STEPHEN POLLARD: Any dog owner whose pet takes a human life should face murder charges - and I say that as someone whose mother was maimed by our family's Jack Russell

How many more people need to die before proper action is taken against the owners of dangerous dogs?

On Saturday, 68-year-old Esther Martin, a grandmother of eight and great-grandmother of three, was killed by two dogs as she visited her eleven-year-old grandson. He is said to have run out ‘shouting for help’ when the attack happened.

The Government has made it a criminal offence to own or possess an XL Bully without a Certificate of Exemption. It’s also now illegal to sell the breed. That is certainly a start. But, clearly, it’s not remotely enough.

In 2022 there were 22,000 recorded dog attacks, up from 16,000 in 2018 – a rise of a third. Since the start of 2021, dogs have mauled to death 23 people, with XL Bullies the breed most culpable.

Ian Langley, 55, Ian Price, 52, Ann Dunn, 65, and perhaps most distressingly ten-year-old Jack Lis and 17-month-old Bella-Rae Birch, are just some of people who have been killed by this monstrous breed.

Surely the time has come to legislate that any dog owner whose pet takes a human life should face a murder conviction.

A powerful dog with a killer instinct is as much a weapon under your control as a speeding car you’re driving or even a firearm

The occasional manslaughter charge, which is the highest criminal levy possible but heavily dependent on the circumstances, is just not enough.

If you do not muzzle a banned dog, however sure you think you are of its good nature, or you allow it off its lead, you are directly responsible for its actions.

A powerful dog with a killer instinct is as much a weapon under your control as a speeding car you’re driving or even a firearm. This is a fundamental point that must be recognised.

But it is not just the more obviously vicious breeds that can attack. I write from experience.

Some 50 years ago, my mother was maimed by our pet, a friendly, loveable Jack Russell terrier. But in one horrific moment, his inner beast took hold of him and he went for my mother, causing life-changing injuries to her face.

Clearly, all animals are capable of the most primal of behaviours – and we need to minimise the number of vicious dogs on our streets.

Yes, XL Bullies are some of the worst offenders, but other aggressive and heavily-built breeds also need to be policed.

That is why I suggest that, in addition to the current blanket ban on XL Bullies, a solid definition of what constitutes a ‘dangerous dog breed’ is drawn up. This is not as difficult as some claim.

You can tell on sight whether a dog poses a genuine physical threat. Therefore, the criteria for identifying a dog should relate to what it ‘looks like’ rather than some complicated biological definition.

That way, unscrupulous breeders cannot evade bans by clever cross-breeding, whereby a dog is technically a new breed – but in reality, is still as dangerous as its parents.

But these bans are difficult to enforce. Ultimately, if someone is harmed by a dog, the buck stops with the person who has owned and trained it.

Murder charges must be on the table, for we cannot wait until someone else is killed.