Most recent activity
-
I have, I’m curious but not particularly bothered as it wouldn’t change anything for me.
DNA tests make no difference to how the DDA is applied due the insertion of the word “type” in the legislation. The verdict and decision to destroy a dog comes down in the end to a tape measure and perception.
-
I could only speculate. I think they must have questioned the “tip off” once they seized the dog, given how quickly they got her assessed.
-
Thanks everyone. I’ll sleep well tonight.
-
A stressful 24 hours. The background - I got Luna from a guy whose bitch had a litter of 14 puppies. He adopted her at 3 and she is a mix of staffy and indeterminate other breed - possibly American Bully, possibly (and I think more likely) lab, possibly ridgeback - basically a breed that brings a red/liver nose and is bigger than a staff. He also owns the dad, who is full staffy.
He was selling the pups at a price that pretty much covered the cost of vaccinations and vet fees - a few hundred quid. One of the last homes one of the pups went to (at 5 months) came back to him and said she had bitten the new owner and he wanted to return her and wanted double his money back, or he was going to the police. He provided no evidence of anything other than being nipped by an excitable puppy - and who wants double their money back in such a situation other than a total fucking chancer. Anyway, the guy I got Luna from took the pup back immediately, but only gave the bloke back the money he'd paid. More than reasonable.
Yesterday, the police arrived at his house with a warrant to enter and search the property, under the Dangerous Dogs Act, and seized the bitch as a suspected banned breed (pitbull). The warrant also gave them the authority to seize electronic devices with a view to tracking any pups from the bitch that had been sold. So I didn't sleep at all last night, with the very real possibility that Luna could be seized and, ultimately, destroyed.
This afternoon, after the bitch had had multipe measurements taken and undergone a temperament test, she was thankfully returned to her owner and determined not to be a banned breed/type. She is no longer at risk and nor is Luna or the other pups. Kudos to the police for processing it so quickly (it can take months sometimes) and not putting her under more stress other than being dragged away with a grasper.
But what an absolute cunt move and what a fucking waste of everyone's time. BSL is beyond a joke and the DDA is universally recognised as being utterly flawed and not fit for purpose. I'm now on the sofa, though, with my two and thanking my lucky stars.
-
Loads of Folk selvedge in most sizes, blue and black, in Brixton TK Maxx. A couple of Edwin rainbow in small sizes, and lots of non-selvedge Nudie.
-
The here was a huge bag (bigger than one of those ikea bags) of RnB and rap vinyl dumped by one of the bin stores in Angell Town yesterday morning. I was walking the dogs so had to leave it. Of course it was gone when I went back later
-
“Encouraging people to drop their 30 minute walk”… I might be doing it wrong, but mine go out twice a day and one of those is for an hour.
And we do our “training games” while we’re out. Doesn’t stop us from doing it at home too.
I didn't really want to get drawn into this, but since I started it by posting up what happened this week, here are my thoughts.
I agree with @Sumo that not all breeds are the same and what they were orginally bred for is important in assessing the risk certain dogs pose to people or other animals (although I'm pretty sure this is no longer the case with the British Bulldog...). Unless all dogs with a fighting, hunting and guarding past (Sharpeis, GSDs, Rotts, Dobes, Wheatens, Bull Mastiffs, etc.) are banned, then we are reliant on knowdledge of the breed and traits and responsible ownership, something that is in short supply with all breeds. Anecdotally, I meet far more growling, snappy, aggressive and unfriendly small and furry dogs that I do bull or guardian breeds.
The 1991 DDA is a perfect example poorly thought through knee-jerk legislation drafted by people with no experience of the issue on which they were legislating. They focused on four breeds (only one of which was present in any significant numbers in the UK at the time, and two of which were not thought to be here at all) none of which were recognised by the KC so that there would be no organised resistence and lobbying. I'm not aware of BSL working anywhere and the DDA has not been effective in preventing tragic attacks. People who want status dogs for the wrong reasons will find a way to have them, and move on to another breed if necessary. When I was a kid, Alsations/GSDs were the "devil dogs", then it was Rotts, then Dobes and so it goes. This is what worries me about "exotic" breeds like the XL Bully - bred for looks with very little understanding of temperament, sold to vain people with £5K to spare and no experience of owning and looking after a dog.
I think there should be restrictions and legislation in place, but not the DDA, which determines whether a dog should be destroyed on the basis of a set of measurements, set out in the orginal legislation when no one knew how to properly identify the four breeds concerned. There are countless examples of dogs with no pit in them (and often with a lot of lab) being destroyed under the act. This is not what was intended, is clearly wrong and doesn't protect the public. I'm afraid I don't know what the alternative is, but it shouldn't be impossible for legislators to properly consult and draw up something much better.
I won't gon into too much detail on @Stonehedge 's data above, other than to say that all data on dog bites and attacks is unreliable, not least because most people are incapable of identifying a pit bull properly. The dog in the graphic is certainly not an APBT. The BBC reports of the recent fatality in Liverpool (?) quoted a bystander/witness (presumably an expert, or why else quote them...) as describing the dog as looking like a pit bull or staffy (two very different looking dogs), yet it turned out to be an XL Bully. That said, I'm absolutely sure that pits top the list, as much because of who owns them and why, but I would bet a lot of money that a significant proportion of those 284 were not pits.
Bottom line - different breeds pose different risks (not just because of character, but also because of their physicality), idiots own dogs (no dog, whatever the breed, should be off-lead in public without a reliable recall), risk needs to be managed, the DDA hasn't worked. The fact that I came close to losing a pup that is not one of the four breeds included in the DDA, makes me feel even more strongly about this.
It is worth noting that the DDA goes beyond BSL, yet this tends to be what the police focus on. I would have more faith if I saw more action on dog behavior that is also covered by the act.
Over and out.