mad al 146 Posted January 9, 2009 Report Share Posted January 9, 2009 Something's not quite right here. Does anybody else think that they want a change in the law so that they can seize any breed of dog, not just ones currently covered by the BSL? What exactly constitutes a 'dangerous dog' in their eyes? A dog that's only dangerous to humans, or might it include a dog which might be considered dangerous to wildlife...? maybe broaden the horizons a bit more Mal and you're nearly there who's on the other end of the lead of a dog considered dangerous to wildlife and here we have an addition to "the ban" Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Malt 379 Posted January 9, 2009 Report Share Posted January 9, 2009 Something's not quite right here. Does anybody else think that they want a change in the law so that they can seize any breed of dog, not just ones currently covered by the BSL? What exactly constitutes a 'dangerous dog' in their eyes? A dog that's only dangerous to humans, or might it include a dog which might be considered dangerous to wildlife...? maybe broaden the horizons a bit more Mal and you're nearly there who's on the other end of the lead of a dog considered dangerous to wildlife and here we have an addition to "the ban" Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dare 1,103 Posted January 9, 2009 Report Share Posted January 9, 2009 Will be good if they do lift the ban and decide to punish the owners HOWEVER this will just give them alot more work simply because every tom dick and harry who doesnt already have a big cross bred "pitbull type" will rush out to by one. Many people dont have a clue how to properly treat and care for an animal such as a pitbull and so saddly i see it only causing more problems. More accidents in the park and although any dog can be dangerous a pitbull or any large bull breed will do more damage. Best thing the rspca can do is go after the idiots selling illegal dogs to the public. Making the breed legal wont stop peoples egos saddly. JMO Quote Link to post Share on other sites
gnasher16 30,278 Posted January 9, 2009 Report Share Posted January 9, 2009 (edited) Oh thank god for the good old rspca...........i suppose they think this will make up for the hundreds of innocent dogs they have killed over the years.........lets see them hold their hands up and apologise for the almighty f**k up they have made over the last 18 years !....or is that asking too much like. Edited January 9, 2009 by gnasher16 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tuzo 251 Posted January 9, 2009 Report Share Posted January 9, 2009 if it comes out that they have to make shur the dog is dangerous dose that mean if you have a pit or tosa if its friendly you can have it even as it stands now that is the case, if your dog is taken you can apply to the courts to have it back. if its not proven to be dangerous you can have it back as per rules of the dda (muzzle,chip etc) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
swamper 11 Posted January 9, 2009 Report Share Posted January 9, 2009 as always folks....keep doing what your doing....keep what you do to your self......then theirs only your self to blame if you get caught Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ChrisJones 7,975 Posted January 11, 2009 Report Share Posted January 11, 2009 They may want to repeal this particular legislation but you're very naive if you think they're going to be your friends again. Compo: Kettle's boiled. I've only got Yorkshire Gold though... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.