The News Vault

What Will The New UK Government Do About Seized Dogs: How About, Kill Them All?

As the UK starts to get used to a Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition Government, the country could be forgiven for quickly forgetting the short, sharp burst of activity surrounding the Dangerous Dogs Act in the final days of the Labour regime. A quick refresher: The then Home Sec, Alan Johnson, announced there would be a public consultation in to the issue of dangerous dogs or ‘status’ dogs as they have been alarmingly dubbed. But today, just a matter of hours in to the new term of this, we are told, ‘progressive’ alliance, we learn something so astonishingly shocking about the mindset of those tasked with dealing with the dangerous dogs issue, it really is worthy of wider examination. The Metropolitan Police have been urged to simply kill ALL of the dogs it has seized.

[note]Note: When I initially published this, it was the early hours of the morning. For those people who’ve been asking what can you do (thank you!), please add your voice using the comments section below as it acts as a digital archive of people’s feelings (one that can not be simply deleted or manipulated). But also, please write and express your heartfelt feelings to the newly appointed Home Sec, Theresa May: http://www.tmay.co.uk/contact – these dogs need people to speak up for them at this critical time.[/note]

Long – and possibly recent – term readers to this site will know that the dangerous dogs topic is one of the most widely covered here.

We have long since covered the various debating points and, often hair-brained, proposals as to how we can responsibly and effectively implement laws that don’t attempt to define a dog as ‘dangerous’ based purely on how and what it happens to look like.

The following is from the BBC:

Scotland Yard has been urged to destroy thousands of dangerous dogs rather than paying more than £10m to care for them.

The Metropolitan Police (Met) plans to outsource kennelling and care of dangerous dogs, which could cost up to £10m over four years.

Lord Harris, former Metropolitan Police Authority chairman, asked: “Why don’t we just put them down?”

A record 1,146 dogs, including pit-bull terriers, were seized in London in 2009. Police currently have 451 dogs.

Each dog can cost the force up to £9,000, while owners fight lengthy court cases trying to prevent destruction.

‘Enormous sum’

Lord Harris said the public would be shocked by the cost.

“We seem to be spending an enormous sum of money on keeping weapons for other people. Why do we keep on doing that?” he asked.

The number of dogs held by the police often surges after high profile incidents, such as when children are attacked.

Police said they could complete the paperwork needed to destroy a dog within 72 hours, but court cases can take years to conclude.

Supt Julia Pendry, who is responsible for the Met’s status dogs unit, said the force must operate within the law.

“It would be absolutely fantastic if we could destroy these dogs,” she said.

“Unfortunately it is a criminal offence because the property belongs to other people.

“Secondly, the RSPCA would probably prosecute me, and people like Defra and the national press would have a field day if we started killing dogs that were people’s pets,” she added.

SOURCE

As we have pointed out many times via these pages, the UK tax-payer is currently footing a VERY large bill for the implementation of this failed law.

Has it just dawned on the power’s that be the fact that if we have a law that compels Police to seize dogs that happen to LOOK a certain way, then the costs associated with such idiocy would be massive and they’d be picked up by the tax payer?

It was the Conservatives who brought this law in to force in 1991 and Labour failed to remove it.

In the past 5 years, 6 people have been killed by dog attack.

Breed specific legislation has had absolutely zero impact on reducing the number of deaths or dog attacks – since its inception it is widely acknowledged that the Pit bull type dog is now more desirable and carries a ‘premium’ price PURELY because it is contraband.

If Britain is to be genuinely committed to a reformist, progressive path – may we suggest the idea of wholesale killing of dogs would go some considerable distance to blowing that image clean out of the water.

When China hosted the Olympics, world-wide media levelled considerable criticism at the authorities who ’rounded up’ the stray street dogs and ‘dispensed’ of them in killing chambers.

Just a couple of days in to the UK’s ‘new dawn’ and we have this obscene suggestion that a mass cull of dogs – who are being held BECAUSE they have not been PROVEN to either be of ‘type’ or to have ever acted dangerously. Quick work.

Please, if you are compassionate dog lover – BE outraged. This is every bit worthy of your anger and emotion.

We must rid the UK of breed specific legislation, if not for the clear and obvious animal welfare reasons but quite simply because it does not work, has never worked and is costing us a fortune. If you live in the UK, YOU are paying for these dogs to be held up, often in shocking conditions (MANY dogs die in police care – the numbers are astonishing).

Nobody wants dangerous dogs on the streets. But the solution is to tackle dangerous owners, not dogs that simply happen to look a certain way and fulfil a definition of ‘type’. This is a system that has reached tipping point and we have a clear fork in the road…

we can either:

Seize and seize as many dogs as we have been doing and PAY for keeping them locked up, PAY for them to go through a ludicrous court process where ‘experts’ will argue as to whether their fur is thick enough to be a ‘type’ or if their chest is broad enough, experts with tape measures, experts opposing the experts with tape measures – all the while not even bringing in to consideration whether they dog ACTUALLY DID anything dangerous

or

Seize and seize and arbitrarily kill as many by virtue of the death rate that unfolds with seized dogs in Police ‘care’ or dispense with the charade all together and just put a needle in them as soon as they are seized.

When you think about folks, it really is ONE way or the other.

End BSL now!

Don't forget about Bruce!!

110 Comments

110 Comments

  1. mike jonas

    May 14, 2010 at 1:20 am

    It would be absolutely fantastic if i could put supt julie pendry down, what a horrible piece of scum!! i cant believe that the people involved in these laws are so ignorant and obviously know very little about dogs! makes me sick to my stomach…

    • stephen burch

      May 14, 2010 at 6:08 pm

      It’s such a shame when people are employed and are not fit for purpose. I would liken this to training an earthworm to be a psychologist. What you would most likely end up with is an earthworm with very little understanding of how other animals behave and why they behave the way they do. I would like to know if any of the ignorant individuals concerned would feel the need to keep their family members in police holding cells if they didn’t like the look of them. I realise that they do not want to deal with these situations but isn’t it about education, not prejudice and cruelty. More than likely these dogs aren’t having their needs met by the authorities concerned so that alone is going to cause suffering. It never ceases to amaze me how ignorant and insecure people can be.

  2. chelsea

    May 14, 2010 at 1:32 am

    This breaks my heart, I am an owner of an american stafoordshire, she is the sweetest dog and the thought of her ever getting locked up and at worst put down because of what she is kills me. Is there a petion or anything to help stop this?

  3. Girija

    May 14, 2010 at 1:34 am

    Today it is these seized dogs in question … tomorrow it could be humans in a similar situation , right?

    Life in all forms deserve reverence. A fly is same as whale is same as tree is same as cockroach is same as human as afar as reverential treatment goes.Anything different is questionable.

    • Victoria Thomas

      May 15, 2010 at 10:45 pm

      I agree with you Girija, Life is becoming very cheap and people are thinking in terms of convenience all the time. To devalue even one life puts us on a very slippery slope.
      I sometimes wonder if people like Pendry have ever evolved from the Neanterthal stage!

  4. danny kelly

    May 14, 2010 at 2:05 am

    it is quite clear to me that killing animals who are innocent flies in the face of justice and civility. and the worst injustice of all is that innocent families who treasure their pets and manage them properly will suffer no end!

    THIS IS WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!

    DANNY

  5. jayjt

    May 14, 2010 at 3:45 am

    I’m mad!yeah this is a stupid law on dog specific dog breed ban it’s out of control i say lift the ban sort out the stupid cruel&uneducated dumb dog owners this message and people’s strong views about this need to be seen and heard by the new government in power they’ve got power what the hell are police gonna do if government don’t bother to listen hear people out about this dog specific breed ban law they may just change the law on this if they get the message loud and clear and bother look into this.I had no idea conservatives were the government who made this happen banning dog breeds and labours just left as it is that is crazy.
    LIFT THE BANN ON SPECIFIC DOG BREEDS IN THIS COUNTRY DO WHAT IS RIGHT BE FAIR TO THE DOGS AND REAL PASSIONATE DOG LOVERS WHO LOVE THE SPECIFIC BREEDS THAT ARE BANNED SUCH AS THE PIT BULL TERRIER THE MOST RAREST LOVING DOGS WE HAVE LEFT.

  6. Lachlan Halley

    May 14, 2010 at 3:52 am

    Being a dog owner, and a dog lover, I find these comments regarding the fate of dogs in police care pending the outcome of a court appalling. It is irresponsible dog owners who either allow , or train, their dog to be aggressive, opposed to breed specifics. If a dog is deemed to be dangerous or aggressive, regardless of breed specifics. It should be the responsibility of these owners to have to pay for the cost of the care, and retraining of their dog.
    All dogs should be microchipped, and registered to a specific owner, who has taken on the responsibility for the care, and welfare of that dog, including any change of ownership, or rehoming costs.
    Dogs shouldn’t be used as status symbols, or fashion accessories, and their lives shouldn’t be considered to be disposable.

  7. Avnish

    May 14, 2010 at 7:50 am

    these politicians …heartless…SAD.. they #%@%#@@^&$&#@#

  8. Faith

    May 14, 2010 at 7:55 am

    It is outrageous. Can the magazine please start off a petition at the No 10 website so that we can all sign it?
    http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/

  9. Michelle Cooper

    May 14, 2010 at 8:35 am

    Lord Harris and Supt Julia Pendry should hang there heads in shame and with that mindset should both resign.
    The dangerous dogs act does not work, and because some mindless thugs use specific breeds as weapons/status dogs does not mean they should all be destroyed.

  10. Daphne

    May 14, 2010 at 8:36 am

    Holland had a practice like this for years, where all dogs resembling a ‘pitbull’ appearance without registration papers (proving they were a staff rather than anything else) were in danger of being picked up and put down, for no reason other than their looks… They have finaly copped on overthere that this was ridiculous and are now focussing on the behaviour rather than breed characteristics… This is a totally backwards and ridiculous proposal and I sincerely hope that there will be lot’s of resistance and people will massively speak out against this!

  11. Tracy

    May 14, 2010 at 8:38 am

    It’s the owners who make the dogs “dangerous” that need to be put down!!!

  12. chris

    May 14, 2010 at 8:45 am

    once again beyond belief
    is there a petition? what else can we do? any ideas? ryan yes it is worth gettitng angry over but good to channel anger and you do sos well marshalling support. if we have signed all the anti bsl petitions etc and try to edcuate people around us and raise awareness about this madness is there anything else we can do ??

  13. FJF

    May 14, 2010 at 8:56 am

    This makes me want to cry! What an awful situation!
    I really feel that no dog should be seized just because of its breed. In fact this just encourages status symbols and usually the people who own dogs for this reason are the people who will inflict abuse and create a dangerous dog therefore increasing the association with that breed!
    The reason the majority of dogs attack is due to the owner’s treatment/training and fear.
    The Country needs more stringent laws on ownership and breeding!
    I own a German Shepherd who as a puppy was constantly cuddled and stroked in the street however now at 7 months I have seen people cross over the road in fear. I can honestly say she has never once been aggressive (Obviously so far) I have taken her to puppy training classes and then she has just completed her bronze award and her introduction to Agility (Agility is Fab for dogs of any breed) to ensure she is well socialised and I think along with good breeding we have a great dog!
    I know people say they don’t have time for classes/agility etc. but if that is the case do they have time for a dog? My partner works 70ish hours a week & I work hard but we make our animals a priority.

    Does anyone know:
    Is there a petition to stop dog been seized?
    What is the current status of licences to have dogs?

  14. Monica

    May 14, 2010 at 9:07 am

    New Government: “OOOH look we don’t like white/ black/ asian/ arab people… they are costing us too much money! Great idea…Lets put them down! That will save us a lot of money!”

    To me it’s just the same… picking someone / animal because of their breed and putting them down!

    Or wait… their next idea is gonna be to kill all the people in prison!!! They are costing us money too.

    What stupid idiots!!!!!

  15. Nendels

    May 14, 2010 at 9:14 am

    This is disgusting. It is like saying everyone who is fat should be put down, everyonoe who has red hair should be put down. Everyone who has a temper should be put down. You can’t judge a book by its cover.
    I know some breeds have a bad reputation – but that does not mean every dog in that breed is bad.
    I believe a percentage of the problems is bad owners – should they be put down too?
    Every case should be judged seprately and decided on its merits or otherwise.
    I had a Staffie cross and she was the softest dog out.
    What about dog trainers (and owner trainers)- they work wonders.
    If this gets paassed, it is totally wrong. What can we do?
    This has to be fair.

  16. Hannah

    May 14, 2010 at 9:25 am

    This latest suggestion by the government is utterly outrageous and barbaric, and that police officer sounds like a real piece of work! Would she be happy for her son/daughter to be forcibly taken away from her, just because of the way they looked? I don’t think so.
    A petition needs to be started. And how about contacting Cesar Milan? He’s a high profile media star who’s already trying to stamp out this ignorant and frankly pathetic attitude to “so-called” dangerous breeds in the USA. Cesar is becoming more involved in the UK and I’m sure he’d want to help if enough people get in touch with him.

    • Denise boyd

      May 14, 2010 at 5:04 pm

      Hannah ur so rite. Cesar was the first person i thot of 2!! We all hav 2 do something about this as a nation of dog lovers! It just proves that ignorance exists high in authority!!! Im gonna email cesar rite now!

  17. samantha espley

    May 14, 2010 at 9:34 am

    Ok now we’ve read and got angry what are we to do about it ! These articles may shock us but five minutes later and another email to open and its been forgot about…we need more information how to constructively opose it and help thse poor animals.

  18. Mandy Rothwell-Billings

    May 14, 2010 at 8:44 am

    What a horrible woman to even suggest such a thing, some if not all of these dogs are probably innocent. They should look to the owner not the dogs and prosecute them. The dogs only do what they are trained and most could probably be rehabilitated.

    • Shiela

      May 14, 2010 at 11:27 am

      Are you totally mad!!!! retrained!!! are you actually saying that if a dog killed your child, you would happily put it in the care of someone who would retrain it? All I can say to this is That I hope that a child of yours is NEVER maimed or killed by an out of control dog.

      • Ryan O'Meara

        May 14, 2010 at 11:34 am

        None of the dogs being held in police kennels have killed anyone. So that is a slightly obtuse argument.

        Dogs who kill are usually dead within 24 hours of it happening. They do not sit in police kennels for months on end.

        The dogs sitting in kennels are not being put to sleep because in most cases, they haven’t actually been proven to have done anything.

  19. Roxanne

    May 14, 2010 at 9:44 am

    me and my partner own an Olde Tyme Bulldog and an English Bull Terrier, these types of dogs get so much bad press but they are just misunderstood, it is not the dog it is the owner, a dog purely gets told what to do as does a child, it sickens me to think that their solution is to kill all dogs that have been seized and lets face it most of the breed types police seize are the bigger not so cute dogs, when I am walking with our dogs most of the dogs that snap and bark are not mine but dogs such as Jack Russells but because they are small they are not considered a danger which is absurd.
    I think it is about time they address the real problem which is people and not the animals if it is so easy to put a dog down which is the wrong thinhg to to, why is it so hard to do the right thing – PUNISH THE OWNER!!

  20. Gill

    May 14, 2010 at 9:48 am

    It is the owners who should be prosecuted. Severely! It is true that some breeds look more aggresive, but it is the way they are brought up that makes them the way they are. Some of them can be really sweet-natured.
    Dog fighting is illegal, but it still goes on, and while it does, these dogs will still be a status symbol. Suspicious owners should be monitored, before anything happens.
    As for the dogs in custody, they should be neutered and rehomed with responsible people.

  21. Julie

    May 14, 2010 at 10:11 am

    What about the bill to the tax payer in fighting the court cases? I imagine that is far higher than the cost of looking after the dogs in question. A ridiculous law that should never have been introduced and should be overturned.

  22. Jules

    May 14, 2010 at 10:13 am

    As always typical humans conclude if you don’t know what to do with it just kill it.
    If they truly have so little understanding and if they really don’t have the answers why oh why don’t they seek advice and knowledge from those people who do instead of blundering their way through?
    There are many logical ways of tackling the issues involved if only they’d open their eyes and see the real problem.

  23. CAROL RYAN

    May 14, 2010 at 10:15 am

    it makes me so mad when i hear about this. my friend recently had his 2 dogs destroyed by the police, despite the fact that the vet for the prosecution argued against it. yes, they were pit bulls, but he had them from very young pups and never allowed them out on their own and certainly didn’t use them for anything else except cuddles and fun.they were 8 and 6 years old and bought before the law changed. it’s a stupid law. any dog can turn and attack anyone. it’s like saying all people with blue or brown eyes are murderers. it’s sickening.

  24. Kate

    May 14, 2010 at 10:22 am

    This is one of the most horrendous ideas I have ever heard! Over the years various breeds have been classed as “dangerous” – Rottweilers, German Shepherds etc – and now it is the turn of the “pit bull type”! When are our politicians going to realise that a dog behaves in the way its human has trained it to? Most of the animals “in jail” are people’s much loved pets and therefore a decision to simply cull all of them is barbaric, but there are owners out there who aren’t exactly dog’s best friend and it is those people who need to be educated. The media doesn’t help either. Whilst, as a life long dog owner, I am as appalled as anyone if a child or adult is attacked, the media can’t wait to print that the attack was done by a “pit bull type!”. Please let us have some proper. fair legislation and stop just hounding one particular breed.

  25. Ryan O'Meara

    May 14, 2010 at 10:31 am

  26. Tracy Brown

    May 14, 2010 at 10:31 am

    I THINK IT IS A TOTAL DISGRACE.

    AT THE END OF THE DAY DOGS ARE LIVING CREATURES AND IT IS NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN

    IT SHOULD BE THE OWNERS WHO HAVE THROWN THEIR DOGS AWAY LIKE RUBBISH THAT SHOULD BE PUNISHED

    IF I HAD THE LAND, I WOULD TAKE THEM ALL IN AND GIVE THEM WHAT THEY DERSERVE, KIND LOVING WARM HOME

    PUNISH THE OWNERS NOT THE DOGS

    • john champion

      May 14, 2010 at 11:15 am

      i totally agree the owners are responsible for their dogs and they should be made to pay . the owners bring these dogs up from pups and train them to turn nasty to fight other dogs also the dogs are used for protection with criminals. then when the dog is evil they let the dog out to roam the streets to attack some innocent victim. A DOG IS FOR LIFE LOOK AFTER IT AND RESPECT IT WITH DIGNITY AND LOVE.
      WHATEVER DOG YOU OWN THEY CAN ALL TURN NASTY IF NOT TREATED RIGHT.

  27. Ella Jones

    May 14, 2010 at 10:56 am

    This is the most disgusting thing I have heard in relation to “status” dogs so far. I too am close to tears reading this and agree with Monica, Julia Pendry is not worthy of her title so I refuse to use it. A more suitable title for someone so ignorant and evil would probably be Dog Hitler.

    Please, lets get a petition through the magazine and get everyone we know to sign it. This again is another incident in support of bringing back dog licensing and testing the applicant before issuing them a license, this way the police would not need to seize people’s pets.

    • Essjay

      May 14, 2010 at 6:31 pm

      I agree with you Ella that this is quite disgusting but I’m not sure that dog licensing is the answer, it may help but it won’t stop the problem anymore than BSL did.
      What needs to be addressed is the number of ‘home breeders’ and breeders of dogs which are currently illegal to own who are making money out of these dogs. Very often, in the case of the illegal dog breeders, the mothers are used as breeding machines and are treated very poorly and cruelly. Breeding should be licensed and more tightly controlled.

  28. Jacky Cutler

    May 14, 2010 at 11:32 am

    Although I am against Breed Specific Legislation, why do people still choose to own and breed these dogs if they know it is illegal (in the case of pit bulls or crosses). I would not be breeding or selling these dogs to people if I thought there was even the remotest chance they could be misconstrued as pit bull types and end up being siezed and/or put down. There are enough pure bred breeds that can be proven to be Staffs or others breeds, so why do people have them?

  29. italykaz

    May 14, 2010 at 12:07 pm

    what is wrong with these people!
    i believe that the majority of the time there are no ‘bad’ dogs just the owners, why not kill all the dangerous humans like the yobs on the streets, rapists, child molesters ect?! the majority of the time i would trust a dog more than a ‘human’

  30. John Robinson

    May 14, 2010 at 12:48 pm

    I feel for poor Lord Harris. Due legal process is just so inconvenient. Perhaps he could balance his budget better if we did away with the court system entirely?

  31. Paulken

    May 14, 2010 at 12:59 pm

    Absolutely the most disgusting thing I have heard from this Con/Lib Dem pact. All these dogs need to be loved and it breaks my heart to think they could be callously put down. It’s a great shame that the people responsible for this idea couldn’t be put in the dogs places instead.

  32. dee

    May 14, 2010 at 1:04 pm

    I take it Supt. Julie does not have a dog.

    It is not the look or breed of the dog that determines bad behaviour but the owners. If this was to happen with people i.e. every young teenager dressing trendy (wearing a hoodie) were to be locked up never mind the ones that are actually nice kids (yes there are some) there would be an outcry.

    If a dog is dangerous and has attacked someone that resulted in serious or fatal injury they are immediatly put down.

    The dogs that are currently locked up just for their looks are you could say INNOCENT and should be returned to their owners if their owners can be proven to be responsible

  33. kevin murphy

    May 14, 2010 at 1:18 pm

    why not put the politicians to sleep lets face it they are more of a danger to the country than dogs i breed train and show german shepard dogs and find that people are nervous of this breed due to scaremongering tacics from media etc if you want to stop dogs being used as weapons target the owners as any dangerous dog is more often than not cause by ill treatment by the owner lets face facts theres more injurys and deaths caused by alcohol than dogs so whats next for the goverment are they going to put the publicans to sleep

  34. Annette Duffy

    May 14, 2010 at 1:44 pm

    I have for years stated that it is NOT THE DOG but the OWNER that causes a dog to be “dangerous”
    ANY dog can turn and savage someone, these so called dangerous breeds are only picked out because they cause more damage than most.
    I personally have had family dogs all my life, my first dog was a Doberman, he was so sweet and loving, and as a child (I was about 3-4 when we had him) I used to be able to ride upon his back like he was a horse. He had a great life and when he grew too big for our family (our family home was only small and my mother had another baby) he went to a local farmer who had him til he died of old age.
    As a teenager we had another family dog of the “dangerous” type, we had an English Bull terrier, she was a family pet through and through, and she never, EVER, so much as growled at someone. She would bark when the door was knocked or at someone running toward me while I was walking her, but that was in a protective manner not because she was “evil or dangerous”. She lived a long happy life in my family and died of old age.
    My brother has had staffies and along my way I’ve had alsations and german shepherds, now as a mother myself, I have a mongrel bitch and a Husky bitch, and as I was taught as a chcild, I teach my children to respect our canine friends, and treat them as part of the family. A dog will always protect it’s home, but will be a stable family pet if they do this.
    I will maintain it is the OWNER not the dog itself that is dangerous and some people should never be allowed to own so much as a jack russell let alone a beautiful, loyal, obedient dog such as a bull terrier (english or staffie)

  35. Dave Myatt

    May 14, 2010 at 2:27 pm

    Its just typical of people in authority that come up with these ill conceived laws and then only listen to so called experts that support the idea.

    Im surprised Lord Harris and Supt Pendry havnt gone the whole hog and suggest we start throwing them off church towers, they would be much easier to get up there than donkeys!!!

    Lets take it a step futher and destroy every person thats been accused of looking a bit shifty, it would save the country millions, reduce congestion, solve the housing problem, help with unemployment, reduce NHS waiting lists……………….

    I for one will be adding what ever support I can in fighting this barbaric proposal and would urge you all to do the same.

  36. Teresa

    May 14, 2010 at 3:15 pm

    They are in most cases not paying to keep wepons they are kidnapping innocent family pets. Where is the justice in this country? Rob a bank get a slap on the wrist, own a dog who never put a paw wrong, have the dog forcefully taken from you, hidden in secret kennels where he will be neglected go through years of court cases. This country is seriously f***ed up. the criminals liturally get away with murdr and the innocent suffer in every sense.

  37. tmills

    May 14, 2010 at 4:12 pm

    a lot of people are missing the basic point here. what really needs to happen to protect these dogs from getting into the hands of said criminals or from being seized by the powers that be -is breeding should be controlled. every dog born in the uk should be spayed at the appropriate time. eventually they would be no dogs for anyone to seize!!! there are enough dogs in rescues and breeding should be heavily targeted. breeding these dogs is so wrong on many counts. if everyone really loved these dogs they would protect them and put their well being above anything else – no dog should be taken away from its family and pts or shoved in kennels until its fate is decided. if we focussed on breeding laws and stopped these poor dogs from being born at all, then no one would take them anywhere and no money would be spent defending/kenneling innocent animals. stop these breeds being bred in the first place and there would be no dogs to kill/sieze and this would stop the dogs from suffering at all. i would not bring a child in to the world if i knew he could be snatched and imprisoned or even murdered for his looks so why is it right to breed these dogs – are they not as important as children? mine are.

  38. tmills

    May 14, 2010 at 4:31 pm

    and another thing – dogs can have mental health / broken brains/ blood clots/ deep fear of something or just very strong “dog” instincts. it is NOT always the owner what causes a dog to be vicious!!!! this is a very naive and ignorant view and i am so fed up of hearing it. it is so hurtful for someone who has had a dog who has been vicious to hear. if a dog has come from a rescue and is a lovely gentle well balanced loving dog for months but all of a sudden attacks someone right out of the blue -is it the kind loving new owners fault?? -did they cause the dog to use this violence ???? maybe a dog shows calmness for years but has a deep rooted fear of a something and that fear causes it to use aggression -is that the owners fault? things are not as black and white as you imagine.

    • kevin murphy

      May 15, 2010 at 10:20 am

      you are right to a certain degree target breeding would help but not abolish it which is what you are saying as a breeder of german shepards i will not release a pup to anyone until they have been properly vetted i also give puppy classes to the new owners to teach them as well as the dogs i have many times refused puppys to people who are looking for guard dogs bitches fo breeding and who were just clueless it is the breeders who have the say on if some one is suitable to own a dog perhaps if more breeders done this in stead of just taking money it would help also i would never leave my kid unattended with any dog i have 6 german shepards all are of sound temperment but are never left alone with any kids a dog will always react with instinct if the kid hurt or startled the dog even by accident the dog will just react thats nature and if you look at the 6 fatal dog attacks in the uk in the last few years all these happened when the dogs owner was not around see the link a dog will no matter how well trained will react differantly when its owners are not around awareness in dog owners is also important in curbing attack not breed specific legislation

  39. Susan

    May 14, 2010 at 4:35 pm

    I am absolutely disgusted with the narrow minded and outrageous comments from these people who clearly have no idea about dogs beaviour whatsoever. ANY dog has the POTENTIAL to bite. Does that mean that all dogs should be seized/banned? I own many different breeds, one being a rottweiler and I have worked hard with all of them (as have all breeders and owners i know). The DDA is a sham. It’s clear that even if a dog is ‘perfect’ if it looks like a pit bull type (or any other banned breed) it doesn’t stand a chance. I t doesn’t help that the media portrays some breeds as aggressive and exaggerate stories which in turn instills more fear in people who are severly mis informed about dogs.
    The way these animals are treated is disgusting and I can’t believe there are people out there who support it.

  40. Mary Alice

    May 14, 2010 at 4:41 pm

    I for one would rather have my tax paying money spent on caring for these dogs until they are returned to their owners, or assesed, helped and then adopted to a responsible family depending on the dogs history of course – than have them spend my taxes on a vast majority of things I do not agree with or support ! And their only way to deal with this issue is KILL KILL KILL ?! That will cost tax payers also, and I for one do not want the blood of these dogs on my hands. BSL does not work, has never worked and will never work. Time to crack down on the criminals who are responsible for using and abusing these dogs in the first place, and leave the innocent alone.

  41. Penny

    May 14, 2010 at 4:42 pm

    Outrageous! I just can’t believe the comments and ignorance and total insensitivity of people in charge of the sensitive issue of the future of living creatures!
    It makes my heart bleed; it is so frustrating to think that the fate of these poor dogs that can’t speak up for themselves or defend themselves lies in the hands of brainless morons!
    Since when do politicians care so much about the pockets of the tax payers anyway? Did anyone ask us – the UK citizens – if we wanted to bail the bloody banks out with our money before taking them anyway?
    And now they worry about the cost of a situation that they created!
    Unacceptable! Infuriating!

  42. Julie Steadman

    May 14, 2010 at 5:17 pm

    Yet again,over the top reaction by the “Elite”.If a dog has done no wrong then you dont put it to sleep unless its ill and cannot be kept out of pain.
    If a dog has bitten then i believe most sensible owners ,as much as it would break their hearts,would put their dog to sleep to prevent serious injury to another person.
    I really wish the powers that be would stop being concerned about the so called “human Rights Act” and deal with the bad owners of dogs.The real bully boys need to be dealt with and not with just a slap on the wrists,but i believe we have a nation of cowards too afraid to deal with the real issues.
    So we choose the easiest and safest options.Leaving good citizens quaking in their boots as the real villians continue doing whatever they wish,while their “pets” suffer again and again.

  43. patricia

    May 14, 2010 at 5:20 pm

    i am a dedicated dog lover. why put these dogs down i do not believe there are bad dogs just bad owners i am 76years young and had a dog all my life and all different breeds . i say to the police try one of these dogs at home for a few weeks see if they are bad dogs.
    you know nothing about most of them you just knocked on doors and took them Staffie are not born dangerous no domestic dog is born dangerous its there owner that want training .

  44. Cathy McCabe

    May 14, 2010 at 5:27 pm

    These stupid people sitting in the house of lords haven`t got a clue to what is going on in the real world. I have had dogs all my life and none have been vicious just very affectionate dogs. People who make these deciscions need to see these dogs and realise that not all banned breeds are bad,it is mostly the irresponsible owners that have the fighting and setting them on people.

  45. Denise

    May 14, 2010 at 5:39 pm

    Surely these polititians have got better things to do than keep persecuting dogs. It is people who make Dogs dangerous not the dogs themselves. How many people have been stabbed in the last year and a lot of them have been young people.Are they going to put the ones that commit these crimes down, I don’t think so. We are supposed to be an animal loving country I do wonder sometimes. When will it ever end this constant persecution of the canine world.

  46. Zach

    May 14, 2010 at 5:44 pm

    Yet again the idiocy of politicians and Other high authority figures fails to surprise me.

    The dangerous dogs act itself is a complete waste of time and there are proven studys that these so called ‘dangerous’ dogs can be part of a happy family unit.

    The Government aren’t looking at this to help people they are looking to it as a quick fix which is unacceptable and disgusting!.

    Its about time the conservatives cleaned up the mess they made and they better do it quickly too!.

  47. Essjay

    May 14, 2010 at 6:18 pm

    I think it’s disgusting that these dogs are seized on looks alone, do you know if the man walking behind you in the street is a criminal based on what he looks like? In most cases, I doubt it! and would they be arrested if they hadn’t committed a crime? of course not, innocent until proven guilty.
    Why not spend the money on clamping down on the illegal breeders who are making money from the ’status dogs’ instead?
    Incidentally, if you hadn’t made these dogs illegal in the first place then they wouldn’t be so attractive to the wrong people would they?? Racial profiling is wrong, why do it to a dog?
    Deed NOT BREED! There is no such thing as a bad dog, it’s bad owners!

  48. Jan Robinson

    May 14, 2010 at 7:23 pm

    I am appalled at this idea. It is not humane in any sense and Lord Harris and Supt Julia Pendry should be ashamed of themselves!

  49. valerie

    May 14, 2010 at 7:55 pm

    The issue here is the owners, not the dogs, unfortunately, people are using dogs as weapons, rather than carrying knives. These poor dogs need rehoming not killing. What a lazy way out of a situation to suggest killing all the dogs held in custody. I think there would be an outcry if we suggested killing all the people who are also in custody (who I might add have probably done a lot worse than these poor dogs)

  50. Nikita Benney

    May 14, 2010 at 8:07 pm

    I think that its sick and disgusting, most of those dogs have done nothing wrong and their going to pay the ultimate price just because some people are so pathetic that they think certain ‘types’ of dogs make them look hard, forgetting the fact that these ‘types’ are bred specifically so that they are brilliant with people, after working with dogs for almost 3 years now in a rescue centre and the only dogs that i have ever known be aggressive or bad with people are Collies, Jack Russells and Terriers and thats when we have 2 dogs that are under the dangerous dog act, one of which is a Pitbull cross who happens to be the best behaved and most affectionate dog ever.
    They shouldnt kill off these dogs, its the same as killing off all criminals in a prison, its sick and wrong no matter how anyone looks at it and i think that there are alot of people that will agree!

  51. Jennifer Wall

    May 14, 2010 at 8:08 pm

    This is awful, I’m getting as many people as posible to read this. My dog is part Staffie, a supposedly dangerous breed, and part collie, a supposedly gentle breed. Which part of her would the stupid government decide to judge her on? Anyone with any knowledge of dogs believes that is is entirely the fault of the owner if the dog BECOMES agressive. I don’t believe any dog is born agressive, they are trained to become so.

  52. rose

    May 14, 2010 at 9:37 pm

    WHAT!!!! well that is so bad i would like to see what they would do if everyone wanted to kill them just for how they look this a cruel thing to do someone have to do something about this. what will they do then dogs do nearly everything to help people they not just killing dogs put they killing people from the inside to!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  53. sue

    May 14, 2010 at 9:58 pm

    i think theres an easy solution to the problem. all these type of dogs should be muzzled when out in the public and on a lead at all times. If the dog owners are confident that their own kids arn’t at risk then thats up to them. They’ll only have themselves to blame if their dog does indeed turn out to be viscious and theyl learn the hard way and their children will be the ones who pay the ultimate price. as long as measures are put in place so that my family and my dog are safe then i see no reason for the dogs to be held or terminated.

  54. Rachel

    May 14, 2010 at 10:48 pm

    Count me in for your campaign. Wish I could adopt these dogs myself.

  55. Trish

    May 14, 2010 at 10:54 pm

    Completely outrageous!

    This needs to be bought to as many peoples attention as possible now!

    Killing all those dogs will not solve the problem of irresponsible ownership and so called “status dogs” The Dangerous dogs act was never worth the paper it was written on and has created more problems that it has solved. I’m up bringing back some form of licencing and ownership tests / vetting

  56. Jennifer

    May 14, 2010 at 11:09 pm

    I have a bullmastiff x rottweiler and she is a big softie. She is loving,loyal and protective. (That being said i do not trust her or any dog 100% after all they are animal and do not think the same way we do.) The thought of having her taken away from me because she looks the way she does makes me feel sick, because lets face it once they get rid of all the pit bulls in the country these thugs will look to the next best breeds. So whats the government gonna do then ban that breed, seize them all and be back to square one. They have to change this law and they have to change it now.

    Give the responsible dog owners their dogs/family members back and rehome the rest that belong to irresponsible owners. Crack down on irresponsible breeders, crack down on irresponsible owners i’m sure the police know who they are they’ve probably had a few words with them. Get more education out there about dog psychology. Explain to people that loving a dog is not enough that they need rules boundries, and limitations as Cesar Millan would say. It’s not just the thugs that can turn their dogs nasty some undereducated well meaning owners manage it as well.

  57. Kaye Whelpton

    May 15, 2010 at 8:40 am

    The idea of killing because an animal is of a certain breed is disgusting many dogs are much loved family pets who are seized because they look a certain way. The current U.k leaders need to think long and hard about what to do about this problem as mass killing is not the answer just as banning certain breeds has not worked.

  58. kara

    May 15, 2010 at 11:04 am

    This is just awful. I dont know what to say. This is so bad.

  59. Doglover

    May 15, 2010 at 1:17 pm

    I saw the comments made broadcast on the television news last night. The media are trying to point out that these dogs are costing the country too much to kennel. Obviously we know that the Dangerous Dogs Act is not a legislation that is really working. Why
    cant the dogs stay in their own homes until it is decided what type they may be? also they could ask for their dogs to go on the dog register.
    many people are just digging up trouble for the staffie breed and staffie x breed.
    About two weeks ago i had a visit from the local dog warden she said she had called on behalf of the R,S,P.c.A as a complaint had been made. ( I have got two staffie x breeds) The compaint was that i kept dogs on my premises caged up.
    Needless to say i was angry. I do own a crate purely if my dogs should want to go in it for some time out. it is the largest size you can get and even the largest rottie would have plenty of room in it.
    i showed her my dogs vaccinations certificate and insurance papers also the microchipping papers plus the dogs are neutered. I asked her if she wanted to see the rear garden as the dogs sometimes use it and it is kept clean and free of any faeces. she said she did not care about that she just seemed more interested in the crate.
    I wanted to know who had complained about me but she would not say, I do not have many people in and out of my house so it must have been someone that had been inside to know i keep a dog crate.
    Anyway she left as she said that she was satisfied there was no abuse happening, but i am still angry about it also where i live i know of many animals kept outside in poor conditions and at least three quaters of the dogs around here are never exercised but mine are always out. I guess it was someone trying to cause me trouble because my dogs are staffies ( and extremely well looked after) so yes lots of people are getting people into trouble for owning staffies when sometimes the owners and the dogs have done nothing wrong.

  60. karen

    May 15, 2010 at 2:04 pm

    Disgusting, outrageous, so awful.

  61. Sonja Talboys-Allen

    May 15, 2010 at 2:36 pm

    This is just disgracefull but not surprising with this governemnt who wants to bring back hunting they don’t give a toss about animals they are cruel nasty people a lot of them in this new coalition governemnt. To kill an animal just because it is a certain breed is just not acceptable most of these dogs go on to new homes and are fine you get the odd one that has been so badly treated ie trained to hunt to fight to KILL, its these evil people that do this in the first place that want putting down evil cretins. I can see real problems with this new government and animal welfare I hope everyone who voted torries in are ashamed of themselves.

  62. Anna

    May 15, 2010 at 2:37 pm

    If the governemnt are going to kill all the innocent dogs waiting in kennels for justice to be done I am hoping the governemnt will face tribunals and will be severily punished for the slaughter of these victims of injustice that is BSL!

    The solution is to stop BSL and let all good dogs go back home to their families. Punish people who are cruel to dogs, take care of dogs that are dangerous but leave those loving pitbulls alone!!

    This sick solution is exactly what Adolf Hitler proposed in 1933 – kill them all!!!!!!

    If the government kill all imprisoned dogs i will refuse to pay taxes. My money will not sponsor killings of the innocent.

  63. Jess

    May 15, 2010 at 3:21 pm

    “It would be great if we could destroy all these dogs…”
    How inconsiderate can you get? The dogs can’t help what breed they are and these animals are living creatures- these are lives you are so casually talking about ending.

  64. Lisbeth Mønsted Larsen

    May 15, 2010 at 4:00 pm

    As I see it there is two victims here the ones who are bitten by these dangerous dogs and the dogs them selves they did not ask to be born as dangerous. Unfortunatly they belong to that category. So who is to blame here the dogs or those bitten by them? The dogs simply do what they have been bred for generations to do. It is not their fault that they were born in this way. The ones who should be held responsibel for these dogs are the ones who want these breeds. If people are responsibel in having them and know what traits their chosen breed entails.If they keep them on leash at all times and keep them under observation when near other people children and pets why should anyone be against them as companions? They are a liabillity but mostly because of ignorance in keeping them as family “pets” letting them off leash near other dogs is a liabillity because they are unreliabel in their reactions towards other dogs it is latent in these breeds and can be triggered without much provocation. Therefore people who love these breeds should be more respectful and responsibel for how their dogs act. If they are not then it is time to act but euthannising all these breeds is not responsibel nor compassionate. It lacks knowledge and duty towards these victims of peoples demand for these breeds. If people realy want these dogs certain requirements as to how they should be kept and handled should be implimented to prevent futher deaths of both children and other pets. it is vital that those issues are dealt with fairly not indiscriminate euthanisation of all of these breeds of dogs.

  65. Victoria Thomas

    May 15, 2010 at 4:33 pm

    On Bank Holiday Monday we almost hit a dog running in the main road. I got out of the car and scooped the dog into my arms, as he had no collar to get hold of. After taking him to see if he was microchipped, (he wasn’t), and having a Rescue refuse to take him in, we then spent an hour driving around with the dog in the area we found him, trying to find his owner. Eventually he was taken to Birmingham Dogs Home, where he was promptly labelled a Pit Type.
    As I understand it, the Dog Warden collected him and took him to be put down. This dog was about nine months old, incredibly friendly and playful, approached any stranger with slobbery licks and a wagging tail, and everyone he met thought he was lovely.
    But he died because of the way he looked! Apparently, if a dog has no ID and isn’t claimed within a short space of time, the powers that be simply kill it and thats that.
    How the hell can that be fair or lawful?

  66. Victoria Thomas

    May 15, 2010 at 4:37 pm

    Further to my last comment, I’ve already written to Andrew Rosindell, who was the Shadow Minister for Animal Welfare, asking for repeal of the DDA and BSL, and for more sensible systems to be put in place, so that every dog who looks a certain way doesn’t risk being killed.

    The problem with seized dogs is with the owners, who rarely get more than a slap on the wrist. They don’t care about the dogs, they’ll simply get another and the whole circus begins again.
    Meanwhile, the seized dog languishes until someone decides that it’s time it died!

  67. Lisa

    May 15, 2010 at 5:40 pm

    I have only ever been bitten by one dog in my life and it certainly was not a pit bull, nor even slightly resemble a pit bull. It was a Corgi. I have owned Staffordshire Bull Terriers for 15 years now and my mom used to breed German Shepards. Never had a problem, I have afriend whose hulking giant Mastiff is scared of her cat! My nan on the other hand has a Pekineise that would take your face off if she didnt lock it out when we go to visit! To sieze and then kill a dog ANY DOG who has shown no aggression towards another animal or person is just animal cruelty. And for the comments made Supt Julie Pendry that it would be fantastic to shoot all the dogs currently in kennels she surely should loose her job, how can someone with such a callous and unjustified attitude be allowed to be in charge of the so called status dogs unit??? This is like putting a known racist in charge of the equality bill. I hope our new goverment sees the error of this ludicrous law and changes it promptly before more innocent animals are sent to their death purely for the way they look.

  68. Andrea

    May 15, 2010 at 7:08 pm

    This is utterly disgusting!! How dare they speak like this.. And to say it would be delightful if they could just put them to sleep, the heartless woman and people! it is about time they stopped legislation and and all this rubbish..

  69. Nur Aykurt

    May 15, 2010 at 9:43 pm

    shocking news about dog killing is simply one big crime. Very inhuman.Nur-?stanbul

  70. Vahana Hilke eitner

    May 15, 2010 at 11:09 pm

    Hi, disgusted with this big time, cannot believe that this can happen just like that and what is more through the FAST PAPER TRACK, 72 HOURS, who does the Government think they are to decide the way they do, sheer DICTATORSHIP in my book, have spread it far and wide to the best contactpersons on Facebook, also on the support group on Facebook Bring Bruce Home.
    Screaming from the inside, never felt more like a number than right now. Finally the hidden agenda’s come out of the closet, we are nobodies, we have no voice at all!!!!!! Poor Shannon, she must be going through hell right now thinking about Bruce, in thoughts Shannon with you all the way.

  71. Mrs Tina Dukes

    May 16, 2010 at 9:47 am

    Think it should be all stopped until it has been thought through very carefully. There ia a great difference between pet dogs and fighting dogs. thought we were a nation of dog lovers and we put the rest of the world to shame by caring for our dogs. This MUST BE STOPPED NOW.

  72. Sakir

    May 16, 2010 at 9:58 am

    This is inhuman. No one have the right to destroy any life without valid reasons,and this no way a valid reason. Any behaviour problem can be changed by strict training and the government people cannot just turn their back. This cannot be excepted in any way.

  73. Cris

    May 16, 2010 at 11:52 am

    I’ve had several dogs including a doberman, rottweiler, greyhounds and lurchers, beagles and terriers. The breed is no guide to the behaviour or level of aggression. Much more relevant would be to develop a cohesive strategy to prevent overbreeding and irrisponsible ownership, and therefore reduce the number of dogs and the incidence of those in unsuitable homes. Instead we have tabloid-inspired knee-jerk reactions.

  74. Radka

    May 16, 2010 at 12:35 pm

    I have read similar article about police being able to shoot dogs on sight if out of control. I think that this is disgraceful and disgusting comment by some one who was elected by people. Just imagine that you are you walking dog in the park and he starts barking at the police man. He takes his gun out and shoots the dog. His excuse? The dog was dangerously out of control so I can shoot him!! Wish they did it to criminals and not to poor dogs!

    I believe that this is the last stroke many people were waiting for…lets spread this message and lets get some useful laws in place. Laws by dog people and not by some one who does not even care whether the dogs are alive or not!

    please email the only political party who care for animals as I believe if they have many emails they will be able to do something!

    http://www.animalscount.org/

  75. SDaedalus

    May 16, 2010 at 2:51 pm

    What happened to the great British principle of innocent until proven guilty? It is most unfair to judge a dog by its appearance or breed rather than its actions. The focus should indeed be on bad owners rather than bad dogs. You can tell a lot about a country, by the way it treats its animals.

  76. annmarie

    May 16, 2010 at 4:28 pm

    absolutely outrageous

  77. jan

    May 16, 2010 at 4:48 pm

    jan Submit on 16 May 2010 16:08:26:

    http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/DDARepeal1991/

    The suggestion of destroying these dogs is outrageous. The 1991 DDA has been proven to be unreliable and therefore the amendment was brought in. This has been proven to be too ‘expensive’ and now they want to revert back to the 1991 act and destroy, even if the dog has done no harm. The reason these dogs end up in the wrong hands is because there is a status for a banned breed. Lift the ban completely and we will see things improve. No dog is born dangerous. Terrorism is disgraceful, but we do not kill all muslims because of the extremists. BSL is wrong, let us club together and repeal the 1991 act section 1. Please sign the petition, it is up and running again on 3rd June. Lets be a voice for these innocent dogs

  78. Leigh

    May 16, 2010 at 5:06 pm

    I’m discusted beyond belief. Any party that keeps BSL in place will NEVER get my vote. Politians do not care what is right or wrong, all they care about is getting votes. It’s clear who calls the shots when it comes to laws regarding dogs in the UK…….the media. The media write stories about “vicious devil dogs bred to kill” with no regard to facts what so ever, the general public read these and get scared, then the government does what it thinks the public wants…..kill the devil dogs before they eat all of our children. Wouldn’t it be nice to live in a country where the media only writes factual reports and where the laws were written based on factual evidence. But I suppose that’s too much to ask for being that this is the UK!!!!

    One more thing, I think that anyone (whether politian, police officer, member of the public ect) that wants these poor dogs put to sleep should have to be the ones that give the lethal injection to the dogs and then inform the owners.families face to face why they killed their beloved pets.

    Put an end to BSL for good!!!!

  79. Lucy

    May 16, 2010 at 8:43 pm

    The dogs are the innocent party and it is disgusting that they are the ones that always suffer. It’s humans that should suffer – why should they make these dogs like this and have no conscience as to the consequences of them being destroyed? Education is needed and the goverment should be concentrating on this and giving grants to help and encourage more dog rescues so as to help these poor dogs.

  80. Karen Clemons

    May 16, 2010 at 8:47 pm

    How utterly absurd, how could people even think about killing the poor creatures let alone say it?

  81. jayjt

    May 16, 2010 at 10:28 pm

    THIS IS THE ONLY SOLUTION TO THIS DOG SPECIFIC BANN BREED PROBLEM AND I HOPE RYAN O’MEARA AGREES WITH ME ON THIS THE GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO LIFT THE BANN UNBANN SPECIFIC DOG BREEDS REMOVE THIS LAW AND TACKLE THE REAL PROBLEM WHICH IS CRUEL PEOPLE OWNERS FORCING DOGS TO FIGHT ABUSING DOGS AND MAKING DOGS TO BE AGGRESSIVE TOWARDS OTHER DOGS AND HUMANS AND INSTEAD MAKE A NEW LAW BANN THESE CRUEL PEOPLE FROM OWNING ANY DOGS TOUGHER IMPRISONMENT SENTENCE’S FINES AND EDUCATING PEOPLE ON PROPERLY OWNING TRAINING DOG’S JUST LIKE CESAR MILAN THE DOG WHISPERER DOES MAKE ALL PEOPLE AWARE AND THE GOVERNMENT ON THE MYTHS FEARS PHOBIAS AND TRUE REAL FACTS ON THESE BANNED DOG BREEDS THESE SEIZED BANNED DOGS UNDER CARE IN KENNELS COSTING MONEY SET THEM FREE GIVE THEM BACK TO THEIR RIGHTFUL OWNERS THEY MEAN NO HARM IF THEY CAN’T FIND OWNERS OF THESE SEIZED BANNED DOGS THEN PUT THESE DOGS UNDER CERTAIN SAFE TESTS FOR THESE DOGS TO BE ADOPTED TO THE PUBLIC AND ALSO CONSIDER TRAINING UP THESE DOGS AND TO BE USED ON THE POLICE FORCE AS SNIFFER DOGS PART OF THE DRUG SQUAD SNIFFING OUT DRUGS WEAPONS CRIMNALS IT’S A BRILLIANT IDEA THE RIGHT FAIR THING TO DO I HOPE PEOPLE READING THIS AGREE.

  82. Fran

    May 16, 2010 at 11:47 pm

    I think these dogs are treated very unfairly. People always want a quick fix and killing them off will do this. The people behind the decision don’t really understand the problem or care about the dogs.

    These dogs DO NOT need to be killed, they need to be REHABILITATED.
    But this takes too much time or money or effort for anyone to bother.

    Its obvious that owners that should get the punishment – fines, imprisonment or bans. Maybe they should be treated like their dogs are!

  83. mickey

    May 17, 2010 at 3:04 am

    this is sick ……a police dog attacked a small child in a park the other month for no reason was the dog killed no just taken off duty did the police say right thats it we will have to find another breed of dog because there all child killers no they put it down to poor training and the dog involed not all of them its one rule for them and another for us ……not fair poor dogs all this because ANY ONE can own a dog, but to smoke u have to be 18 same to drink were the logic in that why not put rules on owning a dog like theres rules on every thing eles in this country

    PEOPLE ARE RESPONSABLE NOT DOGS PUNISH THE PERSON !!!!!!!!

  84. Ghostlyease

    May 17, 2010 at 7:49 am

    Once the general public and the government realise that peoples actions are the root of the problem then we can start to clean up this mess the DDA has left.

  85. Fulvio

    May 17, 2010 at 1:15 pm

    What a shame! In Italy we’ve got a dangerous dog breed list changed twice or more, to add or to cancel some specific breeds.
    These rules didn’t change anything about aggressions!
    The only way to act is education.
    Train people on how to treat dogs and punish irrisponsible owners, not the dogs.
    Why don’t spend time to create school programmes on how to train dogs and live with them.
    Killing all these dogs just ’cause they seem dangerous and ’cause they cost a lot of money is pure cruelty and will not solve the problem!

  86. Jackie

    May 17, 2010 at 4:37 pm

    What sort of person can make the statement “It would be fantastic if we could destroy these dogs”. Only someone with a heart of stone!! I accept that there is an issue with some dogs who have been made dangerous by evil people who treat them cruelly. However, many of these dogs have been seized purely for the way they look and constitute absolutely no risk to anyone or anything. They are someone’s beloved pet and are simply held due to the lengthy legal process required to free them.

    This is pure evil and must not be allowed to happen. Punish the owners of the dogs that are clearly dangerous, not the poor innocent dogs that are held just for the way they look!

  87. Catherine

    May 17, 2010 at 5:01 pm

    This is heartbreaking! When will the authorities realise that it is not the breeds it is the owners. Dogs cannot be punished just because they fall into a ‘category’. I own 3 staffies and not one of them is aggressive in ANYWAY and they are very much part of our family! It is unfortunate that this breed often gets obtained by the wrong type of owner! To kill a load of innocent dogs would cause so much distress and un-necessary heartbreak!More thought needs to be given into educating people when owning any breed of dogs and resolve these problems!

  88. Diane

    May 17, 2010 at 6:34 pm

    I am writing concering this law and Bruce. I have been following Bruce’s story for over a year and keep writing and writng letters on his behalf and will continue to do so until he is home or in a rescue. BSl has been done away with in many countries and cities all over the world because it has been proven it does not work and only punishes good dogs and their owners. I hope Ireland along with others places realizes this soon. The killing of sweet ,family pets needs to end and everyone needs to keep fighting to end BSL everywhere.

  89. Frankie Sunshine

    May 18, 2010 at 2:12 pm

    This is what I wrote to Jenny Jones (her name was mentioned on the Lord Harris web site) who was at the meeting:

    Subject: Dangerous Dogs Act
    Dear Jenny Jones
    MPA

    I read the article on the web site for Lord Toby Harris regarding the MPA meeting held where the cost of ten million pounds to kennel dangerous dogs was discussed.

    Do you support the idea of culling seized dogs in London?

    It was reported last week that dogs could be shot to save money and that Kit Malthouse is now going to write to the Home Secretary to ask for powers to destroy dogs quickly to save money.

    Do you not think that famalies who have had their pet seized from them due to nothing more than its appearance where extremely hurt by these remarks made by your committee?

    A so called ‘attack dog’ or a ‘weapon dog’ is an abused dog – it has been abused, sometimes horrifically, by the person who is using it in this way for their own illegal purposes. All dogs need protection, not to be the focus of some type of witch-hunt.

    It is people who are to blame not the dog themselves-they have no say in who breeds or owns them.

    Then here are many pets who are caught up under the law, do you really agree they should be exterminated?

    These remarks have caused shock and are hurtful to many dog owning Londoners.

    Your etc

  90. Frankie Sunshine

    May 18, 2010 at 2:15 pm

    and this is the reply from Jenny Jones who has given permission for it to be posted up:

    Hello Frank

    Thank you for getting in touch about this.

    Please remember that when reported in the newspapers, quotes are often taken out of a long debate and may not represent the complete views of the person quoted.

    I have strong views on animal welfare that I expressed at the time, but weren’t reported.

    I loathe the idea of killing dogs, and the fact that many of them are abused by their owners makes me feel ill.

    As you know, unfortunately, we have a bad piece of legislation (the Dangerous Dogs Act) that was rushed through with poor drafting, which means that, once seized, banned dogs have to spend months in kennels, usually before being destroyed – all completely legal at the moment.

    For me, this process of putting dogs in such kennels is like imprisoning them for months with a death sentence over them. When, as you say, these dogs are actually family pets, it is even more unfair and cruel, both for owners and pets.

    The DDA needs removing from the statute books and replaced with legislation that tackles the real problem of human cruelty to dogs being abused as attack animals.

    The Green Party is very strong on animal rights – if you would like to see our manifesto, please see here:
    http://www.greenparty.org.uk/policies/policies_2010/2010manifesto_contents.htmlpolicy
    or if you prefer the policy pointers, please see here: http://policy.greenparty.org.uk/policypointers/index.html

    Best wishes
    Jenny
    Jenny Jones AM
    Green Party Group
    Chair, Planning and Housing Committee
    London Assembly
    City Hall
    The Queen’s Walk

  91. Steve

    May 19, 2010 at 9:04 am

    Why do the people we vote in continue to abuse certain breeds of dogs. Aim the legislation at the people who abuse the animals in the first place, its not an education problem, these people do not care about animal welfare. Prosecute the abusers, fine them and jail them if the dog is beyond redemption then unfortunatly they will need to be culled. If this becomes the norm then hopefully stupid people will stop breeding these breeds to make a quick profit.

  92. charlie

    May 19, 2010 at 8:05 pm

    how can anyone say this or think this is ok ????
    for those who feel this is right or ok ..how would u feel if your family pet ,your childrens best friend was PTS just because of the way it looked …because your breed of dog has become the new “status dog ” that morons own n train ?????? over time the “status dog” changes breeds …when will u speak up ?? when its your friends dog ?? your families dog ??? or when its own n u sit snuggled with your dog wondering how people can judge the breed …your dog is wonderfull with your children ….so gentle and loving ..how on earth did it become dangerous ??? well the same as our beloved breeds NO FAULT OF ITS OWN

  93. claire

    May 20, 2010 at 3:18 pm

    what a despicable human being to suggest the murder of these animals. whilst scum languish in state of the art prisons for disgusting crimes, largely innocent dogs, are even begrudged shelter and often neglected in state run kennels thier desperately sad owners try to justify thier pets life. bull breed are far from unpredictable violent killers. i know because i have 15 and not one has ever so much as raised a lip to me. i may get squashed and licked to death with love one day if not careful but thats as much risk as i face. NO dog should be left unsupervised with children that is common sence. even an unattended labradore puppy tragically killed a baby in a bouncer whilst the mother slept intoxicated on drink and drugs. should we now murder all lab pups just incase?

  94. jane

    May 20, 2010 at 3:19 pm

    Once again animals suffering at the hands of human beings. Prosecute the breeders and irresponsible owners! For a so-called dog loving nation,there are a certain ‘breed of people’ who are completely indifferent to the welfare of pets. They see them only as a status symbol or means to financial gain. Get them to pay towards the costs incurred by impounding dogs and stop subjecting family pets to the threat of extermination because of their looks and breed type. The Government must have a part to play in this issue too!

  95. Edward

    May 21, 2010 at 2:24 pm

    I own pit dogs never had a problem with them or the law but they ban them because of silly ownners.We should ban the silly law makers hold them for a period of time when they cost to much for the tax payer put them to sleep with out a court date.Then maybe Westminster will start useing their BRAINS and think about the laws they make.Here in Bermuda we had a dog warden that just went about picking up pit dogs an those he thought where and killed them before he even made it back to the kennels, no charges were ever filed.His name is Fabain Minors.

  96. Mariya

    May 25, 2010 at 11:05 am

    Why not drop section 1 together with other BSL regulations? That would definitely save tax-payers’ money as the only seized cases would be dogs that attempted to attack people and not dogs that don’t look right to them.

  97. jacqueline jewula

    May 29, 2010 at 3:27 pm

    why do they take innoccent dogs away from their owners?
    surely this is like racial prejudice and not unlike the nazi’s

    blame the deed not the breed

  98. Yvonne Thompson

    June 2, 2010 at 2:25 pm

    Up until a year ago I was not a dog person I really didn’t like them but I would never have seen any harm came to them but I got a little staff puppy keira when she was five months old due to her owner beating her up and tying her in the shower at bath time, and because of her I see dogs in a different way no they are smart loving and have so much to give, and killing all dog in the police pound it so wrong all these dogs need is someone to love them show them that not all humans are bad owners or trainers all it takes is a little time and perseverance and they will be fine. Re-homing them is what they should do and to someone that is suiting for the dog not just because the kennels are over run , or to clear the place for more dogs, take the time and get to know the dog and then find them a home that will be in their best interest. Why would someone say kill them all has he no heart does he not feel anything for living creatures dogs are meant to be mans best friend well if that’s mans best friend they don’t stand a chance. Hey way not get yourself put down it would stop you having to be so mean about pets / dogs that have the right to a home and live where they can be loved, what next kill all cats, o and while your at it the prison systems are over run kill them all too, is that gonna be his answer for everything, to many troubled children o just kill em all, to many unemployed just kill em all. It really gets my goat when people running this country open their mouths before thinking of how it is going to effect the rest of us. Brainless twit.

    • Yvonne Thompson

      June 2, 2010 at 2:29 pm

      My staff id the most fun love little sweetie in the world I have never come across a dog that wants to love you so much, all she does is lick smile laugh and play with my cats and the dogs next door. So it is madness that someone that doesn’t even know these dogs in the police pound thinks they should all be killed for all he knows they could be the most loving dog he could ever meet he just need to take the time to get to know them before he judges them

  99. Sara

    June 29, 2011 at 7:13 pm

    It is disturbing that a supposedly progressive nation is allowing such barbarism. Tail docking and declawing disallowed, but BSL and flat-out murder of dogs for looking a certain way are okay? Hypocrites.

  100. Cat

    July 5, 2011 at 5:19 pm

    Now my angry inner doglover says “Why don’t we put the government down and lock up all the offending owners that mistreat their animals, that will get rid of the problem!” But the level headed psychotherapist in me says “Where is the big petition for this, before this damn BSL bill is passed????”

  101. victor scerri

    March 2, 2012 at 12:21 am

    this is my story …in november 2011 my staff was involed in a dog fight with another dog ..me and my partner gothim from battersea dogs home as we wanted to give an abanded dog a loving new home. we feel in love with him very quickly .hes loving and affectionate to every human that he meets , but is not so good with other dogs . He is our first dog in battersea around 80% of the dogs are staffs ..a co- worker who was working in the same flat i was working in opened the front door to a sales person while i was working on fitting a kitchen ,she called me to go get my dog which was fighting outside on the pavement .Within seconds i got my dog backin the flat and went back outside the man and dog was gone . 2 days later the owner left his number i called ,and said sorry gave him my insurance details . we soon found out that the insurance did not cover the vet bill he had a pay as his dog unfortunately needed a skin graft to her leg.i said he would need togo through his insurance..he said he did not have any.after texting each other i was given a time limit to pay his bill or face the police . my dog did not go for him at any point and would not to any human. He gave no impression that he was affaid of my dog and even meet him after when i gave him a copy of insurance. I rang the police who had left their number. thay said i would be getting a call from the officer dealing with the matter . In january 27th 2012 4 police and 4 dog wardens knocked on the door ,i let them in and thought great a chance to let them hear what happened as i had not given a statement yet , so i asked if thay wanted a cup of tea ?no thay said as they were arresting me and taking my dog away to be assessed.I was taken tothe police station finger printed dna sampled and photo mug shots taken.and put in a cell. I have never been in trouble with the police in my 44 years of living and growrIng up in London. The whole experience was very upsetting.They took my taped of my statement and let me go on bail,and to come back 2 weeks later as they needed this time to assess my dog and call battersea and go to the vets . ok i thought my dog will be given the ok because hes as good as gold with all humans including children. after 2 weeks of heartache i returned to the station where they said they were going to prosecute under being the owner of a dog that was dangerously out of control in a public place.His statement was given in dec 2011 , so after not getting money from me he then said he felt fear and apprehension.i have asked the cps to settle this matter out of court and pay the guys vet bills . its now been 6 weeks since my dogwas taken from me and his home…everyday i think about him and hope hes ok …i dont know where he is and can`t visit him . The police said if i plea guilty iwouldhave my dog back that day . I feel i`m not a bad owner and always keep him on a lead in parks , give upmy lunch break everyday to walk him ..i still awaiting the cps`s decision . why can`t i get my dog back hes chipped muted and has just had a tumour removed from his mouth/nose six teeth taken out .The sprit of the lawifeelhas been misused here. i`m all for having compulsory insurance and license..when i was a kid i remember you had to have a licence what happened to that? get the people who are breeding dogs to be aggresive, and don`t take care of them. i`m just a number to them . does it take this long to tell me what i all ready know ,he`s not dangerous what good is it doing having him this long? …is there anything i can do to get him back..if the cps want to go to jury then it willbe another 6/8 weeks from the 14th March ..

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

To Top