Don't want to cause an argument or get peoples backs up here

but i cannot believe what a load of old tosh that piece of legislation is!!! i'm doing a large assignment on this legislation and only last night have i ever read the full thing, i am disgusted, instead of tackling the real issue and the individual they state that they have the right to seize a dog on its physical charecteristics, before it has even done anything, seized for being stocky, with a large jaw etc......it doesnt have to be listed on the dangerous dogs act, or even be a mix of a dog on the list, just look scary and its seized, why not bring in lisencing?? vet everyone and their house before anyone can keep a dog, that way idiots who do not train, do not handle or control their dogs cannot keep a dog, this is just my opinion

What do you all think? any opinions welcome

__________________
Dog's leave pawprints on your heart

This really gets me annoyed, its the owners majority of the time that need seizing, i walk my dogs and regulary meet an owner with with a dog that isnt classed as a dangerous dog(i wont mention the breed in case of upsetting someone) and believe me we give it a wide berth i also regularly see a rottie and a staffy. The staffy and rottie are absolutely wonderfull fantastic temperement as the owners know the potential pitfalls with these breeds and have disciplined them, trained them and given them boundries, the small dog is a nightmare snaps, bites lunges on the lead because the owner sees the little one as not a potential danger so has not had the upbringing as the others, all dogs are a potential threat/danger if not trained or are in the wrong hands.

I agree it not a very good legislation but then again i understand fully why theses "breeds" are banned..!
Many people simply don’t realise what breed bans actually are. Because - straight off the bat - they are NOT breed bans. They are breed ‘type’ bans. And there’s the problem. A breed ‘type’ opens up an area of ambiguity that simply destroys any chance whatsoever of being able to fairly and effectively outlaw the breeds deemed ‘dangerous’.
Its very unfair to a dog having its life ended due to look of it, but then for this law to work properly what do they do let it off and hope its not a banned breed of PTS incase it is its very hard.!
But i think its near on impossible to tell the breed from dogs of the breed type.
Look at this for example (i know rotties arent banned)

Attachment 21384 Fully rottweiler

Attachment 21385 rottweiler X SBT

Attachment 21386 NO rottweiler

Attachment 21387 lab X doberman

Look at these pictures and how hard it is to tell the breed from the type.!
If this breed was banned how many out of this 4 would have been siezed??
So its a choice of sieze incase it is the "banned breed" or leave and hope its not BUT then how is this inforcing the law??


I belive they have not only failed to make an impact on the dangerous dogs problem, but gone and ADDED to it!

I belive it needs to be replaced for a more fairer, more effective law, but how??

Whilst us in the UK has a law which permits dogs to be killed as a result of what they look like we have no right to begin to call ourselves a nation of animal lovers.

Kerry x

My point EXACTLY, only you put it better to destroy a dog on its appearance is not enforcing this law effectivly, i think lisencing should be brought back, no one is allowed to keep a dog without a lisence as with some exotics, the law should be based on breed not "type" and the individual not the "type" judged, it makes me so mad that such lovely natured dogs could be destroyed for their apperance, its racism of the dog world, these dangerous dogs were selectivly bred to fight by US, what the hell gives us the right to now selectivly choose which dog looks like it might be dngerous and which doesnt, any dog of any age, breed or sex is capable of really hurting someone, something needs to be done about this joke of a legislation!!!

Abi xx

__________________
Dog's leave pawprints on your heart

The DDA was brought in after a spate of dog attacks in the early 90's.It was a knee jerk reaction and the government needed to be seen as doing something.

It was brought in to "protect the public",however in the 17 years this has been active,dog bites have increased not decreased.It is a useless piece of legislation which is unworkable and unenforceable.The act does not cover attacks on private property and I'm led to believe 85% of bites and attacks happen on private property.

By placing restrictions on breeds you are stating that all dogs of that breed are dangerous,which is simply untrue.

The focus needs to be on owners,rather than the way a dog looks,we need to address the real issue and not the symptoms.Two legal breeds when crossed can produce an illegal type dog.

a new law is currently going through the house of lords that remove bsl. It's fairly current so u can google it.

makes me sick you should be albe to have any dog you want its some of the owners that are worng not the dogs its meant to be a free country my rottie is as soft as a brush never bothers anyone

Does anyone know the details of a Japanese Tossa? Are they banned from the U.K..? The reason why I asked is because someone at the golf club mistook my Boerboel as a Japanese Tossa. Is there any mastiff types banned. Boerboels are a South African Mastiff and they look like dogs on steroids. Really protective and some consider the breed to be the best guard dogs in the world. I always have my dogs on a leash but the thought of some idiot coming up and seizing my dogs because they look dangerous is quite frankly frightening. I assume the french mastiffs might fit in the same categorry. I've had to work hard to retrain Cooper because of some idiots jack russel attacking cooper. He stood there and let this thing dangle from his jowels and wondered what went on. He had bite marks on his face of course he did but done nothing. The next time the jack russel went for Cooper I had to work damn hard to keep Cooper from eating this yappie thing for breakfast. I really want to swear but I won't. Out went the Cooper I knew well and loved who you could let off the lead and let socialise with other intact males ie boxers and in came this animal that wanted to eat every dog on the street because of this jack russel. Cooper isn't so bad now as we can walk past other dogs with little attention given but it wasn't easy. He can socialise with dogs he already knows but with new dogs he's got to be carefully introduced. My mother has a jack russel cross and its coothy but what do we do with the jack russel not trained and sets other dogs off? would that dog be seized? If a larger dog on the lead gets attacked by a smaller dog off the lead and the man isn't quick enough to stop the little dog from getting seriously hurt who gets in trouble and who would have to foot the vets bill? I feel better having got that off my chest but come on. They should make it a legal requirement for all dog owners to train their dogs. Responsability begins at home, have a look in the mirror.

yes the japanese tossa is banned in the uk, im sure it would worry me too, its unfair and unjust to seize a dog because people believe it to appear dangerous, absolute disgrace, especially when there are owners like you who are responsible, i believe we should take \ look at the other end of the lead before we critisize the loving family dogs at the end, i really hope the government does something about bsl, i really do

__________________
Dog's leave pawprints on your heart

Thanks for your info and support m8. D'ya .think they could take the wife instead. pmsl. Only kidding.