Swiss man paws for thought after dog bites on Thai beach (video)

[harryviking]

17 hours ago, webfact said:

A Swiss man sought a sustainable solution after he and more than 10 other Thais and foreign beach dwellers, were bitten by dogs belonging to an unidentified foreign man on Ban Suan Luang Beach in Prachuap Khiri Khan.

 

The latest victim, a 76 year old Swiss man named Rolf Weber, told Naewna that one of the six dogs on the beach bit his right leg while he was jogging along the beach at about 5pm on Thursday, August 15.

 

Weber explained that as he was jogging, he encountered six dogs and their owner, a foreign man named Mathias. One of the dogs ran towards him and bit his leg. He pulled out his mobile phone to record the incident but the foreign owner of the dogs urged him not to file a complaint with the police and promised to cover Weber’s treatment costs.

 

Weber disclosed that he visits Ban Suan Luang Beach every year and spends about three months travelling in the area. He heard about previous dog bites on the beach and encountered the same group of dogs each year.

Weber refused the dog owner’s gesture because he wanted the area to be a safe place for everyone and called on the relevant officials to resolve the issue.

A Thai man, 74 year old Champ Manatae, revealed to the media that his home and restaurant were near the beach. He stated that the dogs had bitten both Thai and foreign people.

 

Another Thai national, 51 year old Sunan Chartchai, disclosed that locals and foreigners in the area previously participated in a beach-cleaning activity a few years ago. However, they no longer dared to engage in any beach activities due to the presence of the dogs.

 

Business operators who run accommodation and restaurants along the beach also voiced their concerns, fearing that they might soon lose customers if the dogs continued to wander freely and bite people.

 

Photo via Nawn

Photo via Naewna

 

 

by Petch Petpailin 

Photo via Naewna

 

Source: The Thaiger 2024-08-19

 

-  Cigna offers a variety of health insurance plans designed to meet the minimum requirement for medical treatment coverage, with benefits reaching up to THB 3 million. These plans are tailored to provide comprehensive healthcare solutions for expatriates, ensuring peace of mind and access to quality medical services. To explore the full range of Cigna's expat health insurance options and find a plan that suits your needs, click here for more information.

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

When will Thai authorities start to straighten up on this dog plague!? Time to start to reduce the dog population in Thailand!! This is madness!! 

[harryviking]

5 hours ago, Homburg said:

Uzi?  

With a silencer!😎

[Sydebolle]

Just wondering how long it will take when someone in that area will serve the dogs their last supper. 

[Hugh Jarse]

16 hours ago, neverere said:

Impounded? To where?

 

Allow foreigners to use tasers on aggressive dogs.

[BritScot]

16 hours ago, neverere said:

Where do you suggest the dogs are 'removed' to? Also Thailand does, as a rule, not destroy dogs. 

As a dog lover/animal lover I would suggest it's very simple. If he refuses to put his dogs on a lead in public then they should be taken from him and yes put down if they attack and bite. For what reason does he need as many dogs? Has he mental problems. Even when I worked my dogs I only had 6 and never had more than 2/3 out at any time, including when working. Plus on paths and when walked in public they were always on a lead. Regardless how well trained you think your dogs are, things happen and I could not forgive myself if because of my arrogance my dogs got run over. If I had a nippy dog it would be muzzled.

[richard_smith237]

17 hours ago, neverere said:

19 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Simple solution here - remove the dogs and fine the owner. 

That wont be popular as 'dog lovers' will always claim its not the dogs fault and I'd agree. 

Nevertheless, there is no 'nice simple, clean, pretty solution' someone will have to make the decisions and carry out the actions many are to weak to consider, particularly when it come to strays in public areas.

Where do you suggest the dogs are 'removed' to? Also Thailand does, as a rule, not destroy dogs. 

 

As pointed out - its not a popular decision... but the obvious answer is 'destroy' them... 

 

"As a rule" ??...  Thailand breaks rules all the time... and there is no law against destroying stray animals...     

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

9 hours ago, kwilco said:

19 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Good - Dogs should not be free to roam the beaches and any area's where people are relaxing, running & where children are playing. 

 

A complete lack of accountability means so few take the responsibility to adequately train and restrain their dogs and the public are placed at risk. 

 

 

Dogs should either be owned and collared, owners fully accountable with firm fines if they are not, or removed (and yes, destroyed).

 

 

Simple solution here - remove the dogs and fine the owner. 

That wont be popular as 'dog lovers' will always claim its not the dogs fault and I'd agree. 

Nevertheless, there is no 'nice simple, clean, pretty solution' someone will have to make the decisions and carry out the actions many are to weak to consider, particularly when it come to strays in public areas.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Expand  

Unfortunately there are still too many dogs in Thailand to do this.

 

Agreed there are - but its still possible. 

 

Whenever I've lived in more 'affluent' neighbourhoods there are no dog issues...

... someone is paid to deal with the issue.

 

Thus: The issue is not that there are too many dogs... but not enough people bothered about the issue until something happens to them or someone close to them. 

 

 

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

5 hours ago, Lopburikid said:

19 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Good - Dogs should not be free to roam the beaches and any area's where people are relaxing, running & where children are playing. 

 

A complete lack of accountability means so few take the responsibility to adequately train and restrain their dogs and the public are placed at risk. 

 

 

Dogs should either be owned and collared, owners fully accountable with firm fines if they are not, or removed (and yes, destroyed).

 

 

Simple solution here - remove the dogs and fine the owner. 

That wont be popular as 'dog lovers' will always claim its not the dogs fault and I'd agree. 

Nevertheless, there is no 'nice simple, clean, pretty solution' someone will have to make the decisions and carry out the actions many are to weak to consider, particularly when it come to strays in public areas.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Expand  

According to the report they are not strays. the owner is a foreigner who ALLOWS the dogs to run free. As for strays....how do you think strays become strays? Maybe instead of destroying the dogs, we should consider placing the owners behind bars for a few years, maybe 5 minimum, so as to get them to take more responsibility for their dogs actions. Just a thought. A least they haven't gone the stupid UK way of destroying an entire breed because of the actions of a few owners. 

 

So what... whether they were stray dogs, looked after soi dogs, or owned dogs... 

....'Dogs should not be free to roam the beaches and any area's where people are relaxing, running & where children are playing"...

 

Its just that simple...   Remove any roaming dogs...

- those that have a collar of ownership - fine the owners heavily (as a preventative measure).

- those caught multiple times - remove the dog and destroy it. 

- those without a collar - destroy them. 

 

Yes - this is a horrible solution...   but there is no nice comfortable happy solution to this problem. 

 

The only good thing about this solution is that it prevents future suffering of stray animals. 

 

Sometimes we need people to do things we are not prepared to do ourselves because we are too soft to handle the situation - nevertheless, this is a situation that needs handling.

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

1 hour ago, BritScot said:

As a dog lover/animal lover I would suggest it's very simple. If he refuses to put his dogs on a lead in public then they should be taken from him and yes put down if they attack and bite. For what reason does he need as many dogs? Has he mental problems. Even when I worked my dogs I only had 6 and never had more than 2/3 out at any time, including when working. Plus on paths and when walked in public they were always on a lead. Regardless how well trained you think your dogs are, things happen and I could not forgive myself if because of my arrogance my dogs got run over. If I had a nippy dog it would be muzzled.

 

There, a logical response from a responsible owner....   All dog owners should take note.

[richard_smith237]

5 hours ago, Slocum said:

19 hours ago, nakhonandy said:

I have heard various reasons, none that make any sense. Usually quoting Buddhism. 

Then the authorities are confused when these dogs are killed or more commonly poisoned. 

It's just a weak excuse, using Buddhism..Just simple low and bad management, with weak ministry leadership.....

 

Agree with this... While I like the sentiment of being kind to all living things, I see allowing such issues to continue as cruelty, thus see the Buddhist aspect not as 'kindness' but as 'laziness'...

 

I recall at work in a location in Thailand where we needed a 'remote cook'...    the kitchen area was not clean enough and I saw too many ants around. I told the head cook to clean the area an get rid of the ants... (put down ant poison)... 

... She replied that she couldn't kill all those ant's it goes against her buddhist beliefs to kill living things - threatened with her job the kitchen was spotless..... 

[off road pat]

8 hours ago, AhFarangJa said:

What strikes me here in the report, is that there are dozens of Thai people , business owners, beach goers, all complaining about the problem. Yet it takes a Foreigner here for three months to actually try to get something done. Therein lays a problem here, local people will suffer instead of speaking out in case they lose face, or are seen to be troublemakers.

I was exactly on that same beach two years ago. And then already that German named Mathias was known for letting his dog bite people.

Everybody knew him and feared his dog. The authority's should dig a bit deeper! He bought a house and land there !! My understanding is that foreigners can not own land in Thailand.

[Montnoveau]

17 hours ago, neverere said:

Impounded? To where?

 

Usually straight to the Crocodile Farm, I've been told.

[cjinchiangrai]

Kill the dogs and arrest the owners. There is no room for killer dogs.

[kwilco]

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Agreed there are - but its still possible. 

 

Whenever I've lived in more 'affluent' neighbourhoods there are no dog issues...

... someone is paid to deal with the issue.

 

Thus: The issue is not that there are too many dogs... but not enough people bothered about the issue until something happens to them or someone close to them. 

 

 

 

 

 

totally illogical. obviously a minority

I've lived in Thailand for over 20 years normally in middle class closed village developments i.e. the majority of Thailand and there has always been a dog problem. 

"disposing of dogs doesn't address the problem at all. at best it shifts them around temporarily.

 

there are around 860,000 to 2 million "roaming dogs in Thailand - about half a million in greater bangkok.

THey pose health and safety threats all over the country - zoonotic disease (e.g. Rabies) road safety and public inconvenience as above.

 

Culling the dogs doesn't work

THe care organisations are largely funded by donations.

THere are campaigns to varying degrees of success around the country.

One of the things about stray dogs is if the problem gets better peple don't notice their absence or reduction in numbers.

[Luuk Chaai]

18 hours ago, neverere said:

Impounded? To where?

 

 

let them go visit the dog fish

[GroveHillWanderer]

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

As pointed out - its not a popular decision... but the obvious answer is 'destroy' them... 

 

"As a rule" ??...  Thailand breaks rules all the time... and there is no law against destroying stray animals...     

 

 

 

Are you sure about that? According to the article below, it is illegal to euthanize dogs in Thailand unless they have rabies. 

 

Quote

Though euthanasia is illegal in the Buddhist country, the law makes exceptions for animals with rabies.

 

Thailand's Stray Dogs - Off the streets

[metisdead]

A troll post has been removed:

 

17. ASEAN NOW news team collects news articles from various recognised and reputable news sources. The articles  may be consolidated from different sources and rewritten with AI assistance These news items are shared in our forums for members to stay informed and engaged. Our dedicated news team puts in the effort to deliver quality content, and we ask for your respect in return. Any disrespectful comments about our news articles or the content itself, such as calling it "clickbait" or “slow news day”, and criticising grammatical errors, will not be tolerated and appropriate action will be taken. Please note that republished articles may contain errors or opinions that do not reflect the views of ASEAN NOW.

If you'd like to help us, and you see an error with an article, then please use the report function so that we can attend to it promptly.

[edwinchester]

Surprised the problem has gone on for a while. Dogs that bite passersby in our village don't last very long at all.

[richard_smith237]

2 hours ago, kwilco said:

4 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Agreed there are - but its still possible. 

 

Whenever I've lived in more 'affluent' neighbourhoods there are no dog issues...

... someone is paid to deal with the issue.

 

Thus: The issue is not that there are too many dogs... but not enough people bothered about the issue until something happens to them or someone close to them. 

 

 

 

 

 

totally illogical. obviously a minority

I've lived in Thailand for over 20 years normally in middle class closed village developments i.e. the majority of Thailand and there has always been a dog problem. 

"disposing of dogs doesn't address the problem at all. at best it shifts them around temporarily.

 

Not illogical at all... In the wealthy neighbourhoods - the absense of dogs has been noted. 

People are paid to get rid of them - quiet nights sleep, no dragging of garbage around the streets etc...  

 

This of course is not a nationwide solution - but I had no objections to those in the neighbourhood (or someone) taking matters into their own hands and employing someone to deal with the issue.

 

 

2 hours ago, kwilco said:

 

there are around 860,000 to 2 million "roaming dogs in Thailand - about half a million in greater bangkok.

THey pose health and safety threats all over the country - zoonotic disease (e.g. Rabies) road safety and public inconvenience as above.

 

Agreed...   Not just on a neighbourhood level - they can be dealt with on a national level.

 

2 hours ago, kwilco said:

Culling the dogs doesn't work.

 

Yes it does - why are there no stray dogs in the UK ?

 

If done property and approached with sufficient resources with continued observation - culling works. 

 

 

2 hours ago, kwilco said:

THe care organisations are largely funded by donations.

THere are campaigns to varying degrees of success around the country.

 

Who are underfunded and cannot resolve the issue - they just feed the problem.

 

2 hours ago, kwilco said:

One of the things about stray dogs is if the problem gets better peple don't notice their absence or reduction in numbers.

 

Correction..."stupid people don't notice if the problem gets better"...  

... I noted that an area of Bangkok that lived in hardly ever had stray dogs... I don't remember any around... walking at night or day time... (Lots of extremely wealthy families lived in the area with their walled off gardens)... I long postulated that someone must have been paying off a local team to 'ensure the area' was dog free.

 

It can also be noticed than in 'more Muslim' area's of Bankok, there are fewer dogs - most likley because the strays are fed less in these areas.

 

On the other hand - Turkey (which does not have a stray dog issue) does have an issue with stray cats, becasue 'animal lovers' keep feeding them...   the benefit there is the cats get rid of the rats... 

[richard_smith237]

11 minutes ago, edwinchester said:

Surprised the problem has gone on for a while. Dogs that bite passersby in our village don't last very long at all.

 

The issue has been a national issue for decades while I've been here....

 

A kid being mauled by a stray or a pittie is a monthly story on here.... 

[richard_smith237]

1 hour ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

Are you sure about that? According to the article below, it is illegal to euthanize dogs in Thailand unless they have rabies. 

 

 

Thailand's Stray Dogs - Off the streets

 

Efficient use of wording in that article... 

 

Euthanasia of Humans is illegal...    It not not expressly illegal to euthanise animals, though neither is it 'expressly allowed'...  this is the grey area under which a policy to euthanise can exist...

 

... This has occured in the past... where 'dog snatchers' were (and still are) employed to round up the stray animals and 'take them away'....

 

... 'taking them away' is sufficient for most to be acceptable, but of course ignores the elephant in the room that these dogs are either being destroyed or taken over the boarder for profit (to sell as food)...   

 

Don't like this from happening - then stop it once and for all - get rid of all strays to prevent suffering of future generations of animals. 

 

Make owners be accountable for existing animals (wear a collar) and breeding must exist under license. Heavy fines for those found turning their 'unwanted animals' to the streets.

 

 

There is no affordable / nice, humane way...  but there is a way of solving the problem and if this issue had been resolved 20 years ago - we wouldn't be discussing it today.

 

 

 

[kwilco]

14 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Not illogical at all... In the wealthy neighbourhoods - the absense of dogs has been noted. 

People are paid to get rid of them - quiet nights sleep, no dragging of garbage around the streets etc...  

 

This of course is not a nationwide solution - but I had no objections to those in the neighbourhood (or someone) taking matters into their own hands and employing someone to deal with the issue.

 

 

 

Agreed...   Not just on a neighbourhood level - they can be dealt with on a national level.

 

 

Yes it does - why are there no stray dogs in the UK ?

 

If done property and approached with sufficient resources with continued observation - culling works. 

 

 

 

Who are underfunded and cannot resolve the issue - they just feed the problem.

 

 

Correction..."stupid people don't notice if the problem gets better"...  

... I noted that an area of Bangkok that lived in hardly ever had stray dogs... I don't remember any around... walking at night or day time... (Lots of extremely wealthy families lived in the area with their walled off gardens)... I long postulated that someone must have been paying off a local team to 'ensure the area' was dog free.

 

It can also be noticed than in 'more Muslim' area's of Bankok, there are fewer dogs - most likley because the strays are fed less in these areas.

 

On the other hand - Turkey (which does not have a stray dog issue) does have an issue with stray cats, becasue 'animal lovers' keep feeding them...   the benefit there is the cats get rid of the rats... 

Everything you've posted just shows how profoundly ill-informed you are about the roaming dog issues in Thailand and the rest of the world.

 

Why not educate yourself before posting such nonsense?

[kwilco]

7 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Efficient use of wording in that article... 

 

Euthanasia of Humans is illegal...    It not not expressly illegal to euthanise animals, though neither is it 'expressly allowed'...  this is the grey area under which a policy to euthanise can exist...

 

... This has occured in the past... where 'dog snatchers' were (and still are) employed to round up the stray animals and 'take them away'....

 

... 'taking them away' is sufficient for most to be acceptable, but of course ignores the elephant in the room that these dogs are either being destroyed or taken over the boarder for profit (to sell as food)...   

 

Don't like this from happening - then stop it once and for all - get rid of all strays to prevent suffering of future generations of animals. 

 

Make owners be accountable for existing animals (wear a collar) and breeding must exist under license. Heavy fines for those found turning their 'unwanted animals' to the streets.

 

 

There is no affordable / nice, humane way...  but there is a way of solving the problem and if this issue had been resolved 20 years ago - we wouldn't be discussing it today.

 

 

 

THere is NO COUNTRY IN THE WORLD where culiing has worked.

To suggest it's carried out in the UK - is complete nonsense. THe roaming dog population in UK is a fraction of Thailandd's due to well established reasons - stray dogs are caught in very small numbers kept and rehoused or euthanised - that is not a cull. 

[richard_smith237]

Just now, kwilco said:

THere is NO COUNTRY IN THE WORLD where culiing has worked.

To suggest it's carried out in the UK - is complete nonsense. THe roaming dog population in UK is a fraction of Thailandd's due to well established reasons - stray dogs are caught in very small numbers kept and rehoused or euthanised - that is not a cull. 

 

Fair enough - round up stray dogs and rehousing or euthanising them is not culling.... 

 

So.. semantics asside... 

 

In Thailand... all the stray dogs could be rounded up and caught, and either rehoused or euthanised...  There (same thing).

 

 

For the pedantic: Same same - nid-noi different...

 

 

 

[richard_smith237]

8 minutes ago, kwilco said:

Everything you've posted just shows how profoundly ill-informed you are about the roaming dog issues in Thailand and the rest of the world.

 

Why not educate yourself before posting such nonsense?

 

You're a canine overpopulation expert as well as a road safety expert.

 

Everything you've posted shows how profoundly you lack the backbone to deal with an issue...

Life is nice when you can 'dance over issues' instead of understanding there is an underlying 'dirt' to ensure better standards of living for us (the general human public).

 

If you don't like the word culling (which does work in other countries - just speak to farmers) - then rehousing of dogs does nothing (effectively rehousing means placing them in over populated shelters where there is a spread of disease and further mating as the dogs are in mixed-gender pounds and further suffering)...  

Culling - same as euthanasia, its just a word softies such as yourself can swallow - but the underlying result is the same - getting rid of them, shipping them to Vietnam (for food) or just killing them.

 

Its not nice - but life isn't.... 

[kwak250]

Next door to us they let 2 dogs roam around and once the dog took a sh7t outside their house and had something thrown at it and got told to go and sh7t up the road(usually our house)
I got tired of cleaning up their dogs sh7t so one day started playing  a sort of mini golf with an  old broom when they went out .

Called it shi77y stick
Got quite good,  i could chip it just over their gate if the consistency was just right so they would walk in it when they got home.
Hit the window once and stopped after that ,Moved a few years ago so all good

[kwilco]

25 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

You're a canine overpopulation expert as well as a road safety expert.

 

Everything you've posted shows how profoundly you lack the backbone to deal with an issue...

Life is nice when you can 'dance over issues' instead of understanding there is an underlying 'dirt' to ensure better standards of living for us (the general human public).

 

If you don't like the word culling (which does work in other countries - just speak to farmers) - then rehousing of dogs does nothing (effectively rehousing means placing them in over populated shelters where there is a spread of disease and further mating as the dogs are in mixed-gender pounds and further suffering)...  

Culling - same as euthanasia, its just a word softies such as yourself can swallow - but the underlying result is the same - getting rid of them, shipping them to Vietnam (for food) or just killing them.

 

Its not nice - but life isn't.... 

As soon as someone starts bandying about the word "expert" in a derogatory manner you know they have realised they have no idea what they are talking about

 

Almost everything you say is either wrong or contradicting yourself – you clearly have never studied the roaming dog problem in Thailand

 

Culling the dogs doesn't work.

 

Yes it does - why are there no stray dogs in the UK ?

 

You don’t see how illogical that is???? The UK has never had a roaming dog population on the same scale as Thailand.

Culling doesn’t work – it actually increases the problem in a relatively short period of time. The only place culls work is on small islands (e.g. rats or invasive species)

The population of stray dogs to be reduced to manageable proportions requires control of the food supply and an effective CNVR program

 

“Who are underfunded and cannot resolve the issue - they just feed the problem.”

“ – HOW?? – in fact Soi Dog Foundation have ridden Phuket of rabies and reduced the stray dog population from 70000 to 7000 by CNVR – but I’m guessing you haven’t noticed.

In BKK funded by donations and the BMA they are in the process of CNVR about 680000 dogs – again if you’ve noticed you didn’t understand how it happened.

 

“... I noted that an area of Bangkok that lived in hardly ever had stray dogs... I don't remember any around... walking at night or day time” –  you didn’t see any change – according to you, that’s “stupid”!

 

 

Turkey

As of July 2024, Turkey is debating a new law that would require municipalities to collect stray dogs and house them in shelters for vaccination, neutering, and spaying. The dogs would then be available for adoption, but any that are terminally ill, infectious, aggressive, or pose a health risk to humans would be euthanized. The legislation was drawn up by the ruling conservative AK Party. 

The bill has been called a "massacre law" by activists, who argue that it would result in the mass extermination of unadopted dogs. Some say that the government has misread the national mood and has begun to back down from the original plan. The legislation that was introduced in July 2024 is a watered-down version of the initial proposal, which reportedly called for the strays to be euthanized if they were not adopted within 30 days. The new legislation would put to sleep strays who are at risk of rabies, have become aggressive, or cannot be rehabilitated. 

Some say that local municipalities are largely to blame for the country's stray dog problem because they have failed to neuter the dogs in their areas. Others say that at least 75 people, including 44 children, have been killed as a result of attacks or by traffic accidents caused by dogs since 2022

 

[tandor]

9 hours ago, rct99q said:

In between 1 and 2 you need to add kill dog and take with you to hospital and have it tested for rabies. If negative no need for the human to go thru the rabies treatment. 

Hmm!..Im talking sense and you're not..Rabies is no laughing matter, once you are confirmed POS you have a very slim chance of survival.

[Middle Aged Grouch]

During a visit to a friend in Hua Hin who lived in one of those posh pool villa residences in Hin Lek Fai, I ran into stray dogs at least twice.

 

Not to mention the rude falang dog owners of the residence who were allowing their dogs to <deleted> and urine in front of other homes,  where the owners were absent.

[IslandLover]

11 hours ago, sambum said:

 

Absolute garbage dog defending post!

 

"A least they haven't gone the stupid UK way of destroying an entire breed because of the actions of a few owners....."

 

The "stupid UK way" was to ban an entire breed not just because of the irresponsibility of "a few owners" but because of the well documented fact of the unpredictability of the breed in question (Pit Bull?) which has led to numerous fatal attacks over the years.

 

One example which shows the results of the "stupid way":-

 

 

 

Giant, aged 2, the Pit Bull breed or Ban Dog that savaged its owner to death last week has been taken to his funeral in Pattaya.

He took part in a ceremony called "khor khama" in which he apologized to the corpse. 

 

Now you could say that this is an isolated incident, but from Forbes Advisor:-

"The breed that commits the most attacks overall is pit bulls.

"The breed that is most likely to be involved in a fatal attack is pit bulls."

Pit bulls are involved in more dog attacks than any other breed. In fact, the American Animal Hospital Association reports this breed was responsible for 22.5% of bites across all studies. Mixed breeds were a close second at 21.2% and German Shepherds were the third most dangerous breed, involved in 17.8% of bite incidents.⁶"

 

That is why the "stupid UK way" was undertaken in the first place!

 

 

 

Except the latest breed to be banned in the UK is the XL Bully, a derivative of the Pit Bull.  Pit Bulls were banned years ago.  Not that it stops morons importing them from places like the USA and breeding them clandestinely.