthausen says. The upfront cost for the spray or diffuser ranges from $20 to $40, and refills are $15 to $20.

Digging for the root cause

How pheromones might actually work is a matter of conjecture. Because these synthetic pheromones are often used in concert with a behavior modification or counter-conditioning program, as in Hanko’s case, it’s possible that the pet is reacting more to the owner’s changed behavior or expectations than to the product itself.

When pheromones do appear to work, they usually do so within 3 to 10 days, although Hunthausen has seen a couple of almost immediate reactions in some animals. When a fearful reaction can be predicted, as in the case of fireworks on the Fourth of July or an upcoming car trip, Hunthausen recommends that pet owners start using the product at least 10 days beforehand.

Longtime Turkish Van owner and author of "Kittens for Dummies" Dusty Rainbolt of Lewisville, Texas, credits Feliway with keeping kitty hostilities at bay in her multi-cat household.

“I use it to help prevent territoriality,” she says. “It doesn’t stop it entirely because you can’t when you have this many cats, but it really tones it down.” The one time she ran out of it, she noticed an increase in urine marking until she was able to replenish her supply.

Rainbolt also finds Feliway effective for cats that don’t enjoy the car ride to the veterinary clinic. She sprays Feliway in the cat carrier 10 or 15 minutes before putting the cat inside it. She recommends using Feliway any time a cat faces a stressful situation: a new pet in the home, an owner bringing home a baby or a new boyfriend, or a pet sitter coming in while the owners are on vacation.

Could pheromone therapy help your pet? It’s possible, but you have to be willing to try to figure out why Misty or Max is anxious in the first place. Few cases of anxiety-related problems are successfully resolved without behavior therapy.

“There’s always a reason why the pet is doing what it’s doing,” Landsberg says. “If you don’t address the underlying cause, then you might not get the improvement you expect.”

Better behaved pets through chemistry?
Pheromone products may ease anxiety, but they’re not a panacea

How pheromones might actually work is a matter of conjecture. Because these synthetic pheromones are often used in concert with a behavior modification or counter-conditioning program, as in Hanko’s case, it’s possible that the pet is reacting more to the owner’s changed behavior or expectations than to the product itself.

When pheromones do appear to work, they usually do so within 3 to 10 days, although Hunthausen has seen a couple of almost immediate reactions in some animals. When a fearful reaction can be predicted, as in the case of fireworks on the Fourth of July or an upcoming car trip, Hunthausen recommends that pet owners start using the product at least 10 days beforehand.

Longtime Turkish Van owner and author of "Kittens for Dummies" Dusty Rainbolt of Lewisville, Texas, credits Feliway with keeping kitty hostilities at bay in her multi-cat household.

“I use it to help prevent territoriality,” she says. “It doesn’t stop it entirely because you can’t when you have this many cats, but it really tones it down.” The one time she ran out of it, she noticed an increase in urine marking until she was able to replenish her supply.

Rainbolt also finds Feliway effective for cats that don’t enjoy the car ride to the veterinary clinic. She sprays Feliway in the cat carrier 10 or 15 minutes before putting the cat inside it. She recommends using Feliway any time a cat faces a stressful situation: a new pet in the home, an owner bringing home a baby or a new boyfriend, or a pet sitter coming in while the owners are on vacation.

Could pheromone therapy help your pet? It’s possible, but you have to be willing to try to figure out why Misty or Max is anxious in the first place. Few cases of anxiety-related problems are successfully resolved without behavior therapy.

“There’s always a reason why the pet is doing what it’s doing,” Landsberg says. “If you don’t address the underlying cause, then you might not get the improvement you expect.”

Monday, October 09, 2006

HAPPY THANKSGIVING

Both Shasta and I would like to wish you all a HAPPY THANKSGIVING! I am thankful for all the new people and friends I have met and the support and incouragement you have given to me. The fight against the BSL together and the love of our fur-kids and fur-kids EVERYWHERE!.
Happy Thanksgiving everyone.



*hugs* Conners and Shasta

Friday, October 06, 2006

Pit bull owners bare their souls to fight Ontario's ban on dogs

What we would do for our dogs!!! I give all these ladies credit to bare themselves for the LOVE and FIGHT for the bullies! Hat's off to all of you!!! Here's the link to the story in the Ottawa Citizen.


Pit bull owners bare their souls to fight Ontario's ban on the dogs
Fundraising calendar features dog lovers in assorted states of undress
Iris Winston, The Ottawa Citizen
Published: Friday, October 06, 2006

An 82-year-old Ottawa woman is posing nude for a fundraising calendar. Her inspiration: the love of a pit bull.
Octogenarian Squibs Mer-cier appears unencumbered by clothes with her Staffordshire bull terrier, one of the breeds that falls under Ontario's ban of pit bull-type dogs. The calendar is to raise money for a legal challenge to the law.

Ms. Mercier is the only founding member of the Staffordshire Bull Terrier Club of Canada still living, let alone posing for pin-up pictures. In the calendar, she and 11 other members of the club appear wearing only broad smiles with their dogs and the occasional discreetly placed best-in-show rosette or flag.

From a new bride flanked by her two Staffordshire bull terriers, to a model in a bubble bath with her dogs on the edge of the tub, the photographs -- most of them by professional photographers -- speak of the warm relationship between the dogs and their owners.

The brainchild of club president Clive Wilkinson, the calendar attempts to heighten awareness of the plight of Staffordshire bull terriers and related breeds that fall under the umbrella of Ontario's Bill 132.

The McGuinty government's bill, which amended the Dog Owners' Liability Act, received royal assent in March 2005. It "prohibits individuals from owning, breeding, transferring, importing or abandoning pit bulls." The bill grandfathers current dogs and owners, but insists that the dogs be muzzled in public places.

"I'm certainly not prepared to muzzle my dogs," says Mrs. Mercier, as she pets her gentle, 13-year-old champion Staffordshire, Duchess. "I've had Staffies all my life. They're wonderful companions. This stupid and unfair law will make the breed extinct. We have to fight it. If we don't oppose the bill, they'll just move on to the next breed. It's not dogs they should be banning. It's bad owners."

The battle against the legislation, with high-profile lawyer Clayton Ruby for the defence, is before the courts. This, says Mrs. Mercier, is why raising funds in various ways, such as auctions, raffles and now calendars, is a priority.
"This money could have gone into doing good for animals in other ways, if we didn't have this fight on our hands," she says. "But we're not going away. You only lose when you give up."

The first 450 copies of the 2007 Beautiful Staffies and Their Ladies calendar quickly sold out. A new batch of the "baring it all against banning" calendar is available through the Staffordshire Bull Terrier Club of Canada at www.staffordcanada.com.

Tuesday, October 03, 2006

Legal Defense New E-BAY Items

new e-bay items

It's time to bid!!
There are new e-bay items up for auction. Please check them out & bid generously.
Please cross-post widely!

A fun lap quilt called "There's a Dog on My Quilt", it is non-breed specific so send the link to all your dog friends!

A jean shirt with a logo that says it all ... I love My Staffie

A breed specific book

An unframed art print ... If anyone has more info on this print, it would be greatly appreciated. It was donated for our auction at the Specialty but no details were included

Happy bidding!

Dog credited with saving teen from fire

Dog Credited With Saving Teen From Fire
FORT MEYERS, Fla. (AP)

A pit bull who was recently adopted by a family after wandering onto a construction site may have saved a teen girl from a house fire on Friday.

Jerrica Seals, 17, was already safely out of the house by the time firefighters arrived, the News-Press of Fort Meyers reported.

"She called me screaming," said Leticia Vega, 36, the sister of Seals' boyfriend Javier Garcia, 23, who owns the home.

"She said the dog woke her up barking, jumped on the bed and bit her on the leg."

Seals was taken to the hospital for a checkup, but Garcia said she was going to be fine.

Deputy fire Chief Steve Clyatt said blaze appears to have been caused by a bad extension cord on a window air conditioner.

Vega said her oldest brother, Gabriel Garcia, found the dog while he was working.

"He didn't pay no mind to it," Vega said.

"He just kept working and the dog just stayed there so he brought it home. He doesn't usually bark. He's real friendly."
10/02/06 15:35 EDT

SBTCC's $1000 Challenge

SBTCC's $1000 Challenge

The Noel family, members of the Staffordshire Bull Terrier Club of Canada have put forth a challenge to other individuals, families or groups of dog lovers to donate $1000 to the legal challenge in the month of October.They started off this challenge with $1000. Since then Coleen & Clive Wilkinson, Mo Pyke & Matt Brierley and other members have stepped up, accepted this challenge and donated $1000 or more. All this in 2 days!

We are at a critical time for fundraising in this legal challenge and we can not stop. To get 100 individuals, families or groups to donate $1000 would help tremendously.

If you would like to accept the challenge you may go to
http:// www.staffordcanada.com/donations/index.html
and either donate directly through PayPal or you may make a cheque payable to "Belle Campeau - Legal Defence Fund" and mail it to:

Belle Severn
7339 Fourth Line Rd.
RR#4
Kemptville, ON
K0G 1J0

The SBTCC understands that not everyone is able to donate $1000. Another great way to support the legal challenge and get a great, fun gift in return is to donate $20 plus shipping to the SBTCC and get one of their "Beautiful Staffies and their Ladies" 2007 calendars.
http://www.staffordcanada.com/images2/Order%20Form.pdf

Please, please crosspost this email to any other email lists, yahoo groups, blogs, friends, family or just everyday dog loving people. We must get our message across, we must continue to fight.

Thank you to those who have donated, bought calendars and continue to fight.

Monday, October 02, 2006

Dog Owners Suitability Test and Training

In K9 News Magazine are these two articles. They want what we want in Canada and in the U.S.

Dog Attacks: Dog Owner Suitability Tests are the Obvious Answer

We're off again. The News of the World (Britain's top selling Sunday newspaper) has joined its sister title, The Sun in calling for a change to dog legislation.
They are calling for owners of dogs who attack people, whether on their own property or not to be liable for criminal prosecution.

Whilts this is not exactly the same stance as The Sun, who are calling specifically for the muzzling of Rottweilers at home and in public, at least it appears that this is what they were calling for (you can read it here.), both newspapers are keen to see 'devil dogs' and their owners legislated against.

Both newspapers are calling for something to happen in the style of we want change, we want it now and we want children protected. We agree, change is needed. But change for change's sake won't prevent a single death or future dog attack. There is a solution, both newspapers have missed it.

The thing is, this whole debate is rapidly turning into a 'them and us' situation when in reality the dog owning community want the same thing. Nobody wants to see people injured as a result of a dog attack but surely prevention has got to be better than cure.

The News of The World's campaign is supported by the views of Clare Carey and Mark Lawrence, the parents of little Harvey Lawrence the boy who received horrendous injuries when he was attacked by a Rottweiler last week.

Clare stormed:

"Dangerous animals in zoos are kept behind bars. Dogs like Rottweilers have the same kind of characteristics so even putting them on a lead is not enough. They're stronger than a person. "We've seen the damage this dog's teeth did to Harvey's skull and his face and I wouldn't want any other parent to have to go through this. "Children shouldn't have to live in fear of animals. We must do something to protect them. "The law needs to be changed. People who own dogs need to take responsibility."

Comparing "dogs like Rottweilers" as having similar characteristics to dangerous zoo animals is understandable in part. In many ways, they do. They are capable of delivering fatal attacks, physically they can indeed be stronger than many people and yes, they are animals. They are not wild animals though and belong to a group of animals who are collectively known as our best friend, the Rottweiler is not an exmption from that description. There are many reasons for this.

The main difference between animals in zoos and dogs is that canines were domesticated and are absolutely predisposed to accept training and psychological conditioning delivered by humans. Punishing the people who chose to ignore their responsibility to train their dogs is fine (see how much we're still agreeing here).

But at what point does the punishment actually prevent the attack in the first place? Surely this has to be the aim because unlike 99.9% of crimes, it's rare that the owner of an attacking dog actually wanted the crime to happen, they didn't chose for it to happen and they certainly don't profit from it when it occurs. Negligence is the issue and the way to combat negligence is by demanding that owners are aware of their responsibilities.

A dog ownership suitability test would ensure that dog owners knew of their legal and social responsibilities. A dog ownership suitability test would make certain that would-be dog owners were required to understand dog law, learn how the dangerous dogs act relates to them, understand how dog body language works, realise how powerful certain breeds are and what makes them tick. A dog ownership suitability test WOULD prevent dog attacks, WOULD go a long way toward stopping the wrong people owning dogs that were unsuitable for their level of experience or lifestyle and WOULD guarantee that all dog owners were equipped with at the very least, a basic level of understanding of what their responsibilities were to their dog and to society.

The dangerous dogs act is quite unique in that it is a piece of legislation, a much criticised piece of legislation at that, where the group of people it's aimed at (dog owners) widely don't know what's in it and the specific group it legislates against (dogs) can't actually read it. The truth is, the dangerous dogs act could be the finest piece of law making in British legal history but would still be rendered next to useless if the people it's meant for don't know what's in it and the section of society it was brought in for can't read the thing.

Given that we have taken dogs to new levels of achievement over the past 100 years - think guide dogs, cancer detection dogs, Police dogs, drug detection dogs, bomb detection dogs (Rottweilers playing a role in many of these disciplines), it still remains unlikely that we'll ever be able to teach man's best friend to read and understand the complexities of the British legal system. With that in mind the only sensible way to ensure that the dangerous dogs act offers a benefit to society is to try and think of a system that obligates dog owners to understand it. How can we do that? A dog ownership suitability test or, 'Doggie Driving Licence' would do exactly that.

A dog ownership suitability test would take care of this and then some. If dog owners still don't understand their responsibilities after that and their dogs are attacking people, fouling the streets or causing a nuisance to innocent members of society then yes, let's see them prosecuted as criminals.

If we didn't have driving tests, theory exams and laws of the road legislating for speeding, dangerous driving, understanding traffic signals etc, laws which are understood by the vast majority of the people they were designed to apply to, drivers, and are there not just to protect the people behind the wheel but other members of society who inevitably come into contact with them, would we honestly be surprised if accidents occur as a result of sheer ignorance/negligence? Seems illogical that we don't seek to apply the same theory to dog owners.

Breed specific legislation will not stop people dying and being injured as a result of dog attacks. Muzzling orders will not stop people dying and being injured as a result of dog attacks. Prosecuting negligent dog owners whose dogs injure or kill is fine in theory but it's still retrospective, somebody has still been killed or attacked. Let's try and prevent dog attacks, prevent abuse of dogs as a result of owner negligence and let's make something positive come out of a tragic week. Dog ownership suitability tests are the prevention, criminalisation is only the cure.

From the K9 Magazine The Dog Lovers Blog

Muzzle Them, Ban Them, Destroy Them - Why Not Just Train Them?

September 28th, 2006 by Ryan

When they get it right on animals (and they often do) we’re the first inline to pat them on the back and pay credit to Britain’s largest selling daily newspaper. But just lately they’ve got it so wrong something needs to be said.

The Sun’s campaign to highlight animal cruelty was noble. They dedicated entire front pages to the issue of animal neglect and campaigned to stamp out cruelty. They are a largely influential newspaper.

In the wake of the two tragic Rottweiler attacks over the past week The Sun have been slavishly sticking to the good old tabloid principle of using language such as ‘devil dogs’, ‘raging beasts’ and so on. Today especially, The Sun have got it totally and utterly wrong. Their stance will achieve nothing for the victims of dog attacks and certainly nothing for dogs.

Today The Sun tells us their position on ‘devil dogs’. “Muzzle Them”, they bellow. Reading further it seems the “them” in this case are Rottweilers.

© Sun Newspaper, Sept 28 2006
“BRITAIN is a nation of dog lovers.

But even those who love their pets more than their fellow humans must accept there is a limit to the risk society can tolerate.

The shocking death of tragic tot Cadey-Lee Deacon, mauled to death by two raging rottweilers, makes the blood run cold.

Such deaths are mercifully rare. Attacks are not.

In the last few weeks alone rottweilers have savaged a two-year-old toddler and a girl aged 12.

These powerful guard dogs have jaws like a steel trap. They are highly-intelligent, territorial — and domineering when inadequately trained. Like a car in the hands of an inexperienced or incompetent owner, they can be lethal.

To make matters worse, some unscrupulous breeders deliberately produce aggressive “devil dogs”, favoured by saddos to project a macho image.
Rottweilers are exempt from the list of breeds banned under the Dangerous Dogs Act.

This loophole-riddled law also fails to cover dog attacks on private property.

For Cadey-Lee, any action is too late. But the government cannot sit back and allow another child — or adult — to be torn apart by these eight-stone beasts.

It must follow the example of countries like Germany — and order them to be muzzled”

So, given that both of these attacks happened on their owner’s private property are we to assume The Sun wants all Rottweilers muzzled all of the time rather than just in public?

What is The Sun’s view on Rottweiler crosses? How do they want to legislate against dogs who are ‘a bit’ Rottweilerish?

What about the dogs of a similar size, all of whom are equally capable of causing serious damage to people, the Doberman, the Anatolian Shepherd, the Leonberger, the GSD, the Belgian Shepherd, the Japanese Akita and what about the nation’s favourite dog, the Labrador - you know - the one responsible for a fully grown, adult woman who had to receive the world’s first face transplant this year? What about them?

Should ALL dogs simply be muzzled at all times, surely that’s the logic at play here?

No, this is the EXACT type of kneejerk response that would solve absolutely NOTHING.

Pit Bulls were banned - whether you believe rightly or wrongly - so surely we should be safer from dog attack, yes? Well no actually, Home Office statistics reveal dog attacks on the up and the reason dangerous dogs are on the agenda again is because a child has died.

So let’s muzzle the Rottweiler. What happens then?

Well, apart from subjecting the many thousands of Rottweilers who haven’t done a damn thing to a single person and have been found guilty by association , condemned to a life of misery, walking around with their muzzles on 24/7, they would inevitably become a less popular breed. Owners who want a large, sturdy, reliable dog to share their home with and yes, offer a degree of home security, would find themselves opting for a dog who they didn’t have to witness living in misery thanks to a muzzling order and who wouldn’t be the cause of abuse from misguided non dog owners, convinced that Rottweiler ownership is only one notch worse than paedophillia. Other breeds will take their place in the popularity stakes.

Let’s take ourselves forward 20 years. No more Rottweilers, no more Pit Bulls. We’re all completely safe from dog attacks now surely? Of course we’re not and it’s ridiculous, incompetent and downright opportunistic to think otherwise. Where the Rottweiler once sat will be the Mastiff, the American Bulldog, the Ridgeback or other dog of similar size and stature. Take your pick, which is the one who’ll be responsible for the next title of ‘devil dog’?

We need education not legislation. We need to ensure that this vicious cycle of the wrong dogs getting into the hands of the wrong owners stops. We need to ensure people not only fully understand their obligations as a dog owner (of ANY type) we need to ensure people ARE DUTY BOUND to comply with their responsibilities. We need a dog ownership screening test.

We can legislate to high heaven. We can get down to a situation where we’re only allowed to keep dogs of a certain size. We can all just decide that the risk of keeping dogs is to high. Afterall one death, as absolutely tragic, appaling and stomach churning as it is, is an isolated incident.

If dogs were killing people week in week out, we’d be in a different position. The fact is, they’re not. Electricity is though, cars are, smoking is, drinking is - should we ban it all or should we take the view that, by and large, these things co-exist with us in normal society and in many cases they enance people’s lives. Yes, there are dangers. Yes, lack of care can cause accidents to happen. But simply banning or imposing ill though out restrictions won’t cure the problem and we’ll have learned nothing. Let’s get this one right. There is an opportunity to make something positive happen from a truly tragic week. Dog ownership tests WILL have a positive effect. Banning orders, muzzling and breed legislation wont. We’ve already proved that haven’t we?