36 replies to this topic

[Ian]

blackmagic, on 10 March 2010 - 04:38 PM, said:

because the cases where a dog attacks someone in a house are currently excluded as it is not a public place. They want to be able to prosecute these cases.

Thanks - I suppose that should have been obvious if I'd thought about it a bit more Personally I think I still need to be convinced that the possible detriment to responsible dog owners with dogs attacking trespassers for example is outweighed by the need to prosecute the idiots (who I think may be discouraged by the chipping, traceability & accountability / penalties on them rather than the dog etc anyway) Will be interesting to see how this proceeds & evolves

[Ian]

kola, on 11 March 2010 - 01:11 AM, said:

Mayhew response;

http://themayhewanim...to-toughen.html

I'm not sure whether I'd see it as necessarily relevant to dangerous dogs or agree with compulsory neutering, or even annual vaccinations (type of vaccine, duration argunments etc) myself though I do agree with the registration & some means of checking / enforcement will be needed if compulsory chipping is initiated.

I liked the reply in general though.

[kola]

Article:
Public Consultation on Dangerous Dogs
http://www.dogmagazi...-dogs-need-you/

[kola]

Article;
Defra Consultation - explanations and some help with;
http://dangerousdogs...nsultation.html

[Pingu]

blackmagic, on 10 March 2010 - 04:38 PM, said:

because the cases where a dog attacks someone in a house are currently excluded as it is not a public place. They want to be able to prosecute these cases.

not strictly true but mostly true

if the dog is in a place which is not public, but to which the dog has no right to be (such as if it jumps a fence into someone elses garden without permission or if a burgler brings a dog with him\her) then the dda can still be applied

[kola]

BBC Radio Four programmes - Law In Action

Was broadcast on tuesday, on again thursday (tonight) 8pm, also on podcast;

http://www.live.bbc....asts/series/law

This weeks edition looks at the Dangerous Dogs Act section one, inc interviews with Government, Trevor Cooper solicitor and Allie Green DDA Watch and registered dog Bishop's lovely owner Sara, by podcast stuck half way through thou

[Rumpole]

Pingu, on 16 March 2010 - 09:24 AM, said:

not strictly true but mostly true

if the dog is in a place which is not public, but to which the dog has no right to be (such as if it jumps a fence into someone elses garden without permission or if a burgler brings a dog with him\her) then the dda can still be applied

and the 1871 dogs act covers private places whether the dog should be there or not