While the rest of us were complaining about the traffic, a ten year old girl spent three hours of her bank holiday weekend undergoing reconstructive surgery to her face.

The reason? Another attack by dogs. The attack on Rhianna Kidd in Dundee led to a 33-year-old woman being charged under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 for failing to keep the her Rottweilers under control.

The attack came just days after an eight year old, Sky Barker, was mauled by a Japanese Akita, requiring 175 stitches to repair the damage.

There appear to be several reasons for attacks such as these. The first is the carelessness on the part of the owner that in the worst cases is tantamount to manslaughter. It’s quite simple; big, dangerous dogs need to be kept under control at all times.

Another reason is the vague set of rules under which four types of dogs are banned: the Japanese Tosa, Dogo Argentino and Fila Brasileiro. Critics say the rules over what is a dangerous dog are too vague, allowing many dog owners to simply pretend their pets are not among the banned types.

Dangerous dogs are often abandoned and then attack animals or people. Battersea Dogs and Cats Home said recently that it had been forced to put down a growing number of dogs because of their behaviour.

A final, particularly alarming, reason is the increasing breeding of ‘status’ dogs. Dogs, trained to attack, have become the new weapon of choice in some inner city areas. It may be illegal to brandish a knife, but a cross-breed might get past the Dangerous Dogs Act and it’ll make the owner look hard as nails - or at least that’s the idea. Many of these animals are also used in dog fighting, which is growing in popularity.

All of these problems stem not from the breed of dog involved, but from the owner.

But what can be done about it? The government is being lobbied to introduce a registration or licence scheme. This would be paid for by the owner and would reliably link a dog to the person responsible for it. Is this the answer?

London's deputy mayor Kit Malthouse said recently that owners who use their dogs as weapons should face the same penalties as carrying a knife.

You can sign Malthouse’s petition, and see his other recommendations, here: http://www.london.gov.uk/dangerous-dogs-petition.

this one has a definite yes from me and i like dogs and take my sons collie for many walks.
.
there are a breeds around that can and do kill and sometimes certain breeds are in the hands of local yobs and thugs who shouldnt be allowed these sort of animals anyway. added to that is the renewal of dogfighting and this will get totally out of hand when police force cuts start to bite. so yes,tougher rules and also a dog licence of at least £100 for certain types of dog with the details of where the dog is kept and by whom. those with criminal records should not be allowed to have any sort of fighting type dog. if you agree then write to your mp or just e mail him or her.

What really needs to happen is to get the status tag removed from the owners who must have the dog to give them street-cred. Have a look around you when you're out in your car and look at the type of owners who have these types of dogs.

A local vet once told me that Rottweilers are not pets, and that pretty much sums it up for me. Look at the biting action of a Staff and tell me that's a pet. What about the power in the jaws of most dogs?

Making a salutory example of a few owners and heavily publicising it could be a start....... but then again we've seen the power of the bite of some judges.

Most dogs are not inherently vicious but become vicious due to training or mistreatment. The solution is twofold: ban those breeds which are specifically bred for viciousness, of which there are few, and introduce licences for other breeds. Penalties for owning banned breeds and for training/mistreating dogs need to be sufficiently harsh to provide a deterent and licence fees should high enough to prevent someone owning a dog on a whim. Licences should be capable of withdrawal in cases of abuse.

A friend of mine had a rottweiler as a pet. The only chance of being harmed by it was its boisterousness. Like most dogs it would welcome you on arrival by running towards you. The problem was that its size and weight was liable to knock you over.

On the Costa del Sol the Municipal Police enforce the dangerous dog laws which means in effect we do not see many of these dangerous dogs. In order to own such a dog the owner must apply for a licence, have no criminal record and pass a psychological test. The thugs and morons used to strut about with their weapon dogs, but no more. The Spanish police also have the cojones lacking in their UK counterparts to enforce the law.

ALL dogs have the potential to be dangerous, let's face it prior to humans messing in their lives and using them for their own protection and hunting they used to hunt in packs. Why do most humans own a dog? As a status symbol, it is not just thugs who own them for status.

We used to have a dog licencing system, not well policed as it was really just another tax. Whilst I abhor legislation for legislation's sake making, the owners accountable is the best way to stop these attacks, increase the list of dangerous dogs, make licences prohibitive, make breeders more accountable and prosecute the owner of ANY dog that attacks a human, whether they are on the list or not ,as if they had committed the attack themselves.

The only other answer is for us humans to get a life and stop owning other species to boost our own image.

Licences won't work - accept this.

The only way to get rid of status dogs is to remove their status. Every dog should have to be muzzled - that's it. Any dog without it get's taken away and the owner gets an immediate fine, there's no messing around with breeds, no courts, no legal aid. It's quick, it's easy and soon the idiots with these dangerous dogs will realise there's no point to having them. The people who get dogs because they are animal lovers should be happy to put up with this inconvenience.

Dangerous breeds should be banned
All dogs to be licenced at L100 annually
Annual lcences with name & address of owne and muzzle to be worn on a neck collarat all times outside the home.
Spot fine of L100 for non-compliance or fouling any public place.
L100 reward for informers on any of the above/.
Any dog who injurs any other animal (non-vermin) to be killed with out any trial or chance for appeal
Before licence owners to show proof of goodccharacter and dog-handling certificate.

I was quite happy to sign the dangerous dogs petition. But it is only for London.

Quote: 'In the rest of the UK, a child under five has been killed each year since 2006 by a dangerous dog. We need to make sure this doesn’t happen in London and give more protection from dangerous dogs to Londoners.'

Anon 2.......your first comment "how idiotic" summed up your own rant!