Don't Kill Kruger

[Phil D. Rolls]

So, you own a Japanese fighting dog, it has a name like (Freddy?) Kruger, and it maims a little girl. You then have the cheek to ask for mercy when it comes to sparing the dog's life?

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sunday-mail/2010/09/05/owner-of-devil-dog-which-savaged-10-year-old-scots-girl-pleads-for-pet-s-life-86908-22538845/

Stupid enough to own one I suppose. :rolleyes:

[johnbc70]

I do not understand why people want to own these types of dogs. Whenever I am out with my daughter and see a dog that looks like one of these 'dangerous dog' types I always make sure I pick her up as you never know what they will do.

The owners of these dogs pretty much always look like losers anyway so perhaps owning a dog like this gives them some sort of sense of power that they would never have without them.

[Phil D. Rolls]

I do not understand why people want to own these types of dogs. Whenever I am out with my daughter and see a dog that looks like one of these 'dangerous dog' types I always make sure I pick her up as you never know what they will do.

The owners of these dogs pretty much always look like losers anyway so perhaps owning a dog like this gives them some sort of sense of power that they would never have without them.

I think they sometimes have them for protection.

[heretoday]

Pretty much all dog owners are in denial to some extent about their pet's potential to behave badly off the leash.

It's not a question of "losers" owning big Japanese fighting dogs or anything else. It's about keeping your dog under control at all times and making sure it comes immediately when called.

The fact of the matter is that some people should not be dog owners full stop. How can you legislate for that?

[SlickShoes]

Pretty much all dog owners are in denial to some extent about their pet's potential to behave badly off the leash.

It's not a question of "losers" owning big Japanese fighting dogs or anything else. It's about keeping your dog under control at all times and making sure it comes immediately when called.

The fact of the matter is that some people should not be dog owners full stop. How can you legislate for that?

Its also about bad parents.

I have a cocker spaniel who is the most timid thing ever, but when i used to walk him along protobello promenade the amount of kids that would come up to him and just start petting him, prodding him and sometimes pulling at him was unreal. For this reason on the prom i always kept him on a leash so that i could pull him away when ever i needed to. Most of the time these kids were going up to any dog and doing the same and the parents are totally oblivious.

Im not saying the dog isnt at fault for biting but if another live being is in your face pulling your ears and tail and pocking you in the eyes then it would probably be a bit annoying.

This is the same reason i never let my dog walk of leash near a main road, i know hes trained i know he wont go on the road but he is a dog not a person, something could cause him to forget his training and leg it out onto the road and there would be nothing i could do to stop it, so why risk it? Its not difficult to treat a dog correctly, most of these dogs that attack people come from abusive households where they are probably soundly beaten and shouted at throughout there life, you cant just leave a dog to its on devices you need to spend time with it and take care of it, sadly a lot of people have no idea about dogs.

[heretoday]

Its also about bad parents.

I have a cocker spaniel who is the most timid thing ever, but when i used to walk him along protobello promenade the amount of kids that would come up to him and just start petting him, prodding him and sometimes pulling at him was unreal. For this reason on the prom i always kept him on a leash so that i could pull him away when ever i needed to. Most of the time these kids were going up to any dog and doing the same and the parents are totally oblivious.

Im not saying the dog isnt at fault for biting but if another live being is in your face pulling your ears and tail and pocking you in the eyes then it would probably be a bit annoying.

This is the same reason i never let my dog walk of leash near a main road, i know hes trained i know he wont go on the road but he is a dog not a person, something could cause him to forget his training and leg it out onto the road and there would be nothing i could do to stop it, so why risk it? Its not difficult to treat a dog correctly, most of these dogs that attack people come from abusive households where they are probably soundly beaten and shouted at throughout there life, you cant just leave a dog to its on devices you need to spend time with it and take care of it, sadly a lot of people have no idea about dogs.

:top marks

[Phil D. Rolls]

I think it's one thing to have a dog like a Lab or Cocker Spaniel, but owning a 12 stone fighting dog is like walking around with a panther on a lead IMO.

[heretoday]

I think it's one thing to have a dog like a Lab or Cocker Spaniel, but owning a 12 stone fighting dog is like walking around with a panther on a lead IMO.

They've all got teeth!

[Phil D. Rolls]

They've all got teeth!

Yes, but if the 12 stone mastiff decides to chase a cat, or jumps on you, he's decidedly harder to shift or restrain. And the other two breeds weren't created as fighting animals.

[matty_f]

I think it's one thing to have a dog like a Lab or Cocker Spaniel, but owning a 12 stone fighting dog is like walking around with a panther on a lead IMO.

:agree:

[Beefster]

Maybe it's just me but a dog owner who doesn't see the need to destroy a dog, after it has mauled a kid, isn't fit to own the dog in the first place.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Maybe it's just me but a dog owner who doesn't see the need to destroy a dog, after it has mauled a kid, isn't fit to own the dog in the first place.

It used to be an unwritten rule that if a dog tasted blood, it would be destroyed - no two ways about it. I just can't for the life of me see how anyone could regard a dog of that breed as a pet.

[--------]

It used to be an unwritten rule that if a dog tasted blood, it would be destroyed - no two ways about it. I just can't for the life of me see how anyone could regard a dog of that breed as a pet.


The problem with dogs (and children) is that they need someone to be in control. If a dog-owner isn't the boss of the dog, the dog will be its own boss and do whatever it likes. That goes for all dogs, from Chihuahuas to Bull Mastiffs - they all bark and snap and bite - but the difference is that while a Chihuahua may give you a nasty bite on the ankle or hand, a Mastiff or an Akita will cause serious injury or death.

I've had 4 dogs in my life - two Border Collies, a Lab/Collie Cross-breed, and a Corgi.

The only one I had any trouble with in terms of bloodshed was the Corgi, and thankfully she was dog-aggressive as opposed to people-aggressive. And she always went either for another Corgi (they seriously don't like one another), or a dog ten times her size - German Shepherd, Dalmation, and on one occasion a Great Dane.

Looking back, i realise that we failed to take her seriously - she was a wee dog with a cuddly coat and a big grin (most of the time) and it never occurred to us she might have aggression issues.

The others have all been fine - because I and the family never take them for granted.

We didn't let children just wander up and start pulling their ears - it stands to reason that a dog might very well resent this and react badly.

(Wouldn't you if someone just walked up and poked your ribs or yanked at your earlobe?)

When we're in a crowd we don't let our present Collie Lucy off the lead - that's asking for trouble. She's a placid dog, not aggressive, but she needs to be under our eye.

When we answer the door, we order her away - and she obeys, because we've taken the trouble to establish her in good behaviour patterns.

Owning a dog means work, and too many dog-owners aren't prepared to put the work in to make their dogs safe and disciplined.

"Kruger" is people-aggressive - he's proved that. He won't ever be safe around people without a huge amount of rehab work with experts - and even then there'll always be a question-mark. The damage has already been done to him, and tragically, a child has paid the price.

And yet I know a couple of Akitas with whom I'm perfectly comfortable - provided the (responsible) owners are with their dogs.

Better and safer to put Kruger down now.

And his owner should never be allowed to keep another dog, ever again.

[SlickShoes]

The problem with dogs (and children) is that they need someone to be in control. If a dog-owner isn't the boss of the dog, the dog will be its own boss and do whatever it likes. That goes for all dogs, from Chihuahuas to Bull Mastiffs - they all bark and snap and bite - but the difference is that while a Chihuahua may give you a nasty bite on the ankle or hand, a Mastiff or an Akita will cause serious injury or death.

I've had 4 dogs in my life - two Border Collies, a Lab/Collie Cross-breed, and a Corgi.

The only one I had any trouble with in terms of bloodshed was the Corgi, and thankfully she was dog-aggressive as opposed to people-aggressive. And she always went either for another Corgi (they seriously don't like one another), or a dog ten times her size - German Shepherd, Dalmation, and on one occasion a Great Dane.

Looking back, i realise that we failed to take her seriously - she was a wee dog with a cuddly coat and a big grin (most of the time) and it never occurred to us she might have aggression issues.

The others have all been fine - because I and the family never take them for granted.

We didn't let children just wander up and start pulling their ears - it stands to reason that a dog might very well resent this and react badly.

(Wouldn't you if someone just walked up and poked your ribs or yanked at your earlobe?)

When we're in a crowd we don't let our present Collie Lucy off the lead - that's asking for trouble. She's a placid dog, not aggressive, but she needs to be under our eye.

When we answer the door, we order her away - and she obeys, because we've taken the trouble to establish her in good behaviour patterns.

Owning a dog means work, and too many dog-owners aren't prepared to put the work in to make their dogs safe and disciplined.

"Kruger" is people-aggressive - he's proved that. He won't ever be safe around people without a huge amount of rehab work with experts - and even then there'll always be a question-mark. The damage has already been done to him, and tragically, a child has paid the price.

And yet I know a couple of Akitas with whom I'm perfectly comfortable - provided the (responsible) owners are with their dogs.

Better and safer to put Kruger down now.

And his owner should never be allowed to keep another dog, ever again.

Yep that basically sums it up.

There really should be some way of monitoring who has dogs and a way of keeping dogs away from bad owners and total psychos!

I freely admit that when i got my dog i was not ready for and had no idea what i was letting myself in for, had there been some way of saying who is allowed a dog maybe i wouldnt have got one and id have to have done more research first.

I got lucky and got a good natured dog thats worst trait is obsessive licking, if i had got a dog with aggression issues i have no idea how i would have coped.

[Ritchie]

The problem with dogs (and children) is that they need someone to be in control. If a dog-owner isn't the boss of the dog, the dog will be its own boss and do whatever it likes. That goes for all dogs, from Chihuahuas to Bull Mastiffs - they all bark and snap and bite - but the difference is that while a Chihuahua may give you a nasty bite on the ankle or hand, a Mastiff or an Akita will cause serious injury or death.

I've had 4 dogs in my life - two Border Collies, a Lab/Collie Cross-breed, and a Corgi.

The only one I had any trouble with in terms of bloodshed was the Corgi, and thankfully she was dog-aggressive as opposed to people-aggressive. And she always went either for another Corgi (they seriously don't like one another), or a dog ten times her size - German Shepherd, Dalmation, and on one occasion a Great Dane.

Looking back, i realise that we failed to take her seriously - she was a wee dog with a cuddly coat and a big grin (most of the time) and it never occurred to us she might have aggression issues.

The others have all been fine - because I and the family never take them for granted.

We didn't let children just wander up and start pulling their ears - it stands to reason that a dog might very well resent this and react badly.

(Wouldn't you if someone just walked up and poked your ribs or yanked at your earlobe?)

When we're in a crowd we don't let our present Collie Lucy off the lead - that's asking for trouble. She's a placid dog, not aggressive, but she needs to be under our eye.

When we answer the door, we order her away - and she obeys, because we've taken the trouble to establish her in good behaviour patterns.

Owning a dog means work, and too many dog-owners aren't prepared to put the work in to make their dogs safe and disciplined.

"Kruger" is people-aggressive - he's proved that. He won't ever be safe around people without a huge amount of rehab work with experts - and even then there'll always be a question-mark. The damage has already been done to him, and tragically, a child has paid the price.

And yet I know a couple of Akitas with whom I'm perfectly comfortable - provided the (responsible) owners are with their dogs.

Better and safer to put Kruger down now.

And his owner should never be allowed to keep another dog, ever again.

:top marks

i've just shelled out £280 on a 12 month dog training contract to get my wee border/patterdale terrier cross into shape.
he is like your corgi.

i've had one session with the trainer and all ready the difference is phenomenal.

i do feel sorry for the dogs/owners sometimes aswell though as the media do not help at all with the exaggerated stories which are often far from the truth.

for example, most of you would have heard about the incident in Gilmerton a month or so ago.
this happened about 5 doors down from my GF's parents house and it was her mum who eventually managed to prize the dogs jaws off the boys arm using a broom handle.
the dog in question was put down and it was labelled a 'monster' in the media.

this dog had been around children and the boy who got bit on numerous occassions, including my GF's little brother without any bother at all but this time it snapped.... totally out of character.

there was an autopsy carried out on the dog after it was put down and it was discovered that it had a massive brain tumour which could have possibly been the reason why it lashed out.... this was never mentioned in the media though.

dogs are unpredictable no matter how well they are trained.

[Woody1985]

Good post Doddie.

One point though, you mention being trained by experts. I could be wrong but I thought I read in the paper that the woman is a certified dog trainer so that doesn't always work.

[--------]

Good post Doddie.

One point though, you mention being trained by experts. I could be wrong but I thought I read in the paper that the woman is a certified dog trainer so that doesn't always work.


I wasn't thinking of a dog "trainer" - I was thinking of a canine psychologist or someone like the wee guy in the "Dog Whisperer" series - in other words, someone who REALLY knows what he/she's doing.

So in OTHER other words - there's a snowball's chance in a VERY VERY HOT PLACE INDEED of Kruger EVER being safe in any sense of the word. FR's criterion of "once it's tasted blood, that's it" seems to me to be the sensible way to look at things.

My uncle George had a big German Shepherd called Glen, who acted as guard dog on his house and pub in Coalburn, as well as being the family pet. Glen was absolutely trustworthy with children and obeyed my uncle faithfully - until when he was about 10 years old he went on the run one night and savaged some sheep. The police caught him in the act, and brought him back to the house - bloody muzzle and all. It broke George's heart, but he called the vet right away, and had Glen put down. No alternative, no question. That's the way life is.

IMO this is the only way a responsible dog-owner can look at things. Best way to protect your dog is to make sure it's under control at all times.

[Killiehibbie]

I wasn't thinking of a dog "trainer" - I was thinking of a canine psychologist or someone like the wee guy in the "Dog Whisperer" series - in other words, someone who REALLY knows what he/she's doing.

So in OTHER other words - there's a snowball's chance in a VERY VERY HOT PLACE INDEED of Kruger EVER being safe in any sense of the word. FR's criterion of "once it's tasted blood, that's it" seems to me to be the sensible way to look at things.

My uncle George had a big German Shepherd called Glen, who acted as guard dog on his house and pub in Coalburn, as well as being the family pet. Glen was absolutely trustworthy with children and obeyed my uncle faithfully - until when he was about 10 years old he went on the run one night and savaged some sheep. The police caught him in the act, and brought him back to the house - bloody muzzle and all. It broke George's heart, but he called the vet right away, and had Glen put down. No alternative, no question. That's the way life is.

IMO this is the only way a responsible dog-owner can look at things. Best way to protect your dog is to make sure it's under control at all times.Poor dug must've got fed up of the taste of huns and decided to go for a few sheep instead. I bet nobody noticed the difference when he mauled the locals:greengrin

[Woody1985]

That brings up the question about rehab, humans and dogs can both have natural instincts to kill yet the solution for dogs is to kill them. Yet we do not advocate the death penalty for those such as tobin because its wrong to take a life. Why don't we have doggy jails? I know it can be argued that humans have a greater capacity for rehab but there others that can't.

[--------]

Poor dug must've got fed up of the taste of huns and decided to go for a few sheep instead. I bet nobody noticed the difference when he mauled the locals:greengrin


It really wasn't funny - we were all very fond of the old dog. It was the first time I saw a grown-up (my uncle) really upset and crying. If any of the customers were getting a bit rowdy in the bar, George would ask them to quiet down, and if they started arguing with him, he'd tell them they were upsetting the dog, and Glen would stand up with his front paws on the bar and growl at them. It never failed to restore order. My dad said that the pub was like a morgue for days after it happened - Glen was a favourite with everyone.

The thing is he never touched a human, but once he'd gone for the sheep he couldn't ever really be trusted ever again. You can't ever take a dog for granted - they're great pets and wonderful friends, but the human has to be the boss. Every dog has a wee bit of the wolf in it.

[Bishop Hibee]

It's heartening to see such a sensible approach to dog ownership being expounded on this thread.

I know a guy whose step-dad had a dog, not sure what breed, who had bred it to attack when he shouted "it's the pope" and pointed! Step-son hated the step-dad and became a Celtc fan just to spite the hun.

Does anyone think the reintroduction of the a dog-license would help to control bad owners and their dogs? Maybe a fee per year could pay for wardens to patrol parks making sure dog turds are collected by owners, dogs are on a leash where appropriate etc.

[Phil D. Rolls]

That brings up the question about rehab, humans and dogs can both have natural instincts to kill yet the solution for dogs is to kill them. Yet we do not advocate the death penalty for those such as tobin because its wrong to take a life. Why don't we have doggy jails? I know it can be argued that humans have a greater capacity for rehab but there others that can't.

There's been some valiant attempts to take this thread off topic, but this is the best so far. :greengrin

Sadly there's probably a lentil eating social worker developing this project as we speak. How much do they get paid again - money down the toilet IMO. :whistle:

[IWasThere2016]

Maybe it's just me but a dog owner who doesn't see the need to destroy a dog, after it has mauled a kid, isn't fit to own the dog in the first place.

:agree: As a dog owner, I 100% agree

[Viva_Palmeiras]

What can ordinary folks do though ? Got a neighbour who let's their staff crap all over the gardens doesn't have on a leash even when I happened to get visor evidence the wardens police, council and landlord did next to nothing. They are abusive shout and it's a time bomb waiting to happen I really despair at the behaviour of some folks and no they are not approachable the blokes already been in prison a number of times but hey according to the landlord he's not living there rantover

[barcahibs]

I love dogs but NO dog should ever be off the leash in a public area unless the owner is absolutely sure it will ALWAYS return instantly on command. Based on my experience of dogs there are very few, if any, that applies to.

Was speaking to an American acquaintance who was/is horrified by the casual attitude people have to dogs being off the leash over here.
Apparently it just doesn't happen in the States (or at least her part of it) dogs do not get to run around public areas.

Apart from the potential danger aspect there's also the pressure that dogs running wild exerts on the wildlife, especially in our public parks.

[Dinkydoo]

I love dogs but NO dog should ever be off the leash in a public area unless the owner is absolutely sure it will ALWAYS return instantly on command. Based on my experience of dogs there are very few, if any, that applies to.

Was speaking to an American acquaintance who was/is horrified by the casual attitude people have to dogs being off the leash over here.
Apparently it just doesn't happen in the States (or at least her part of it) dogs do not get to run around public areas.

Apart from the potential danger aspect there's also the pressure that dogs running wild exerts on the wildlife, especially in our public parks.


Bit in bold.

I agree 100%. I myself have a chocolate Lab, and although he is a big sook who is great with children, I would never let him off the lead in a public park. For one, he's massive, I just know that because of his excitable nature he'd end up running up to some frail old granny knock her over and consequently cause some serious damage.

He is very obedient but also very head strong. We have an empty field a mile or so away from my house (I live in Georgetown if anyone knows it - it doesn't take long to get to the town centre or the countryside, 6 and two 3's really), when I let him off the lead there he'll run around like a madman and occassionally, suddenly swerve off and chase a rabbit, as if it was compulsory. :greengrin It's actually quite funny to watch.

Although he never knows what to do if the rabbit stops because he's just not a 'killing' sort of dog - usually stares blankly at it and then runs back to me - for this reason, I must be in control of him at all times in public places.............

.........he is still an animal after all.

[McSwanky]

Got a neighbour who let's their staff crap all over the gardens

Did anyone else read that slightly wrong?

[--------]

I love dogs but NO dog should ever be off the leash in a public area unless the owner is absolutely sure it will ALWAYS return instantly on command. Based on my experience of dogs there are very few, if any, that applies to.

Was speaking to an American acquaintance who was/is horrified by the casual attitude people have to dogs being off the leash over here.
Apparently it just doesn't happen in the States (or at least her part of it) dogs do not get to run around public areas.

Apart from the potential danger aspect there's also the pressure that dogs running wild exerts on the wildlife, especially in our public parks.


:agree:

In the US there are specialised dog-parks where dogs can run off the leash. Otherwise I think dogs have to be under control at all times in public. The law there seems to be a lot stricter about dog mess - and on the other side of the coin, a lot fiercer about cruelty to animals as well.

There's absolutely no justification for the law allowing people like loko's neighbour to own a dog like a Staffordshire Bull Terrier - they're great dogs if properly trained and controlled, but potentially highly dangerous if not.

[Judas Iscariot]

:agree:

In the US there are specialised dog-parks where dogs can run off the leash. Otherwise I think dogs have to be under control at all times in public. The law there seems to be a lot stricter about dog mess - and on the other side of the coin, a lot fiercer about cruelty to animals as well.

There's absolutely no justification for the law allowing people like loko's neighbour to own a dog like a Staffordshire Bull Terrier - they're great dogs if properly trained and controlled, but potentially highly dangerous if not.

What's even worse is there's no law which prevents LOKO's neighbour from having kids nether mind a docile animal..

[--------]

What's even worse is there's no law which prevents LOKO's neighbour from having kids nether mind a docile animal..


I know a couple of vets and a farrier who could sort that out.... :devil:

[Phil D. Rolls]

What's even worse is there's no law which prevents LOKO's neighbour from having kids nether mind a docile animal..

That's right. :agree:

[barcahibs]

It's heartening to see such a sensible approach to dog ownership being expounded on this thread.

I know a guy whose step-dad had a dog, not sure what breed, who had bred it to attack when he shouted "it's the pope" and pointed! Step-son hated the step-dad and became a Celtc fan just to spite the hun.

Does anyone think the reintroduction of the a dog-license would help to control bad owners and their dogs? Maybe a fee per year could pay for wardens to patrol parks making sure dog turds are collected by owners, dogs are on a leash where appropriate etc.

I know the Dog's Trust in particular are against any introduction of dog licence. Apparently statistics from Ireland, where they do have dog licences, show that it doesn't make any difference at all to problem dogs or owners.

Part of their argument is that the financial cost of a licence would be prohibitive to many, especially the elderly, who rely on a dog for companionship.

I'm not sure I agree though obviously I bow to their expertise. I think a dog licence would be a good idea along with a set of rules and restrictions on who can have a dog and how that dog should be cared for. The whole thing would be a bugger to enforce though and could only be paid for by relatively expensive dog licences.

IMO all dogs should be microchipped. Each dog will include on its microchip a sort of doggy ID card with its owners name, address, vets name and a certificate showing that it and its owners have been on a course with a registered dog trainer.

All dogs would be neutered unless the owners have registered and passed a licence test to become a dog breeder. You should not be able to give a dog as a present. Any dog you own is yours for life unless it is passed onto the SSPCA/RSPCA/Dogs Trust etc for legal rehoming free of charge.

Dogs should be on a leash except in designated dog friendly areas.

Owning a dog should not be an automatic right, the owner has a responsibility both to the dog itself and to the public. It is a living creature which deserves care and respect.

People should be fully legally responsible for the actions of their dog. The police/rspca/sspca should have the right to immediately seize any dog they suspect hasn't conformed to the rules.

Will never happen, even I can see its draconian but its the way things should be IMO. A lot of it could happen just by the public choosing to be more responsible though.

[Phil D. Rolls]

I know the Dog's Trust in particular are against any introduction of dog licence. Apparently statistics from Ireland, where they do have dog licences, show that it doesn't make any difference at all to problem dogs or owners.

Part of their argument is that the financial cost of a licence would be prohibitive to many, especially the elderly, who rely on a dog for companionship.

I'm not sure I agree though obviously I bow to their expertise. I think a dog licence would be a good idea along with a set of rules and restrictions on who can have a dog and how that dog should be cared for. The whole thing would be a bugger to enforce though and could only be paid for by relatively expensive dog licences.

IMO all dogs should be microchipped. Each dog will include on its microchip a sort of doggy ID card with its owners name, address, vets name and a certificate showing that it and its owners have been on a course with a registered dog trainer.

All dogs would be neutered unless the owners have registered and passed a licence test to become a dog breeder. You should not be able to give a dog as a present. Any dog you own is yours for life unless it is passed onto the SSPCA/RSPCA/Dogs Trust etc for legal rehoming free of charge.

Dogs should be on a leash except in designated dog friendly areas.

Owning a dog should not be an automatic right, the owner has a responsibility both to the dog itself and to the public. It is a living creature which deserves care and respect.

People should be fully legally responsible for the actions of their dog. The police/rspca/sspca should have the right to immediately seize any dog they suspect hasn't conformed to the rules.

Will never happen, even I can see its draconian but its the way things should be IMO. A lot of it could happen just by the public choosing to be more responsible though.

How long would it be before people starting going on about PC going mad?

[--------]

I know the Dog's Trust in particular are against any introduction of dog licence. Apparently statistics from Ireland, where they do have dog licences, show that it doesn't make any difference at all to problem dogs or owners.

Part of their argument is that the financial cost of a licence would be prohibitive to many, especially the elderly, who rely on a dog for companionship.

I'm not sure I agree though obviously I bow to their expertise. I think a dog licence would be a good idea along with a set of rules and restrictions on who can have a dog and how that dog should be cared for. The whole thing would be a bugger to enforce though and could only be paid for by relatively expensive dog licences.

IMO all dogs should be microchipped. Each dog will include on its microchip a sort of doggy ID card with its owners name, address, vets name and a certificate showing that it and its owners have been on a course with a registered dog trainer.

All dogs would be neutered unless the owners have registered and passed a licence test to become a dog breeder. You should not be able to give a dog as a present. Any dog you own is yours for life unless it is passed onto the SSPCA/RSPCA/Dogs Trust etc for legal rehoming free of charge.

Dogs should be on a leash except in designated dog friendly areas.

Owning a dog should not be an automatic right, the owner has a responsibility both to the dog itself and to the public. It is a living creature which deserves care and respect.

People should be fully legally responsible for the actions of their dog. The police/rspca/sspca should have the right to immediately seize any dog they suspect hasn't conformed to the rules.

Will never happen, even I can see its draconian but its the way things should be IMO. A lot of it could happen just by the public choosing to be more responsible though.



I don't think this is too far away from what applies right now in some parts of the USA. I would say that before seizure the police/SSPCA should have to get a warrant or at least post notice of intent - otherwise you'd alienate a lot of responsible owners, I think.

OAPs could be catered for, surely - if you're on the computer for the pension, you're eligible for a free dog-licence.

Our dogs were all microchipped (except the Corgi - it hadn't been introduced then) and all insured for vet bills. Works for cars, why not for dogs?

[barcahibs]

How long would it be before people starting going on about PC going mad?

Not long :wink: I'm not sure it is PC gone mad, maybe a bit of the nanny state creeping in?



I don't think this is too far away from what applies right now in some parts of the USA. I would say that before seizure the police/SSPCA should have to get a warrant or at least post notice of intent - otherwise you'd alienate a lot of responsible owners, I think.

OAPs could be catered for, surely - if you're on the computer for the pension, you're eligible for a free dog-licence.

Our dogs were all microchipped (except the Corgi - it hadn't been introduced then) and all insured for vet bills. Works for cars, why not for dogs?

Can't argue with any of that. The authorities should of course have to give some sort of warning before seizure or obtain a warrant unless it was felt there was an immediate threat to either the dog or the public. I'd be behind some sort of mandatory vet/public liability insurance as well.

Of course I realise that this is making the whole thing expensive but IMO dog ownership should not be cost or responsibility free. As Doddie says above those who are on a low or fixed income could perhaps be exempt from some of the costs - though not the responsibilities. There would also even under this scheme be a steady supply of dogs coming into rehoming centres so the cost of actually acquiring the dog in the first place needn't be prohibitive.

I don't want to prevent anyone who genuinely wants a dog from owning one, there just should, IMO, be some hoops to jump through first (and not just at the training class :greengrin). I've known people in the past who should not have owned a dog.

If you really want a dog - any animal in fact - you'll get it, but you'll have to work for it a wee bit to prove you're responsible enough.

Anyway I'll reiterate that I know this is pie in the sky and will never happen!

Oh and the next step is to apply the same scheme to children... :devil:

[Viva_Palmeiras]

Did anyone else read that slightly wrong?

blummin iphone:grr: