new sentences for DD owners

Re: new sentences for DD owners

Hannah Omer — Wed, 07 Aug 2013 10:15:40 GMT

I don't know a huge amount about this but from what I have seen it would only be used on owners whose dogs actually kill people or guide/assistant dogs, and not on those dogs who may give an over excited nip every now and then. Dog attacks that result in human death are quite rare but prosecuting owners is difficult under current legislation, so as far as I can tell this is just a way to do so. The overwhelming majority of owners whose dogs are just a little unruly should be fine!

Re: new sentences for DD owners

Katie Mansfield — Wed, 07 Aug 2013 09:18:56 GMT

[quote user="craig_mcdonald1"]Hopefully it will make people think twice about training their dogs incorrectly and using them as weapons.[/quote]

I think this is the idea but sadly I'm pessimistic - after all a lot of gang kids still carry knives and guns and that has always been illegal

[quote user="icklesal"]I can't help but think its going to be the decent owners who's dogs snap that are going to suffer.[/quote]

Yep, this is my concern too. Our Chloe has been attacked twice now; both times she was barking in excitement and play bowing behind our solid garden gate so the other dog could only see her head. (I believe they misinterpreted her body language). Consequently she now barks at every other dog we see with her hackles up. I have to walk her on a lead now wearing a Yellow Dog vest but even then other ppl let their off lead dogs run up to her so I end up trying to pull her away before she gets her defence snap in first.

K x

Re: new sentences for DD owners

Craig McDonald — Tue, 06 Aug 2013 23:50:49 GMT

I agree with this and hope that if it isn't the owners fault they aren't held accountable if it is someone else's fault that they got bitten but that could be very hard to define. Hopefully it will make people think twice about training their dogs incorrectly and using them as weapons.

Re: new sentences for DD owners

Sally Seddon — Tue, 06 Aug 2013 19:50:01 GMT

For a start they don't hand out enough life sentences to those who kill in cold blood so i don't think They will use it properly. What will happen to the poor dog owner who's dog, for example, kills a child after said child has run over to it in the park and scared the cr*p out of it?! I know there are dogs out there that are genuinely dangerous and the owners have made them this way but I can't help but think its going to be the decent owners who's dogs snap that are going to suffer. I'm not condoning dogs that bite, of course, just that its not always the dogs fault or the owners. Sometimes the person attacked is actually to blame. How will they define a dangerous dog, will it be from the dd act or will it be a dog that has attacked someone. I guess if its used on people who make their dogs dangerous and make them attack someone/kill someone then it's not a bad thing. Making a dog kill a person is still murder, just using a live weapon. I may have missed the point completely as I haven't actually read an article or seen the news so don't know the ins and out of what's being suggested.