cybergenesis

If these laws come into effect, it could mean a massive underground network of pitbull and pitbull breeders. If it works anything like drug prohibition, then these breeds could become even more popular and desirable among the undesirable elements of society. Instead of seeing just marijuana busts and stuff on TV, we could see "Police Have Busted a Major Illicit Pitbull Breeding Ring in blah blah blah" Who says the laws couldn't be expanded in the future anyway. Who says German Shepards or Rottweilers aren't dangerous? What about Neapolitan Mastiffs? What about many other dogs?"

This is like the dog version of Nazi Australia coming to life. Dog owners need to band together and arrange protests and take action against this.

The Federal government has agreed to try to help standardise laws, not introduce a national law. Where are the RSPCA when we need them? The net effect could be very similar. Especially if they get a consensus from the majority of states- then across the majority of Australia, strict and draconian dogs laws could take effect. I don't own a "dangerous breed" of dog, but I own a Labrador, and my next dog is going to be an English Mastiff. Both of these dogs are fully capable of being dangerous if socialized and treated the wrong way, and then allowed to wander at large among the public. But what if I want to own one of these "banned" dog breeds in the future? Responsible and decent people who are fully capable of managing their dogs and committed to being good owners should not be banned from owning any type of dog. Pitbulls and crosses are just popular with the rougher underclass, partially due to their cheap price due to backyard breeding. Even so, it is still exceedingly rare for a fatal attack on a human. It is wrong to ban dog breeds, Australia's laws are already too strict in regard to dog ownership. The victims of a rare and horrid dog attack are not the ones who should be in the position to be calling for rational dog laws.

THE family of the four-year-old savaged to death by a pit bull wants a national ban on dangerous dogs - and the Federal Government has agreed. http://www.news.com.au/top-stories/federal-government-to-unify-dangerous-dog-laws/story-e6frfkp9-1226132051447#ixzz1XKkyIvTg OMG this is awful news and draconian. What are peoples opinions?

Holy moly - your lab is the same as TWO average male labs. Surely the average weight of a male lab is more than 30kg? Just checked wikipedia: Labradors are relatively large, with males typically weighing 29 to 41 kg Yeah my dog is pretty heavy hey lol

I agree about not having to muzzle dogs leashed that might attack another dog that runs up to it. I walk my dog around this neighborhood a lot, and I've had some close calls with other dogs coming up to it unleashed. I know that sooner or later it will happen, and I think my Labrador can probably defend itself against most dogs (my dog is larger than the average male full grown Labrador, weighs 60kg). It would be different if it snapped at people walking past, but it is the responsibility of other owners to keep their unleashed dogs away from my leashed dog. I will not take away its right to defend itself, if an aggressive dog attacks it and given that my dog is not timid and is rather large, in most cases the other dog is going to come off worst (I hope). Of course I do everything in my power to avoid such a situation, but I do have a certain sort of twisted theoretical pride that my dog in all likelyhood could probably best most other dogs, if it came down to it. I am not saying ALL other dogs. I've introduced it to several other dogs, and it is ALWAYS top dog in the pack for some reason. It ALWAYS dominates other dogs lol. My dog is the king.

I don't think pitbulls should be banned and I have personally been fully attacked by one before. It was owned by junkie bogans who obviously mistreated it.

I'd be acting a bit differently if somebody cut my testicles off lol But seriously, what was your motivation for desexing? Was it to avoid pregnancy? All my dogs have always been entire, its just my preference.

I just wanted to comment on this thread... My male Labrador (2.5 years old) is not desexed. I don't like the idea of desexing dogs. I am not a professional or anything, but like some of the people above, I also like my dog "natural". I am getting another non-desexed male in a few months, an English Mastiff. I would not change one little bit how my Labrador is, and would only desex if there was the potential for another dog to become pregnant, which there isn't in my case because I have complete control over my dog. Don't like people that try to push others to desex their dogs, responsible dog owners should know if they want to / need to or not. I wouldn't want anybody cutting my balls off, lets just say that As a male, my dog can consider I am sticking up for him

I am sorry but that is seriously naive. Especially with Child Protection. If you truly think that if you have done nothing wrong, that they will never come up with false allegations / concerns etc, you are wrong. Child Protection are dangerous. They don't need hard evidence to take your children, just if on the "balance of probabilities" they feel their suspicions are justified, whether they are real or not, especially when it comes to "sexual abuse". But this is probably starting to go off topic from a dog forum. However I would also be concerned if the RSPCA turned up at my house based on false allegations. I wouldn't let them inside my home, no matter what.

Its bloody stupid. My Labradore is potentially a serious danger to children when it is eating. It is EXTREMELY aggressive at guarding its food. If I was irresponsible and let a child go up and pull my dogs ears when it was eating, I absolutely believe it would attack them. In fact I believe it would attack me! Don't get me wrong, my labradore is otherwise the most friendly well socialized dog you would ever meet. But its previous owners abused it, and used to pull it away from its food to torment it, and it has issues with food. Perhaps we should ban all Labradores as well, hell, lets get real, all dogs should be banned. They are just too dangerous. People shouldn't be allowed pets, I mean what if 1 in a million children is attacked? THINK OF THE CHILDREN. (Obviously I am being sarcastic)

Saw this happen last week....at a gathering where the family dog was allowed to be running around with 15 kids it didn't know. Dog and 2 year old boy were centimetres away from 5 adults when the boy reached out to pat the dog, got his finger tangled in the long curly hair on his ear, tried to pull his hand away, and the dog whipped round and bit him. The little boy was fine....the dog had amazing bite inhibition and didn't leave a mark, but 5 adults were within arms reach of him and it still happened. I was on the other side of the room and saw a split second freeze, but what "sort of supervising, sort of chatting" adult or oblivious 2 year old would have seen that? It wouldn't happen at my place because I would never allow a 2 year old around a dog. You would want to have absolute confidence in the temperament and socialization of a dog to allow it around a 2 year old (and that is only with strict, constant supervision). Very young children and dogs are a combination that scares me to be frank. Often (I am not saying always), allowing such a young child around a dog is irresponsible behavior in my book. Dogs are not teddy bears, they are animals and a child is often a smaller animal to them. A problem is that many stupid owners think they "know" their dog, when they really don't understand their behavior. Some owners think their dogs are little people.

I believe as a general rule, young children (say under 5), shouldn't be allowed around dogs, even with adults supervision. This is unless the owners know what they are doing and know the temperament and behavior of the dog very well. Young children get attacked because dogs regard them as small animals, they do not see them as the fragile, "precious" offspring of adults. The problem is when the dog sees the child as lower in the pack than it is, or interprets the child is challenging it. As a general rule (except in circumstances where the owners actually know what they are doing), children should not be allowed around dogs that are not trained in how to behave around dogs, and that are not trained to read the warning signs of dogs. Very young children cannot understand these things, and may misinterpret things such as a dog snarling, as a dog smiling. I am not saying there are not freak dog attacks without obvious reason, but in most cases, the situation is predictable and avoidable. For example dogs that are raised from puppy age with children running around them and playing with them, tend to be much more comfortable around children, than a dog which only occasionally has access to children.

No doubt. There is a place in this world IMO for dogs prepared to do harm to humans who simply trespass. IMO Australia is not one of those places and a dog with the temperament of the Fila needs to be carefully placed in the right homes anywhere. A correctly temperamented Fila will do more than just guard.. so when little Timmy comes uninvited over the fence looking for his tennis ball, he won't be leaving in one piece. I'd say he wont' be leaving anyway but in a coffin. Anyone who could casually say that they wish to own such a dog in an urban setting in this country needs their head read. Place that argument in a place like Johannesburg and its a whole new ball game. What ever "poodle fan". I live in one of the roughest neighborhoods in Australia, we had over 5 murders in this suburb last year and many, many other bashings, sexual assaults and attacks. Just cause you live in posh poodle ville doesn't give you a right to judge. I've only been here a year and I have already had my place broken into and my possession stolen, including my former dog (which was a labradore). You can really go stuff your opinions. Little Timmy isn't going to be coming over my 3 metre high fence, I don't have any kids as neighbors and all the neighbors are long term. Its none of your bloody business why I want a specific dog or not, and I have every right to have a guard dog that is capable of taking down an intruder for my protection (well I should have that right, if Australia wasn't such a gutless cotton wool nanny state). I have a right to protect myself whatever you may think. You may like dogs that are "like little poodles" but I like real dogs with assertive temperaments that are capable of protecting me. BTW You would make a great leader for this nanny state, seeing as you like to judge other peoples business. I am a responsible owner, entirely capable of managing my dog and restricting my dog to my property. You are a clown who likes to think people are too irresponsible to handle things and everything should be banned. Oh and "poodlefan", there are many non-banned breeds which are quite capable of mauling to death little Timmy, I have met great danes and other dogs that would maul little Timmy if he jumped the back fence, its not the breed, its how the dog is trained and socialized, its hypocritical and deluded reasoning that thinks some breeds are "bad". There is no such thing as an evil or bad breed of dog. Screw the government banning everything (especially dogs), because of the extremely small minority of dog attacks by irresponsible dog owners (you know instead of actually holding those owners heavily responsible). Ban cars, ban back yard pools, ban swimming, ban sports, lets all wrap the whole of society in cotton wool and take away all of our liberties, otherwise poodlefan might have nightmares about the bad things that could happen. OH WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!

Dude pitbull types breeds are widely available and certain other restricted breeds are also available (especially Dogo Argentino) if you know where to go... The dog I would really like though is Fila Brasileiro

No its not, but I do plan on owning a restricted breed in the future. Its the thought of forcing people to desex their dogs that pisses me off. This law makes many presumptions about people being irresponsible, and forces responsible owners to be treated as if they are irresponsible. And what if you want to breed pitbulls or other restricted breeds of dogs? Are they trying to eradicate all breeding? I don't believe in ANY breed of dog being banned. Go to hell nanny state governments of Australia.

I wouldn't have a problem registering my dog, but the problem is I don't want my dog desexed. I prefer having my dog natural. I like the temperament of dogs that are not desexed, they are more energetic, playful and alert. My dog is not around any female dogs. It is ENTIRELY secured in my backyard with 3 metre high fences, and two sets of locked gates between the backyard and the road. WHY THE HELL SHOULD I HAVE TO HAVE MY DOGS NUTS CUT OFF?

Nothing wrong with Pitbulls... No dog breeds should be banned, and its awful that we already ban several dog breeds in Australia.

I must admit that I would like to get my hands on an aggressive dog for guard dog purposes. I live in a very rough, high crime area, and I would like to get a very protective, territorial dog for my own protection. I don't believe in the banning of any breed, I believe in responsible dog ownership and accountability of the owners for their dogs. Fatal dog attacks are still a very rare, freak occurrence. I mean if somebody chains up a dog in their back yard, and frequently belts it, and never socializes it with people (especially children), and in general is an aggressive "bogan" type of owner, no breed banning legislation is going to protect the public. In the freak event that a vicious attack occurs, it makes sense to hold the owner strongly legally accountable. But as I said, I am actually interested in a dog with the potential to attack people, for my own sense of security and protection, which I think is my right. I have a very secure backyard and already own a dog, and my dog has never escaped before (and never will), but my current dog, is not the right sort of dog to use as a guard dog. As for "pit bulls" and any other sort of dog, I am 100% against banning ANY breed. I am also against compulsory desexing of dogs, because I prefer the temperament of a non-desexed animal. I think that owning a dog that suits you is one of the best things about life- a very important part of life for many people. I am tired of this ban this, ban that nanny state the country has become. It is a tragedy that a child has been killed, and the bloody owner should be sent to prison. And yes if an aggressive dog is found wandering unrestrained around the streets, then the bloody owner should face serious consequences. But what can you do, when people are so stupid that they can't secure their own poorly raised, aggressive dogs? And for the record I've been attacked by a pitbull before and only just escaped injury, I blame for the owners, not the dog. In that case, the owners were irresponsible bogan junkies. When I told them their dog had attacked me they threatened to smash me and told me to "f" off. I kicked their dog with such force in the head (more than once) that it flipped over backwards, but immediately (without an instant of hesitation) got back up and attempted to attack me again. I was nearly hit by a car backing off into the main road to escape.

A few points: * There is a serious knee jerk political reaction festering over this. Worry about various breeds of dogs being totally banned and destroyed. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/call-for-urgent-review-of-dog-laws-after-fatal-attack-in-st-albans/story-e6frf7jo-1226117179182 * I personally don't believe "pit bulls" are much more dangerous than many other breeds, but they tend to attract "bogan" type criminal owners. I can't tell you how many meth heads, and animal beaters I have unfortunately met in my life that own "pit bull" type dogs. * A mauling to death is still a rare, freak accident. Car accidents kill far more people and do many other things, but we don't ban these activities. I strongly believe in a persons right to own any breed of dog they want, unless a court order has been made due to prior convictions. I also believe, that if a persons dog attacks and kills someone they should be charged with manslaughter- depending on the individual circumstances of the case. These are rare incidents, I am sorry but I don't feel a ban on any breed is justified. * I believe my full grown male Labrador is capable of mauling and killing a child in the wrong circumstances. It is extremely possessive of its food and extremely aggressive at guarding it. WHile it is fine in all other ways, I wouldn't want a toddler to walk over and try and remove its food from its dish- I believe it would attack the toddler and do SERIOUS damage. As the owner I wouldn't even try and remove its food once it is eating. However, I am a responsible dog owner, my property is very secure (3 meter high fence surrounding the yard), and my dog has never escaped the property before, and to be frank, it never will. Banning any breed of dog in my opinion is knee jerk nanny state stuff. The responsibility for these rare events lies on the heads of the usually irresponsible dog owners. Should we ban kitchen knives because some people may stab others with them? We should do that before we ban dogs, dogs are age old human companions, and I am sorry to people who are offended, but occasionally dog attacks happen. Banning dogs is not appropriate.

Whoa rabbies is probably the worst thing you can ever get... It is DEADLY... I am so glad we do not have it here. Rabbies is my worst fear.

What an awful comment, I would never describe any child as a "feral".

Have to disagree there. In your opinion when is a child old enough to be included in the pecking order? When it is too late? Honestly mate, I read your comments yesterday, and I have to say I was thinking what planet is this person on? Are you truly advocating 4 year old children being near feeding dogs? You say in your circumstances, the children were raised with the dog since puppy age, well that is one circumstances, but I would never in hell allow a 4 year old child near my Labradore when it is eating. My dog was not raised with young toddlers pulling its ears and taking away its food when eating, and I do not believe my dog could ever be trained to be entirely safe around children when eating. Sometimes it still growls at me, but only a very soft growl.

Oh come off it... Nobody is saying they absolutely know what happened, but it is pretty likely the parents are responsible. I own a Labradore, a large male one. It is a food guarder, and a very severe one. I am the only person that can go near its food when it is eating. It will fully growl and bare all its teeth, if any other person goes anywhere near its food- including other dogs. I have various children over my house all the time. It is my responsibility to protect the children from my dog. I will allow older children- that I am confident will behave- around the dog, but keep it absolutely away from younger children. I have never, ever had any incident with my dog, because I am extremely vigilant and careful. I am actually in control of the situation. It would not be an "accident' if my dog attacked a child. I have no doubt that the parents in this case had some serious misconception about their dog, they "trusted it like a human" etc. Dogs can be very trustable, but you have to understand their nature, and most dogs are capable of attacking in the right circumstance. I have seen dogs nearly attack children various times (By quick reflexes I have physically stopped a dog from biting a child), this was all at the house of people who are not responsible with dogs. Going near a dog when it is eating or sleeping, or a child deliberately staring at a dog at face level, are the main triggers of dog attacks against children. However my Labradore has no problem with people going near it when its asleep for some reason. Its only when its eating. It is not aggressive under any other cirsumstances. When my dog eats, no child can get bitten by it, because I put it out the back, I know where the children are in my house, and I lock the back door and without the key it is not possible for a young 4 year old child to get access to the dog. No child has ever had an "accident" around me, I am like a hawk when it comes to children's safety, and proudly so. It is almost certain that this child getting bitten by the dog was fully preventable, and now the bloody poor dog will likely get put down. However, as much as I love dogs, children are more important than dogs.