dogs seized in belfast

[James Doyle 59]

wwwwwwwwww

Edited November 28, 2011 by James Doyle

[hunt and fish 35]

Can someone explain "unnecessary suffering" ?

[brog 670]

Can someone explain "unnecessary suffering" ?

if your dog gets bit and swells and you dont see a vet to get treated

[brog 670]

good enough for them

do you no them and there scum

or do you think its good that someone got nicked

[unlacedgecko 1,466]

If you are after a legal definition I pulled this off the internet;

 

The words “wantonly or unreasonably” do not appear in the other offences of cruelty. In the 1993 cases of Hall v. RSPCA and RSPCA v. Isaacs, which were decided on consecutive days, the Divisional Court held that, based on a close reading of the wording of the second limb of section 1(1)(a), an offence under that limb is committed only where the suffering of an animal:

(a) was unnecessary, in the sense of its not being inevitable despite proper husbandry,

and

(

resulted from the unreasonable acts or omissions of the defendant.

In real terms, it means what ever RSPCA can convince the magistrates/judge it means. There are numerous cases cited on the Self Help Group webiste (www.the-shg.org) where a terrier received excellent medical care from its owner. It was stated in court (and admitted by the RSPCA's own witnesses) that the animal would not have received any better care from a vet. However, the prosecution still suceeded on the basis that the animal was not taken to a vet.

 

If you have a child and that child sustains an injury which is within your ability to treat (grazed knee for example) would you still take the child to the doctor? Of course not. But the RSPCA expect a dog (or other animal) to see a vet for any injury, no matter how minor. And they are prepared to expend millions of pounds every year attempting to prosecute those who disagree with them.

[stop.end 4,079]

what you mean good enough for them??? do you know what there getting charged for ......or is it quite possible its just another rspca officer thinking he knows best

[scent 509]

good enough for them

how the hell can you say that about fellow dog men,out of all the stupid comments iv seen you written that tops it off .Would you say the same if that were me or the lads i hunt with and you know them ,i think not

[kevin em 342]

good enough for them

what a dumb fooker you are to say that

[danny300 2,240]

on the utv news website there showing a pic of a bull terrier beside the story

[hogie 103]

something needs to be done about these charity do goodun c**ts ruining peoples sport and there worse than the people they take these dogs of seen people getting there dogs back with bed sore's stink of piss and skin and bone

[scent 509]

on the utv news website there showing a pic of a bull terrier beside the story

well i tell ye if thats a dog that been mis treated i give up ,looks better fed and in better nick then i am lol

[taz2010 1,297]

feck me are you all dog men or what these lads could have had there dogs out the day before they were caught,and i as a terrier man have had some smashed up dogs in my time and im sure if they visited me the day after some of these outings id worry but thats terrier work so dont judge the lads till ya know the full story and im sure 99% of true terrier men would feel the same as me about this

[Waz 4,253]

Can someone explain "unnecessary suffering" ?

 

Maybe something like this..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/devon/3593318.stm

[scent 509]

Can someone explain "unnecessary suffering" ?

 

Maybe something like this..

http://news.bbc.co.u...von/3593318.stm

im lost i cant see any explaination of unnecessary ssuffering there

[CO CHISE 329]

Can someone explain "unnecessary suffering" ?

 

Maybe something like this..

http://news.bbc.co.u...von/3593318.stm

im lost i cant see any explaination of unnecessary ssuffering there

??