Bạn đang xem bản rút gọn của tài liệu. Xem và tải ngay bản đầy đủ của tài liệu tại đây (40.28 KB, 1 trang )
134
J. Maher et al.
The terms ‘bling’, ‘weapon’, ‘combat’, ‘devil’ and ‘antisocial’ have been used
interchangeably with ‘status’ by the media, politicians and animal welfare
charities (O’Neill 2010; RSPCA 2010). Other dog breeds (for example,
Rottweiler’s, mastiffs and lurchers) have previously been described in this
way (The Sunday Times 2006) although the term is now most commonly
used to describe bull breeds and types (Gunter et al. 2016)—as described
below—when owned by young people (Maher and Pierpoint 2011).3
Bull Breeds and Types
Bull breeds is the collective name for various breeds of dog of a particular type.
Often, but not always, the word bull appears in the name, such as the English
bulldog and the Staffordshire bull terrier. Bull types4 are dogs either not recognised by the Kennel Club as a breed, such as the pit bull, or which include bull
breeds in their parentage. While bull types are commonly associated with the
status dog phenomenon, they are in fact owned by a cross-section of the public
and there is no evidence to support the notion they are inherently problematic or
dangerous. Although ‘type’ has a wider meaning than ‘breed’, for clarity and ease
of use, the authors employ term ‘breeds’ to denote breeds, types’ and their crosses.
Dangerous Dogs
The term ‘dangerous dogs’ is commonly used interchangeably with ‘status
dogs’. However, legally, the former refers to the definitions within the
Dangerous Dogs Act [DDA] 1991, section one, which names four banned
breeds—pit bull, Japanese tosa, dogo Argentino or fila Braziliero. Such dogs
must be destroyed or placed on the list of exempted dogs, which requires the
dog be, for example, neutered and kept on a lead and muzzled in public.
There are a number of problems with the stereotyping of certain breeds as
status dogs and breed-specific legislation, which are explored in the responses