Dangerous Dogs Act has never worked

[TirielWoW]

Yes, i am implying that that is the current solution. It is doomed to fail or doomed to work subuptimally, but that is the only one people will accept. If you have seen my posts, you will see that i am in noway cheering for these laws, a ban is stupid, but it is the only solution, which the current system will accept. People are simply to afraid of fixes, which have a general impact on their ability to get dogs

There's a very easy fix that doesn't impede people from getting dogs. Make people financially and legally responsible for the things their animals do. Your dog kills a kid? You go to prison for murder.

[Pann]

There's a very easy fix that doesn't impede people from getting dogs. Make people financially and legally responsible for the things their animals do. Your dog kills a kid? You go to prison for murder.

This already happens under the Dangerous Dogs Act.

[TirielWoW]

This already happens under the Dangerous Dogs Act.

I've never seen that part enforced. Ever. I've seen people fined, given probation, but I've never seen a successful prosecution of a dog owner for murder.

[Flurryfang]

There's a very easy fix that doesn't impede people from getting dogs. Make people financially and legally responsible for the things their animals do. Your dog kills a kid? You go to prison for murder.

In some countries, you are already financially responcible for your pets in general. There have been given out some heavy pay-outs for some accidents in my country because somebodies dog did some dmg to other pets.

But you can't go to far with this. Like the encident which OP shows off, where the kid died, you would never be able to make a law, which would make the owner a murderer in that case, since it is open to so many random factors. We can proberly talk about smaller punishments as for manslaughter or aquantance to a situation of murder, but very rarely as murder.

For the law to work, you would have to be able to prove, that the owner wanted to kill with his pet... And such laws are already in use many places.

But just because your pet kills a person, does not mean that the owner is at fault. You could end up with some trials, where stupid people attacked a dog/pet and got hurt/killed, because the dog/pet defended itself, and the owner of the dog/pet would be up for heavy punishment.

[TirielWoW]

In some countries, you are already financially responcible for your pets in general. There have been given out some heavy pay-outs for some accidents in my country because somebodies dog did some dmg to other pets.

But you can't go to far with this. Like the encident which OP shows off, where the kid died, you would never be able to make a law, which would make the owner a murderer in that case, since it is open to so many random factors. We can proberly talk about smaller punishments as for manslaughter or aquantance to a situation of murder, but very rarely as murder.

For the law to work, you would have to be able to prove, that the owner wanted to kill with his pet... And such laws are already in use many places.

But just because your pet kills a person, does not mean that the owner is at fault. You could end up with some trials, where stupid people attacked a dog/pet and got hurt/killed, because the dog/pet defended itself, and the owner of the dog/pet would be up for heavy punishment.

I've seen situations where the dog has a history of being aggressive towards children, and then one day the dog finally manages to kill one, and even though there's a history of aggression, nothing substantial happens to the owners. And yes, if your dog kills a child, unless that child climbed your fence without permission to come irritate your dog, you are responsible. You are responsible for controlling your dog in all situations.

[Pann]

I've never seen that part enforced. Ever. I've seen people fined, given probation, but I've never seen a successful prosecution of a dog owner for murder.

Seeing as you from the US and this thread is about the Dangerous Dogs Act in the UK that is not altogether unsurprising however a quick Google search shows that irresponsible owners whose dogs attack people are being fined and in certain cases imprisoned on both sides of the Atlantic.

[Ghostmcghosty]

It is flawed. It should be changed to the dangerous dog owners act.

Cause otherwise it won't do shit. May as well ban any dog that can't fit in a purse.

[Pann]

It is flawed. It should be changed to the dangerous dog owners act.

Cause otherwise it won't do shit. May as well ban any dog that can't fit in a purse.

Ultimately the owner is held responsible for their dog's actions under the Act.

[Ghostmcghosty]

Ultimately the owner is held responsible for their dog's actions under the Act.

For all dogs? Or just the big ones that people are scared of?

[Dystemper]

My father worked in Animal control. He was very much always for the banning of certain breeds after having to deal with them often in attacks and as stray and always said that particular breeds were naturally ALWAYS more aggressive on average than others.

He said idiots with the stupid mindset of "well my "y" Breed is a loving caring dog and wouldn't hurt a fly so all should be legal" always failed to look at the big picture, sure their dog may be fine, but on average dogs of the same Breed he often had to capture and put down due to them tearing someone elses' pets and/or Children up much more often than any other breeds.

Whilst people often fall back on the "It's the owner not the dogs fault" that is only ever a portion of it. A dog like all animals will always naturally have its own temperament and training will always just teach the dogs to do things, never actually mold its natural self.

Most animal control officers didnt or do know shit about dog breeds or behavior and most actually tend to hate animals in general.

[Super Kami Dende]

Most animal control officers didnt or do know shit about dog breeds or behavior and most actually tend to hate animals in general.

My dad loves Animals and did extra-curricular learning on their psychology as part of his job training. So yeah.

[announced]

train the owners, not the dogs. yes some dogs are bred to be guard dogs and violent, but rarely do the dogs ever run out and kill people.

[Zoibert the Bear]

No owner can make anything good from a murderous animal that was breed for fighting and killing.
The law should just ban any breed past certain weight or dimensions.

Congratulations on one of the most retarded posts of the day.

While we are on it, let's ban fat people, since they could fall on a child and suffocate it to death.

Most large dogs tend to be way more passive and calm.

[ItachiZaku]

Cats hardly kill anyone.

They kill everyone.

[stabetha]

Seeing as you from the US and this thread is about the Dangerous Dogs Act in the UK that is not altogether unsurprising however a quick Google search shows that irresponsible owners whose dogs attack people are being fined and in certain cases imprisoned on both sides of the Atlantic.

Reading isn't a strong subject for you is it? They specifically stated "I've seen people fined, given probation, but I've never seen a successful prosecution of a dog owner for murder" and you come back with "durr people have been fined".

[Pann]

Reading isn't a strong subject for you is it? They specifically stated "I've seen people fined, given probation, but I've never seen a successful prosecution of a dog owner for murder" and you come back with "durr people have been fined".

Sorry do I know you?

What did the rest of my post say?

[SupBrah]

Well it's people who breed them that way so once again people are at fault, Also yes there is millions of pitbulls out there not harming anyone.

Yes and no.

I did pitbul and other dog rescue for years, and in my experience, there's 2 main causes of dog attacks.

1.) Feral. Dogs abandoned and left on the street. If you ever see any feral dog, be careful. Especially in urban areas. These dogs are more than likely abused, forced to fight for territory/resources, forced into a life of dog fighting for profit or being a bait dog (forced to be torn up by fighters to train the fighters), and/or are probably starving. These dogs are more rare to attack though as they tend to just want to protect their territory. You tend to know almost right away whether or not to approach one.

2.) This has probably been the biggest cause in my experience: Inbreeding. Dogs like pitbulls are big money in the hood. Don't be surprised if that "purebreed" is really a 4th or 5th generated inbred dog. If you are looking to get a pit, try to go for a mix or an adult that you can easily test the temperment of. If you REALLY want a purebreed, go through a licened, certified breeder. Not Tyrone selling "purebreeds" on the corner of Walmart for $100 a pup.

Hard to tell when they're pups, but as they age you can see more symptoms, including aggression. This is ESPECIALLY a problem with blue-nosed.



Basically, like everything else in this world. The leading cause is fucked up, degenerate humans.

[apepi]

They kill everyone.

By being so cute.

[Celista]

No owner can make anything good from a murderous animal that was breed for fighting and killing.
The law should just ban any breed past certain weight or dimensions.

That makes no sense. Pitbulls are rather medium sized dogs...in comparison golden retrievers/labs are much larger...and no golden retrievers/labs do not have the same bite statistics as pitbulls do (especially and I mean ESPECIALLY in comparison to bite fatalities/seriousness of bites).

[Damajin]

the DDA (and similar laws) don't work because the problem isn't with the dogs it's with the people.

The scary dangerous dog changes every decade or so as they're banned. You want to stop the "scary [x]"? Work on educating people on how to train their dog properly, and work on laws that require proper care and training for certain types of dogs (ie, guardian dogs should have required extensive socializing... herding dogs required classes on what happens to understimulated dogs.. and so on for various types).

It won't happen because it's apparently a sovereign right to do whatever you want with your dog, though.

Sounds like the same argument used with drugs and guns. I agree that dogs especially home and family guardian breeds should be extensively trained and socialized, my brother has a 100 lb female Pit Bull that if he didn't put a ton of hours into training and socializing her as a puppy she'd be an absolute terror. As it is she received much more than the recommended amount of training and is continually doing refresher stuff with her so she's an amazing dog.